The Quantified Judgement Model and Historic Ground Combat
Abstract
Historic ground combat can be analyzed qualitatively and quantitatively. Qualitative analyses of combat are simply historical accounts or case studies. Quantitative analyses, on the other hand, address the mathematical and statistical aspects of ground combat. This thesis selects for study one particular quantitative methodology called the Quantified Judgement Method of Analysis, or more simply, the Quantified Judgement Model (QJM). The QJM has been used to analyze historic battles and predict future battle outcomes. However, this thesis focuses solely on describing the QJM, analyzing its reasonableness from a military viewpoint, and applying it to historic ground combat. The QJM consists of two submodels whose interactions represent several battlefield intangibles such as leadership, morale, and training. The thesis tests the reasonableness of those submodels and investigates their sensitivity to changes in the model parameters. Analysis of the model indicates that it is generally sound and reasonable. However, two equations (Combat Power Ratio and Ability to Gain or Hold Ground) were found to be questionable from a military perspective. Further investigations are suggested at the end. Theses.
Document Details
- Document Type
- Technical Report
- Publication Date
- Sep 01, 1988
- Accession Number
- ADA201164
Entities
People
- Joseph F. Ciano
Organizations
- Naval Postgraduate School