Cutting some trees to see the forest: On aggregation and disaggregation in combat models

Most models of air and land combat use schemes of aggregation and disaggregation in representing combat systems, in spatial configuration, and in depicting progress of a battle. For example, the use of firepower “scores” is an extreme case of aggregation of weapons into a single measure. Combining like systems into weapons categories, partial aggregation, is a common approach to representing a large number of aircraft or ground weapons types. This article explores different approaches to aggregation and what is known theoretically about aggregation and disaggregation in combat models of the Lanchester type commonly called “square law” in two dimensions. It defines requirements for consistency between aggregate and higher‐dimensioned models of this type. Some important conclusions are that aggregation should take into account the specific capabilities of the opponent (raising concern about many “scored” approaches which attempt to evaluate force components in isolation), and that partial aggregation (grouping “like” systems) and disaggregation of previously aggregated results can only be done consistently when certain restrictions on the relative attrition capabilities of weapons systems hold. When this is the case, specific weightings for the force resources can be determined for the partial aggregations. © 1995 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.