startup-tips
Sign in
UpcomingR&D programAuto-collected, not reviewed

Configurable Operator Decision Models for Constructive Test and Evaluation Simulations

🇺🇸 United States·U.S. Department of War — MDA(Government)
Funding
Needs verification
Deadline
2027.01.06
D-61
Official noticeApplyOverseas applicants not eligible ExportPDF

Overview

What you need to judge this in 30 seconds

SBIR · Phase: BOTH · Topic MDA27BZ02-DV009 · Solicitation 27.BZ

Government problem: Missile defense test and evaluation rely on constructive simulations to examine large numbers of scenarios, explore operational concepts, evaluate system-of-systems interactions, and reduce risk before live flight events. These simulations can represent physical platforms, sensors, weapons, communications, terrain, and threat laydowns, but operator decision effects are often represented by fixed scripts, simplified timing rules, or manually coded behaviors. This can cause analysis results to overstate or understate operational performance because human choices influence detection, classification, engagement, prioritization, communication, and response timing across the kill chain. Capability gap: The Government lacks a reusable and validated way to generate, configure, execute, and assess operator decision representations across many scenario variations and proficiency levels. Current approaches can require extensive custom programming for each model, scenario, or operator role; may not provide traceable rationale for actions taken during simulation; and may be difficult to compare across test events, analysis teams, or simulation environments. The gap affects the Government’s ability to understand sensitivity to operator behavior, evaluate alternate tactics, and support VV&A with documented evidence of intended use, assumptions, limitations, data pedigree, and risk. Why innovative solutions are likely available: The Government believes innovative small businesses can apply advances from artificial intelligence (AI)-enabled simulation, human behavior representation, synthetic data generation, reinforcement learning, design of experiments, digital engineering, development, security, and operations, and modular simulation integration to address this problem. Related industry capabilities already demonstrate AI-assisted constructive simulation, synthetic data generation, intelligent agents, and integration of commercial simulation toolchains with Government simulation environments. This topic seeks to mature those types of innovations into a Government-purpose capability suitable for missile defense test and evaluation workflows. Government interest: The Government is not seeking a vendor white paper, a visualization-only training game, or a single hard-coded operator model. The Government is seeking a Direct-to-Phase-II prototype capability that can be adapted to multiple missile defense analysis contexts; that can use Government-provided scenarios, models, data, and subject matter expert (SME) input; that can be evaluated against explicit measures of performance and effectiveness; and that can produce artifacts needed for future transition, reuse, and accreditation. Desired characteristics: •Open, modular interfaces for integration with constructive simulations and analysis workflows. •Configurable operator roles and behavior profiles that can be reviewed and adjusted by authorized Government analysts or SMEs. •Support for scenario ensembles, design of experiments, and repeatable Monte Carlo-style analysis. •Decision traceability, data provenance, uncertainty characterization, and explainable outputs suitable for analyst review. Responsible AI, cyber, data-management, and VV&A considerations incorporated from the beginning of Phase II.

Category
R&D
Industry
Needs verification
Technology
Needs verification
Target stage
Needs verification
Project duration
Needs verification
Estimated preparation
Needs verification

Funding

Award size and how it is paid

Award range
Needs verification
Currency
USD
Total programme budget
Needs verification
Support type
Needs verification
Co-funding
Needs verification
Matching fund
Needs verification
Disbursement
Needs verification
Note
-

Eligibility

Can we actually apply?

Check whether we can applyEnter where you are incorporated, how old you are and how big — we compare it against this announcement and tell you what would unlock it. No sign-in needed.

SBIR/STTR 은 미국 중소기업만 지원할 수 있습니다(Small Business Act 법정 요건). • 계열사를 포함해 상시 종업원 500명 이하 • 미국 시민 또는 영주권자 1인 이상이 50%를 초과해 직접 소유·지배 • 미국 내 사업장을 두고 주로 미국 내에서 사업을 영위할 것 • 수행책임자(PI)의 주된 근무처가 신청 기업일 것 출처: https://www.sbir.gov/faq/eligibility-requirements

Company age
Needs verification
Employees
0명 ~ 500명
Revenue limits
Needs verification
Consortium
Needs verification

Location Requirements

Geography and legal-entity conditions

Primary country
🇺🇸 United States
Also eligible
None
Foreign companies
No
Local entity
Required
Location condition
미국 내 사업장을 두고 미국 시민·영주권자가 50%를 초과해 소유한 중소기업만 신청할 수 있습니다(법정 요건).

Required Documents

Required/optional · issuer · difficulty · validity · cautions

Document requirements were not captured (needs verification). Check the official announcement.

Application Process

How you apply

Application process not captured.

Evaluation

Review process and criteria

Evaluation process not captured.

Timeline

Announcement → intake → review → agreement → execution

Process steps were not captured.

Equity & Financial Terms

Equity, loans and contract conditions

Equity required
Needs verification
Loan
Non-dilutive grant
Duplicate funding
Needs verification
IP ownership
Needs verification
Deliverable ownership
Needs verification
Exclusivity
Needs verification
Right of first refusal
Needs verification
Audit & settlement
Needs verification

Risk Intelligence

Should we apply at all? — five dimensions plus an overall score (lower is safer)

No risk assessment yet. Re-analyse from Admin.

IP / Idea Protection

How much of your technology and idea you must disclose

No IP assessment yet.

AI Analysis

Pros · cons · difficulty · competition · attractiveness

Preparation difficultyNeeds verification

From paperwork and review stages

Competition (estimate)Needs verification

Heuristic from award size and type

AttractivenessNeeds verification

Amount, terms and IP combined

Overall riskNeeds verification

Weighted average of five dimensions

Pros
  • Needs verification
Cons
  • Needs verification
Cautions
  • Nothing flagged

Similar Programs

Comparable by type, country and technology

Source & Provenance

Every value carries its source URL and fetch time

Last fetched
2026.11.06
Human review
Not reviewed — check the official announcement
First seen
2026.11.06
Data status
Auto-collected, not reviewed
AI enrichment
Needs verification
Snapshot history
  • · 4h ago — 최초 수집 (b8477fac)