臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

美國國防部架構規範(DoDAF)建立系統架構發展的標準規範，使得系統有較好的互通性，也促使架構師及決策者有能力去比較不同的架構。然而DoDAF並沒有律定一個詳細的方法論(Methodology)來引導架構發展人員製作架構產品，往往會造成架構發展之困難以及最後的架構無法達到預期目標。
方法論包含了方法、程序與工具三要素，本研究簡單介紹了目前常見的數種DoDAF方法論，並選用以活動為基礎方法論(ABM)以及Vitech的以模式為基礎的系統工程(MBSE)方法論來進行以無人飛行載具執行情監偵作業的案例案例研究，藉由實作過程來展現二種方法論之特性及程序，並分析比較二種方法論之異同與優缺點。
藉由案例分析可發現方法論對架構發展的適用類型、適用的人員以及產出架構的效果與內容都會有影響，所以二個方法論各自有其適用的時機，如ABM方法論較易與使用者進行溝通與建構現有的系統，而MBSE較適用於系統工程師及建構為來的系統，故產製架構前，要了解與慎選架構發展方法論才能使架構發展能有更好之效果。

U.S. Department of Defense Architecture Framework (DoDAF) provides a standardized framework for developing system architecture and improving the system interoperability. The DoDAF enables architects and decision makers to develop and compare different architectures. However, DoDAF does not specify a detailed methodology to guide architects, often causes difficulties in the development stage and the final result may not achieve the desired objectives.
A methodology can be defined as a collection of methods, procedures and tools. This study briefly introduces several existing DoDAF methodologies. Then, we conduct a case study of intelligence surveillance and reconnaissance operations using UAV by the activity-based methodology (ABM) and Vitech's Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) methodology. The characteristics and procedures of both methodologies are presented. The similarities and differences of two methodologies are also discussed in this study.
Through case study we found that the choice of methodology depends on the type of developed architecture, the background of architects as well as the purpose and content of architecture. Therefore, each methodology has its own appropriate situation. The ABM is better for communicating with end user to create the “As-Is” system. On the other hand, the MBSE is more suitable for system engineers to develop the “To-Be” system. Thus, understanding and carefully selecting the development methodology is the necessary conditions for achieving the desired effectiveness.

誌謝 i
摘要 iii
ABSTRACT iv
目錄 v
表目錄 vii
圖目錄 viii
縮寫說明 xi
1. 緒論 1
1.1 研究動機與目的 1
1.2 研究範圍與限制 3
1.3 研究流程與架構 3
2. 文獻探討 6
2.1 美國國防部架構規範之意涵 6
2.1.1 國防部架構規範(DoDAF)發展歷史 7
2.1.2 國防部架構規範產品介紹 9
2.1.3 國防部架構規範之發展與應用 16
2.2 方法論定義 17
2.3 國防部架構規範各種方法論簡介 19
2.3.1 活動為基礎方法論(ABM)簡介 19
2.3.2 架構規格模式方法論(ASM)簡介 23
2.3.3 業務企業架構發展方法論(BDM)簡介 27
2.3.4 極簡主義方法論簡介 33
2.3.5 模式為基礎的系統工程(MBSE)方法論簡介 36
2.3.6 各種方法論之比較 38
3. 案例實作 41
3.1 案例背景介紹 41
3.2 ABM方法論介紹與執行程序 45
3.3 ABM方法論案例實作 48
3.4 MBSE方法論介紹 68
3.4.1 SDL語言介紹 69
3.4.2 系統工程流程 70
3.4.3 Vitech MBSE發展程序 71
3.5 MBSE應用於DoDAF產品製作執行程序 74
3.6 MBSE方法論案例實作 78
3.6.1 案例產品建構程序 78
3.6.2 案例產品之分析 100
3.7 小結 104
4. 結論與建議 107
5. 參考文獻 109

[1] http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/urgent_fury.htm.
[2] U.S DoD, “C4ISR Architecture Working Group Final Report,” U.S DoD, 14 April, 1998.
[3] Steven H Dam, DoD Architecture Framework: A Guide to Applying System Engineering to Develop Integrated, Executable Architectures, SPEC, Marshall, pp. 107-109, 2006.
[4] NSA, “NATO Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance Interoperability Architecture (NIIA): VOLUME 1: Architecture Description,” Allied Engineering Documentation publication, pp. 12-15, 2005.
[5] DoD Architecture Framework Working Group, “DoD Architecture Framework Version 1.5 Volume I : Definitions and Guidelines,” U.S. DoD, Washington D.C., 2007.
[6] Sowell, P. Kathie., “The C4ISR Architecture Framework: History, Status, and Plans for Evolution,” MITRE Corporation, Technical paper, Virginia, August, 2000.
[7] DoD Architecture Framework Working Group ,”DOD Architecture Framework Version 1.0, Volume I: Definitions and Guidelines,” February, 2004.
[8] Clinger Cohen Act of 1996, Title 40.
[9] DoD Architecture Framework Working Group, “DoD Architecture Framework Version 1.5 Volume I: Definitions and Guidelines,” DoD, Washington D.C., pp.ES-3, 2007.
[10] 鄭光隆，“運用DoDAF進行指揮管制流程模擬之研究”，碩士論文，國防大學理工學院資訊科學學系，桃園、臺灣，2005。
[11] 林自強，“運用DoDAF架構之不同觀點描述分析營區防災組織及運作”，碩士論文，國防大學理工學院兵器系統工程學系，桃園、臺灣，2009。
[12] S Ring, S. J., Nicholson, D., “Activity-Based Methodology for Development and Analysis of Integrated DoD Architectures,” The MITRE Corporation, USA, 2004.
[13] Huei Wan Ang, Dave Nicholson, and Brad Mercer, “Improving the Practice of DoD Architecting with the Architecture Specification Model,” The MITRE Corporation, USA, 2005.
[14] BEA Development Team, “BEA Development Methodology,” BTA, USA, 2008
[15] BTA, “BEA 6.0 Summary,” BTA, USA, 2009.
[16] BTA, “Business Transformation Guidance Version 1.1,” BTA, July 6, 2007
[17] Dennis E. Wisnosky, DoDAF Wizdom:planning,Managing and Executing Projects to Build Enterprise Architectures using the Department of Defense Architecture Framework , Wizdom Press, USA, 2006.
[18] DoD, “Chairman of The Joint Chiefs of Staff Instruction: CJCSI 6212.01E,” US. DoD, USA, December, 2008.
[19] Sanford Friedenthal, Alan Moore, Rick Steiner, A Practical Guide to SysML-The Systems Modeling Language, OMG Press, USA, pp.15-16, 2008.
[20] INCOSE, “Survey of Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) Methodologies,” INCOSE, USA, 2008.
[21] INCOSE, “System Engineering Vision 2020,Verson 2.03 TP-2004-004-02,” INCOSE, September 2007.
[22] Joseph Maley, James Long, “System Engineering and CORE : A natural Approach to C4ISR/DoDAF,” Vitech Corp, 2005.
[23] DAU Press, Systems Engineering Fundamentals, Defense Acquisition University Press, USA, pp.31, 2001.
[24] Steven H Dam, DoD Architecture Framework: A Guide to Applying System Engineering to Develop Integrated, Executable Architectures, SPEC, Marshall, pp. 140-144, 2006.
[25] The Charles Stark Draper Laboratory, “Operational Requirements Document for the Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Tactical Control System Version 5.0 with Numbered Requirements,” Cambridge, 1997.
[26] Erdal TORUN, “ UAV Requirements and Design Consideration,” Turkish Land Forces Command Ankara, TURKEY, 2000.
[27] M.L. Cummings, A.R. Kirschbaum, A. Sulmistras and J.T. Platts, “STANAG 4586 Human Supervisory Control Implications,” Air and Weapon Systems Dept, Dstl Farnborough & the Office of Naval Research, 2006.
[28] NSIF Custodial Support Team, “STANAG 4545 NATO Secondary Imagery Format (NSIF) Implementation Guide,” NATO, USA, 2005.
[29] NATO Standardization Agency ,”NATO Ground Moving Target Indicator (GMTI) Format,” NSA, USA, 2010.
[30] NATO Standardization Agency ,”Air Reconnaissance Primary Imagery Data Standard,” NSA, USA, 2009.
[31] Vitech Corporation, “CORE® System Definition Guide,” Vitech Corp, USA, 2004.