Category Archives: 中國軍事智能化

#Artificial #Intelligence, #intellligentization, Asymmetric Warfare, Chinese Artificial Intelligence, Chinese Military Characteristics & Development Trends of Cognitive Domain Operations and Warfare, Chinese Military Intelligentization, Chinese Military Views - 中國軍事觀, Dimensionality Reduction Strikes, Dissipative Warfare, Mosaic Warfare, Multi-Domain Operations, 中國軍事智能化, 中國軍事未來戰爭, 以認知為中心的戰爭：應對複雜戰爭的作戰概念, 認知戰

Chinese Military Evaluation of Foreign Armed Forces Perspectives on Multi-domain Operations

Leave a comment

中國軍方對外軍多域作戰觀點的評估

現代英語：

The opening of each combat domain will inevitably lead to a new round of changes in combat methods. Driven by the new round of scientific and technological revolution and industrial revolution characterized by intelligence, ubiquity and integration, emerging combat domains such as space, cyberspace, electromagnetic spectrum, and cognitive space have an increasing impact on future operations. The concept of “multi-domain combat” has emerged through cross-domain collaboration with traditional land, sea, and air combat domains to achieve complementary advantages and system efficiency, and is becoming a new combat theory that adapts to the evolution of war forms.

The concept of “multi-domain combat” was first proposed by the US military. Subsequently, the United Kingdom, France, and other NATO member states have developed the concept of “multi-domain combat” in different forms. Israel was the first to apply the concept of “multi-domain operations” in actual combat. The Russian army innovatively proposed its own “multi-domain operations” theory from the perspective of its opponents. At present, the concept of “multi-domain operations” has become an important concept that triggers a new round of changes and transformations in foreign military operations.

The concept of “multi-domain operations” is a new operational concept first proposed by the US Army and jointly promoted by other services based on the changes in operational methods in the information age.

The US military believes that the winning mechanism of the concept of “multi-domain operations” is to form multiple advantages in a specific time window through the rapid and continuous integration of all war domains (land, sea, air, space, and cyberspace) and force the enemy into a dilemma. The U.S. Army proposed to be guided by the idea of ​​”global integrated operations” and the concept of “cross-domain collaboration”, and strive to form an asymmetric advantage in future wars through “multi-domain operations”. The multi-domain task force (brigade level) will be the core combat force of the U.S. Army to implement multi-domain operations, integrating artillery, land-based tactical missiles, land aviation, cyberspace, electromagnetic spectrum, space and air defense forces, and forming multi-domain combat capabilities through cross-domain mixed formations. The U.S. Air Force actively responded to the concept of “multi-domain operations”, focused on building a joint combat command and control system, proposed the concept of multi-domain command and control, and focused on developing advanced combat management systems, sinking multi-domain operations to the tactical level to improve the agility and cross-domain collaboration capabilities of future operations. The U.S. Navy has absorbed the core idea of ​​the “multi-domain combat” concept, proposed to build an “integrated global maritime military force”, focused on developing the “distributed lethality” combat concept, and proposed to strengthen the design and exercise of global combat.

The U.S. Department of Defense and the Joint Chiefs of Staff have gathered the ideas and mechanisms of the new combat concept of “multi-domain combat” of the military services, and proposed the top-level concept of “global combat”, aiming to form a new round of asymmetric advantages, lead the transformation of combat methods and military transformation. The global combat concept is centered on joint global command and control, aiming to integrate traditional combat domains with space, cyberspace, electromagnetic spectrum, air defense and anti-missile and cognitive domain capabilities, and compete with global competitors in a full-spectrum environment. It is reported that the concept is still in its infancy and is undergoing theoretical deepening, experimental verification, exercise evaluation and doctrine transformation, and is constantly enriching its conceptual core through multiple work lines. Among them, the US Joint Chiefs of Staff leads the transformation of concepts into policies, doctrines and requirements; the Air Force promotes the concept to maturity by developing advanced combat management systems, the Army by implementing the “Convergence Project”, and the Navy by launching the “Transcendence Project”. The US theater supports the development of multi-domain combat concepts and multi-domain combat modes through war games, project demonstrations and joint exercises.

Based on the perspective of reference and integration, NATO countries such as the United Kingdom actively participated in the development and testing of the US military’s “multi-domain operations” concept, and revised the operational concept in combination with actual conditions.

The British Ministry of Defense proposed the concept of “multi-domain integration”, which is consistent with the concept mechanism of the US military’s “multi-domain operations”, focusing on integrating operations in different domains and at different levels, preparing for the development of a joint force and maintaining competitive advantages in 2030 and beyond. The British Ministry of Defense pointed out that “integrating capabilities in different domains and at different levels through information systems, creating and utilizing synergies to gain relative advantages is the winning mechanism of the multi-domain integration concept.” The concept emphasizes gaining information advantages, shaping strategic postures, building a multi-domain combat environment, and creating and utilizing synergies. The concept raises four specific issues: how to provide an advantage over rivals by 2030 and beyond through “multi-domain integration”; how to achieve cross-domain integration of the Ministry of Defense in cooperation with allies, governments and civilian departments; how to solve the policy issues involved in the concept of “multi-domain integration”; how to promote research on defense concepts, capabilities and war development. With this as a starting point, the British Army has launched a multi-faceted, step-by-step, and systematic military transformation.

Other NATO countries are also jointly developing and innovatively applying the concept of “multi-domain operations” to varying degrees, and promoting the transformation and implementation of the concept of “multi-domain operations” in the form of joint exercises and allied cooperation. In 2019, the US Army led the “Joint Operational Assessment (2019)” exercise, which aimed to assess the combat capabilities of the Indo-Pacific Command’s multi-domain task force. Forces from France, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and other countries formed a multinational task force to participate in the exercise, which assessed the multi-domain combat concepts, formations and capabilities in the combat environment from 2025 to 2028. In October 2019, the NATO Joint Air Power Competition Center held a meeting on “Shaping NATO’s Future Multi-Domain Combat Posture”. In order to shape NATO’s future multi-domain combat posture, it explored and studied military thinking, multi-domain combat forces, multi-domain combat operations and training joint forces. In June 2020, the NATO Command and Control Center of Excellence released a white paper on the Multi-Domain Operations Command and Control Demonstration Platform, which aims to respond to threats and challenges in multiple operational domains with a decentralized, data-driven integrated environment by bridging the command and control gap between technology and operators, tactics and campaign levels, and academia and the military.

Based on the perspective of its opponents, the Russian army seeks a way to crack it on the one hand, and on the other hand, based on the winning mechanism of “cross-domain operations”, it combines its own characteristics to innovate combat theories

After the US military proposed the concept of “multi-domain operations”, the Russian army actively sought a way to crack it based on its own security interests. In December 2020, the Russian magazine “Air and Space Power Theory and Practice” published an article titled “Argument for the Use of Aviation Power to Break the Enemy’s Large-Scale Joint Air Strikes in Multi-Domain Operations”, which stated that large-scale joint air strikes are the initial stage for NATO countries to implement multi-domain operations. Large-scale coordinated operations will be carried out against Russia’s most important key facilities, creating conditions for subsequent decisive actions by NATO joint armed forces. The Russian army must comprehensively use the reconnaissance and strike system composed of the aviation forces of the theater forces to cause unbearable losses to the enemy, break its large-scale joint air strikes, and force NATO’s initial stage goals of multi-domain operations to fail to be achieved, causing NATO’s political and military leadership to abandon the attempt to continue to implement multi-domain operations.

On the other hand, the Russian army proposed the “military unified information space” theory for the new combat method of “cross-domain combat”. Its core idea is: to use modern information technology to establish a networked command and control system to achieve the deep integration of the army’s command, communication, reconnaissance, firepower, support and other elements, thereby improving the battlefield situation perception capability and combat command efficiency. The Russian military continues to promote theoretical development around the realization of cross-domain combat capabilities: first, relying on the unified information space of the army to establish a network-centric command model; second, introducing artificial intelligence into the command and control system to achieve the unification of the physical domain and the cognitive domain; third, developing network, space and underwater combat forces to gain advantages in emerging combat fields; fourth, establishing a unified military standard system to enhance the interoperability of forces and weapons. The Russian military has not completely absorbed the Western concept of “multi-domain combat”, nor has it completely denied the beneficial elements of the Western “multi-domain combat”, but has combined its own absorption of some advanced combat ideas of “multi-domain combat” to enrich its own unique combat theory.

Based on the perspective of combat needs, Israel took the lead in applying the concept of “multi-domain combat” on the Gaza battlefield, and used the multi-domain combat force “Ghost” as the main combat force.

The Israeli army believes that multi-domain joint combat is an inevitable trend in the development of future wars. For Israel, which mainly relies on ground combat, by integrating land, air, cyberspace, electromagnetic spectrum and sea elite forces, it can quickly identify, track and destroy enemy targets, and further improve the lethality of the Israeli army. This concept is in line with the concept of “multi-domain combat” proposed by the US Army. Under the guidance of this concept, the Israeli army formed the “Ghost” force and took the lead in actual combat testing on the Gaza battlefield. In the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in May 2021, Israel used the “Ghost” combat battalion for the first time to implement multi-domain operations in the code-named “Wall Guardian” operation against Hamas, which was called the world’s first “artificial intelligence war”. The Israeli army mainly relied on machine learning and data collection in this war, and artificial intelligence became a key component of combat and a force multiplier for the first time. In the operation to clear the Hamas tunnel network, the Israeli army used big data fusion technology to pre-identify and target, and then dispatched 160 fighter jets to carry out precise strikes, which greatly destroyed the Hamas tunnel network and achieved air control over the ground; in the attack on Hamas rocket launchers, the Israeli fighter pilots, ground intelligence forces and naval forces used command and control systems to quickly find targets and carry out real-time precise strikes, quickly shaping a favorable battle situation.

According to the Israeli army, the “Ghost” force is very different from traditional forces in terms of combat organization, weapon configuration and combat methods. The unit is temporarily organized under the 98th Paratrooper Division of Israel, including the brigade reconnaissance battalion, the ground forces of the Paratrooper Brigade, the armored brigade, the engineering corps, the special forces, the F-16 squadron and the Apache helicopter, as well as the “Heron” drone and other multi-domain combat forces. Through the use of multi-domain sensors and precision strike weapons, cross-domain maneuvers and strikes are achieved, “changing the battlefield situation in a very short time”. The battalion was established in July 2019. Although it is a ground force, it integrates multi-domain combat forces such as air strikes, network reconnaissance, precision firepower, electronic confrontation, intelligence interconnection and maritime assault. It is a battalion-level combat unit with division-level combat capabilities. After its establishment, the unit has continuously improved its multi-domain integration and cross-domain strike capabilities through exercises, and has quickly exerted two major functions with the support of the newly developed artificial intelligence technology platform: one is to serve as an elite weapon on the battlefield and fight in an asymmetric manner; the other is to serve as a test unit to continuously innovate and develop new combat concepts, combat theories and technical equipment, and to promote successful experiences to other units at any time.

現代國語：

褚 睿 劉瑤琦

每一個作戰域的開闢，必將引發新一輪作戰方式的變革。在以智慧、泛在、融合為特點的新一輪科技革命和產業革命的加速推動下，太空、網絡空間、電磁頻譜、認知空間等新興作戰域對未來作戰影響日益增大，透過與傳統陸、海、空作戰域跨域協同實現優勢互補、體系增效的「多域作戰理論」概念應而生，正成為適應戰爭形態演進的新型作戰理論。

「多域作戰」概念最早由美軍提出。隨後，英國、法國以及其他北約成員國均以不同形式發展「多域作戰」概念。以色列率先將「多域作戰」概念運用於實戰。俄軍從對手視角創新提出了自己的「多域作戰」理論。當前，「多域作戰」概念已成為引發外軍新一輪作戰方式變革轉型的重要概念。

「多域作戰」概念是基於資訊時代作戰方式變革，由美陸軍率先提出、其他軍種協力推進的新型作戰概念

美軍認為，透過所有戰爭領域（陸、海、空、太空、網路空間）快速且持續的整合，在特定時間窗口形成多重優勢，迫使敵人陷入困境是「多域作戰」概念的製勝機理。美陸軍提出以「全球一體化作戰」思想和「跨域協同」理念為指導，力求透過「多域作戰」方式形成未來戰爭非對稱優勢。多域特遣部隊（旅級）將是美陸軍實施多域作戰的核心作戰力量，集砲兵、陸基戰術導彈、陸航、網絡空間、電磁頻譜、太空以及防空力量於一身，通過跨域混合編組形成多域作戰能力。美空軍積極響應「多域作戰」概念，著眼於建構聯合作戰指揮與控制體系，提出多域指揮與控制概念，聚力開發先進作戰管理系統，將多域作戰向戰術級下沉，以提高未來作戰的敏捷性和跨域協同能力。美國海軍吸納“多域作戰”概念的核心思想，提出打造“一體化全局海上軍事力量”，重點開發“分佈式殺傷”作戰概念，提出加強全局作戰設計和演習。

美國國防部和參聯會匯集軍種「多域作戰」新型作戰概念的思想與機理，提出了「全局作戰」頂層概念，旨在瞄準形成新一輪非對稱優勢，牽引作戰方式變革與軍事轉型。全局作戰概念以聯合全局指揮與控制為核心，旨在將傳統作戰域與太空、網絡空間、電磁頻譜、防空反導和認知領域等能力整合在一起，與全球性競爭對手在全頻譜的環境中競爭。據悉，該概念目前尚處於萌芽期，正在進行理論深化、試驗驗證、演習評估和條令轉化，並通過多條工作線，不斷豐富其概念內核。其中美軍參聯會領導概念向政策、條令和需求轉化；空軍通過開發先進作戰管理系統、陸軍通過實施“融合項目”、海軍通過啟動“超越項目”共同推動該概念走向成熟。美戰區透過兵棋推演、項目展示和聯合演習等形式支援多域作戰概念和多域作戰模式開發。

英國等北約國家基於借鑑與融入視角，積極參與美軍「多域作戰」概念的發展與試驗，並結合實際修訂作戰概念

英國國防部提出了「多域融合」概念，與美軍「多域作戰」概念機理相一致，著重於整合不同領域和不同層次的作戰，為2030年及以後發展一支聯合部隊、保持競爭優勢做準備。英國國防部指出，「透過資訊系統整合不同領域和不同層級的能力，創造和利用協同效應，以獲得相對優勢，是多域融合概念的製勝機理。」該概念強調奪取資訊優勢、塑造戰略態勢、構設多域作戰環境、創造和利用協同效應。該概念提出4個具體問題：如何透過「多域融合」為2030年及以後提供超越對手的優勢；如何實現國防部與盟友、政府和民事部門合作的跨域融合；如何解決「多域融合」概念涉及的政策問題；如何促進國防概念、能力和戰爭發展方面的研究。以此為抓手，英軍開啟了多面向、分步驟、體系化的軍事轉型。

其他北約國家也正在不同程度地聯合開發和創新運用「多域作戰」概念，並以聯合演習、盟國協作等形式推動「多域作戰」概念轉化落地。 2019年美陸軍領導開展的、旨在評估印太司令部多域特遣部隊作戰能力的「聯合作戰評估（2019）」演習中，法國、加拿大、澳大利亞、新西蘭等國部隊組成多國任務組織參與其中，評估了2025-2028年作戰環境下的多域作戰概念、編組、能力。 2019年10月，北約聯合空中力量競爭中心召開了「塑造北約未來的多域作戰態勢」會議，為塑造北約未來多域作戰態勢，從軍事思想、多域作戰力量、多域作戰行動和訓練聯合部隊等方面進行了探索和研究。 2020年6月，北約指揮控制卓越中心發布了多域作戰指揮控制演示平台白皮書，旨在通過彌合技術和作戰人員、戰術和戰役層面、學術界和軍方之間的指揮控制鴻溝，以分散、數據驅動的綜合環境來應對多個作戰域的威脅與挑戰。

俄軍基於對手視角，一方面尋求破解之道，另一方面基於「跨域作戰」制勝機理，結合自身特點創新作戰理論

美軍提出「多域作戰」概念後，俄軍基於自身安全利益考量，積極尋求破解之道。 2020年12月，俄羅斯《空天力量理論與實踐》雜志刊發《論證運用航空力量打破敵方多域作戰中大規模聯合空襲》的文章，認為大規模聯合空襲是北約國家實施多域作戰的初始階段，將對俄羅斯最為重要的關鍵設施實施大規模協同作戰，為北約聯合武裝力量後續決定性行動創造條件。俄軍必須綜合運用戰區部隊的航空力量組成的偵察打擊系統，給敵造成無法承受的損失，打破其大規模聯合空襲，迫使北約多域作戰初始階段目標無法實現，致使北約政治軍事領導層放棄繼續實施多域作戰的企圖。

另一方面，俄軍針對「跨域作戰」這種新型作戰方式，提出了「軍隊統一資訊空間」理論，其核心思想是：利用現代資訊技術建立網絡化的指揮控制系統，以實現全軍指揮、通信、偵察、火力、保障等要素的深度融合，進而提升戰場態勢感知能力與作戰指揮效率。圍繞實現跨域作戰能力，俄軍持續推進理論開發：一是依托軍隊統一資訊空間，建立網絡中心指揮模式；二是將人工智慧引入指揮控制系統，實現物理域與認知域的統一；三是發展網絡、太空和水下作戰力量，爭取新興作戰領域優勢；四是建立統一的軍事標準體系，提升兵力兵器互操作能力。俄軍沒有全盤吸收西方「多域作戰」概念，也沒有全盤否定西方「多域作戰」有益成分，而是結合自身將「多域​​作戰」的一些先進作戰思想吸收，充實自身特色的作戰理論。

以色列基於作戰需求視角，率先運用「多域作戰」概念於加薩戰場，將多域作戰力量「幽靈」部隊作為主要作戰力量

以軍認為，多域聯合作戰是未來戰爭發展的必然趨勢，對於以地面作戰為主的以色列而言，透過整合陸上、空中、網絡空間、電磁頻譜和海上精銳力量，迅速識別、追踪和摧毀敵方目標，能夠進一步提高以軍的殺傷力。這一理念與美陸軍提出的「多域作戰」概念一脈相承。在這一理念的指導下，以軍組建了「幽靈」部隊，並率先在加薩戰場上進行了實戰檢驗。在2021年5月的巴以沖突中，以色列在對哈馬斯的代號為「城牆衛士」行動中首次運用「幽靈」戰鬥營實施了多域作戰，被稱為世界上第一場「人工智慧戰爭」。以軍在這場戰爭中主要依靠機器學習和數據收集，人工智慧首次成為作戰的關鍵組成部分和力量倍增器。在對哈馬斯地道網的清除行動中，以軍通過大數據融合技術進行預先識別和瞄準，而後出動戰機160架次進行精確打擊，極大破壞了哈馬斯的地道網，實現以空制地；在對哈馬斯火箭發射裝置的打擊中，以軍戰鬥機飛行員、地面情報部隊和海軍部隊之間使用和控制系統，快速指揮目標

根據以軍的說法，「幽靈」部隊在作戰編成、武器配置和作戰方式等方面與傳統部隊迥然不同。該部隊編制暫屬以色列第98傘兵師，包括旅偵察營、傘兵旅的地面部隊，裝甲旅、工程兵、特種部隊，F-16中隊和阿帕奇直升機，以及“蒼鷺”無人機等多域作戰力量，通過使用多域傳感器和精確打擊武器，實現跨域機動與打擊，“在極短時間內改變戰場局勢”。該營成立於2019年7月，雖然是一支地面部隊，但它整合了空中打擊、網絡偵防、精確火力、電子對抗、情報互聯以及海上突擊等多域作戰力量，是具備師旅級作戰能力的營級作戰單元。該部隊組建以後，不斷通過演習提升多域融合和跨域打擊能力，並在新開發的人工智能技術平台的支撐下迅速發揮兩大功能：一是在戰場上作為精兵利器，以非對稱方式作戰；二是作為試驗部隊，不斷創新和發展新型作戰概念、作戰理論和技術裝備，隨時將成功經驗推廣到其他部隊。

中國原創軍事資源：http://www.81.cn/xxqj_207719/xxjt/ll/10068139888.html

#Artificial #Intelligence, #intelligent warfare, #intellligentization, #中國軍事人工智慧武器化, #新興戰爭技術, #智慧化戰爭, #軍事資訊化與智慧化, China's Military Organization - Intelligence, Chinese Artificial Intelligence, Chinese Military Future Wars, Chinese Military Intelligentization, Dissipative Warfare, Intelligent Warfare, 中國軍事智能化, 認知域戰

Chinese Military Comprehensive Observations of Intelligent Warfare: Focus on Anti-AI Operations During Intelligent Warfare

Leave a comment

中國軍隊智慧化戰爭綜合觀察：聚焦智慧化戰爭中的反人工智慧作戰

現代英語：

Focus on anti-AI operations in intelligent warfare

■ Kang Ruizhi and Li Shengjie

introduction

The extensive application of science and technology in the military field has caused profound changes in the form and mode of warfare. The military game between major powers is increasingly manifested in technological subversion and counter-subversion, surprise and counter-surprise, offset and counter-offset. To win the future intelligent war, we must not only continue to promote the deep transformation and application of artificial intelligence technology in the military field, but also strengthen dialectical thinking, adhere to asymmetric thinking, innovate and develop anti-artificial intelligence combat theories and tactics, and proactively plan anti-artificial intelligence technology research and weapons and equipment research and development to achieve “breaking intelligence” and win, and strive to seize the initiative in future wars.

Fully understand the inevitability of anti-AI operations

Comrade Mao Zedong pointed out in “On Contradiction”: “The law of contradiction of things, that is, the law of the unity of opposites, is the most fundamental law of dialectical materialism.” Looking at the history of the development of military technology and its combat application, it has always been full of the dialectical relationship between attack and defense. The phenomenon of mutual game and alternating suppression between the “spear” of technology and the “shield” of corresponding counter-technology is common.

In the era of cold weapons, people not only invented eighteen kinds of weapons such as “knives, guns, swords, and halberds”, but also created corresponding “helmets, armor, and shields”. In the era of hot weapons, the use of gunpowder greatly increased the attack distance and lethality, but also gave rise to technical and tactical innovations represented by defensive fortifications such as “trench” and “bastion”. In the mechanized era, tanks shined in World War II, and people’s development of technical and tactical related to “tank armor” and “anti-tank weapons” continues to this day. In the information age, “electronic attack” and “electronic protection” around information control have set off a new wave of enthusiasm, and electronic countermeasures forces have emerged. In addition, there are countless opposing concepts in the military field such as “missiles” and “anti-missiles”, “unmanned combat” and “anti-unmanned combat”.

It should be noted that “anti-AI warfare”, as the opposing concept of “intelligent warfare”, will also gradually emerge with the extensive and in-depth application of intelligent technology in the military field. Prospective research on the concepts, principles and technical and tactical implementation paths of anti-AI warfare is not only a need of the times for a comprehensive and dialectical understanding of intelligent warfare, but also an inevitable move to seize the high ground of future military competition and implement asymmetric warfare.

Scientific analysis of anti-AI combat methods and paths

At present, artificial intelligence technology is undergoing a leapfrog development stage from weak to strong, and from special to general. From the perspective of its underlying support, data, algorithms, and computing power are still its three key elements. Among them, data is the basic raw material for training and optimizing models, algorithms determine the strategic mechanism of data processing and problem solving, and computing power provides hardware support for complex calculations. Seeking ways to “break intelligence” from the perspective of the three elements of data, algorithms, and computing power is an important method and path for implementing anti-artificial intelligence operations.

Anti-data operations. Data is the raw material for artificial intelligence to achieve learning and reasoning. The quality and diversity of data have an important impact on the accuracy and generalization ability of the model. There are many examples in life where artificial intelligence models fail due to minor data changes. For example, the face recognition model in the mobile phone may not be able to accurately identify the identity of the person because of wearing glasses, changing hairstyle or changes in the brightness of the environment; the autonomous driving model may also misjudge the road conditions due to factors such as road conditions, road signs and weather. The basic principle of implementing anti-data operations is to mislead the training and learning process or judgment process of the military intelligent model by creating “polluted” data or changing the distribution characteristics of the data, and use the “difference” of the data to cause the “error” of the model, thereby reducing the effectiveness of the military intelligent model. Since artificial intelligence models can conduct comprehensive analysis and cross-verification of multi-source data, anti-data operations should pay more attention to packaging false data information from multi-dimensional features to enhance its “authenticity”. In recent years, foreign militaries have conducted relevant experimental verifications in this regard. For example, special materials coating, infrared transmitting device camouflage and other methods are used to simulate the optical and infrared characteristics of real weapon platforms and even the engine vibration effects to deceive intelligent intelligence processing models; in cyberspace, traffic data camouflage is implemented to enhance the silent operation capability of network attacks and reduce the effectiveness of network attack detection models.

Anti-algorithm warfare. The essence of an algorithm is to describe a strategy mechanism for solving a problem in computer language. Since this strategy mechanism has a limited scope of adaptation, it may fail when faced with a wide variety of real-world problems. A typical example is Lee Sedol’s “God’s Move” in the 2016 man-machine Go match. After reviewing and analyzing the game, many professional Go players said that the “God’s Move” was not actually valid, but it worked for AlphaGo. Silva, the developer of AlphaGo, explained that Lee Sedol had hit an unknown loophole in the computer; there are also analyses that it may be that “this move” contradicts the Go logic of AlphaGo or is beyond its strategy learning range, making it unable to cope. The basic principle of implementing anti-algorithm warfare is to conduct logical attacks or logical deceptions against loopholes in the algorithm strategy mechanism and weaknesses in the model architecture to reduce the effectiveness of the algorithm. Anti-algorithm warfare should be combined with specific combat actions to achieve “misleading deception” against the algorithm. For example, drone swarm reconnaissance operations often use reinforcement learning algorithm models to plan reconnaissance routes. To address this situation, irregular or abnormal actions can be created to make the reward mechanism in the reinforcement learning algorithm model less effective or invalid, thereby achieving the goal of reducing its reconnaissance and search efficiency.

Anti-computing power operations. The strength of computing power represents the speed of converting data processing into information advantage and decision-making advantage. Unlike anti-data operations and anti-algorithm operations, which are mainly based on soft confrontation, the confrontation method of anti-computing power operations is a combination of soft and hard. Hard destruction mainly refers to the attack on the enemy’s computing power center, computing network facilities, etc., by cutting off its computing power to make it difficult for its artificial intelligence model to function; soft confrontation focuses on increasing the enemy’s computing power cost, mainly by creating a “fog” of war and data noise. For example, during combat, a large number of meaningless data such as images, audio, video, and electromagnetic are generated to contain and consume the enemy’s computing power resources, reducing the effective effect rate of its computing power. In addition, attacks can also be carried out on weak links in defense such as the support environment and supporting construction of computing power. The computing power center consumes huge amounts of electricity, and attacking and destroying its power support system can also achieve the effect of anti-computing power operations.

Proactively plan the construction of anti-AI combat capabilities

In any war, the right tactics are used to win. In the face of intelligent warfare, while continuing to promote and improve intelligent combat capabilities, it is also necessary to strengthen preparations for anti-AI operations, proactively plan theoretical innovations, supporting technology development, and equipment platform construction related to anti-AI operations, and ensure the establishment of an intelligent combat system that is both offensive and defensive, and integrated with defense and counterattack.

Strengthen the innovation of anti-AI combat theory. Scientific military theory is combat effectiveness. Whether it is military strategic innovation, military scientific and technological innovation, or other military innovations, they are inseparable from theoretical guidance. We must persist in emancipating our minds, broadening our horizons, strengthening dialectical thinking, and using the innovation of anti-AI combat theory as a supplement and breakthrough to build a theoretical system of intelligent combat that supports and serves to win the battle. We must insist on you fight yours and I fight mine, strengthen asymmetric thinking, and provide scientific theoretical support for seizing battlefield control through in-depth research on anti-AI combat concepts, strategies and tactics, and effectively play the leading role of military theory. We must persist in the integration of theory and technology, enhance scientific and technological cognition, innovation, and application, open up the closed loop between anti-AI combat theory and technology, let the two complement and support each other, and achieve deep integration and benign interaction between theory and technology.

Focus on the accumulation of anti-AI military technology. Science and technology are important foundations for generating and improving combat effectiveness. Once some technologies achieve breakthroughs, the impact will be subversive, and may even fundamentally change the traditional war offense and defense pattern. At present, major countries in the world regard artificial intelligence as a subversive technology and have elevated the development of military intelligence to a national strategy. At the same time, some countries are actively conducting research on technologies related to anti-AI operations and exploring methods of AI confrontation, with the intention of reducing the effectiveness of the opponent’s military intelligence system. To this end, we must explore and follow up, strengthen the tracking and research of cutting-edge technologies, actively discover, promote, and stimulate the development of technologies such as intelligent confrontation that have anti-subversive effects, seize the technological advantage at the beginning of anti-AI operations, and prevent enemy technological raids; we must also carefully select, focus on maintaining sufficient scientific rationality and accurate judgment, break through the technical “fog”, and avoid falling into the opponent’s technical trap.

Research and develop weapons and equipment for anti-AI operations. Designing weapons and equipment is designing future wars. What kind of wars will be fought in the future will determine what kind of weapons and equipment will be developed. Anti-AI operations are an important part of intelligent warfare, and anti-AI weapons and equipment will also play an important role on future battlefields. When developing anti-AI weapons and equipment, we must first keep close to battlefield needs. Closely combine combat opponents, combat tasks, and combat environments, strengthen anti-AI combat research, accurately describe anti-AI combat scenarios, and ensure that the demand for anti-AI combat weapons and equipment is scientific, accurate, and reasonable. Secondly, we must establish a cost mindset. The latest local war practices show that combat cost control is an important factor affecting the outcome of future wars. Anti-AI operations focus on interfering with and confusing the enemy’s military intelligence system. Increasing the development of decoy weapon platforms is an effective way to reduce costs and increase efficiency. By using low-cost simulations to show false targets to deceive the enemy’s intelligent reconnaissance system, the “brain-breaking” effect can be extended and amplified, and efforts can be made to consume its high-value strike weapons such as precision-guided missiles. Finally, we must focus on upgrading while building, using, and upgrading. Intelligent technology is developing rapidly and is updated and iterated quickly. We must closely track the opponent’s cutting-edge military intelligent technology applications, understand their intelligent model algorithm architecture, and continuously promote the application and upgrading of the latest anti-artificial intelligence technology in weapon platforms to ensure its efficient use on the battlefield.

現代國語：

關注智慧化戰爭中的反人工智慧作戰

■康睿智 李聖傑

引言

科學技術在軍事領域的廣泛運用，引起戰爭形態和作戰方式的深刻變化，大國軍事博弈越來越表現為技術上的顛覆與反顛覆、突襲與反突襲、抵消與反抵消。打贏未來智慧化戰爭，既要不斷推進人工智慧技術在軍事領域的深度轉化應用，還應加強辯證思維、堅持非對稱思想，創新發展反人工智慧作戰理論和戰法，前瞻佈局反人工智慧技術研究和武器裝備研發，實現「破智」制勝，努力把握未來戰爭主動權。

充分認識反人工智慧作戰必然性

毛澤東同志在《矛盾論》中指出：「事物的矛盾法則，即對立統一的法則，是唯物辯證法的最根本的法則。」縱觀軍事技術發展及其作戰運用歷史，從來都充滿了攻與防的辯證關系，技術之「矛」與相應反制技術之「盾」之間相互博弈、交替壓制的現象屢見不鮮壓制的現象屢見不鮮。

在冷兵器時代，人們不僅發明出「刀、槍、劍、戟」等十八般兵器，與之相應的「盔、甲、盾」等也被創造出來。熱兵器時代，火藥的使用大幅提升了攻擊距離和殺傷力，但同時也催生了以「塹壕」「棱堡」等防禦工事為代表的技術戰術創新。機械化時代，坦克在二戰中大放異彩，人們對「坦克裝甲」與「反戰車武器」相關技戰術的開發延續至今。資訊時代，圍繞制資訊權的「電子攻擊」與「電子防護」又掀起一陣新的熱潮，電子對抗部隊應運而生。此外，「導彈」與「反導」、「無人作戰」與「反無人作戰」等軍事領域的對立概念不勝枚舉。

應當看到，「反人工智慧作戰」作為「智慧化作戰」的對立概念，也必將隨著智慧技術在軍事領域的廣泛深度運用而逐漸顯現。前瞻性研究反人工智慧作戰相關概念、原則及其技戰術實現路徑，既是全面辯證認識智慧化戰爭的時代需要，也是搶佔未來軍事競爭高地、實施非對稱作戰的必然之舉。

科學分析反人工智慧作戰方法路徑

目前，人工智慧技術正經歷由弱向強、由專用向通用的跨越式發展階段。從其底層支撐來看，數據、演算法、算力依舊是其三大關鍵要素。其中，數據是訓練和優化模型的基礎原料，演算法決定了數據處理與問題解決的策略機制，算力則為復雜計算提供硬體支撐。從數據、演算法、算力三個要素的角度尋求「破智」之道，是實施反人工智慧作戰的重要方法路徑。

反數據作戰。數據是人工智慧實現學習和推理的原始素材，數據的品質和多樣性對模型的準確度和泛化能力有重要影響。生活中因為微小數據變化而導致人工智慧模型失效的例子比比皆是。例如，手機中的人臉識別模型，可能會因人戴上眼鏡、改變發型或環境明暗變化等原因，而無法準確識別身份；自動駕駛模型也會因路況、路標及天氣等因素，產生對道路情況的誤判。實施反數據作戰，其基本原理是通過製造“污染”數據或改變數據的分佈特徵，來誤導軍事智能模型的訓練學習過程或判斷過程，用數據之“差”引發模型之“謬”，從而降低軍事智能模型的有效性。由於人工智慧模型能夠對多源數據進行綜合分析、交叉印證，反數據作戰應更加註重從多維特徵出發，包裝虛假數據信息，提升其「真實性」。近年來，外軍在這方面已經有相關實驗驗證。例如，利用特殊材料塗裝、紅外線發射裝置偽裝等方式，模擬真實武器平台光學、紅外特徵甚至是發動機震動效果，用以欺騙智能情報處理模型；在網絡空間，實施流量數據偽裝，以提升網絡攻擊靜默運行能力，降低網絡攻擊檢測模型的效果。

反演算法作戰。演算法的本質，是用計算機語言描述解決問題的策略機制。由於這種策略機制的適應範圍有限，在面對千差萬別的現實問題時可能會失效，一個典型例子就是2016年人機圍棋大戰中李世石的「神之一手」。不少職業圍棋選手復盤分析後表示，「神之一手」其實並不成立，但卻對「阿爾法狗」發揮了作用。 「阿爾法狗」開發者席爾瓦對此的解釋是，李世石點中了電腦不為人知的漏洞；還有分析稱，可能是「這一手」與「阿爾法狗」的圍棋邏輯相悖或不在其策略學習範圍內，導致其無法應對。實施反演算法作戰，其基本原理是針對演算法策略機制漏洞和模型架構弱點，進行邏輯攻擊或邏輯欺騙，以降低演算法有效性。反演算法作戰應與具體作戰行動結合，達成針對演算法的「誤導欺騙」。例如，無人機群偵察行動常採用強化學習演算法模型規劃偵察路徑，針對此情況，可透過製造無規則行動或反常行動，致使強化學習演算法模型中的獎勵機制降效或失效，從而達成降低其偵察搜尋效率的目的。

反算力作戰。算力的強弱代表著將資料處理轉換為資訊優勢和決策優勢的速度。不同於反數據作戰和反演算法作戰以軟對抗為主，反算力作戰的對抗方式是軟硬結合的。硬摧毀主要指對敵算力中心、計算網絡設施等實施的打擊，通過斷其算力的方式使其人工智能模型難以發揮作用；軟對抗著眼加大敵算力成本，主要以製造戰爭“迷霧”和數據噪聲為主。例如，作戰時大批量產生影像、音訊、影片、電磁等多類型的無意義數據，對敵算力資源進行牽制消耗，降低其算力的有效作用率。此外，也可對算力的支撐環境和配套建設等防備薄弱環節實施攻擊，算力中心電能消耗巨大，對其電力支援系統進行攻擊和摧毀，也可達到反算力作戰的效果。

前瞻佈局反人工智慧作戰能力建構

凡戰者，以正合，以奇勝。面對智慧化戰爭，持續推進提升智慧化作戰能力的同時，也需強化對反人工智慧作戰的未雨綢繆，前瞻佈局反人工智慧作戰相關理論創新、配套技術發展和裝備平台建設，確保建立攻防兼備、防反一體的智慧化作戰體系。

加強反人工智慧作戰理論創新。科學的軍事理論就是戰鬥力，軍事戰略創新也好，軍事科技創新也好，其他方面軍事創新也好，都離不開理論指導。要堅持解放思想、開闊視野，強化辯證思維，以反人工智慧作戰理論創新為補充和突破，建構支撐和服務打贏制勝的智慧化作戰理論體系。要堅持你打你的、我打我的，強化非對稱思想，通過對反人工智慧作戰概念、策略戰法等問題的深化研究，為奪取戰場制智權提供科學理論支撐，切實發揮軍事理論的先導作用。要堅持理技融合，增強科技認知力、創新力、運用力，打通反人工智慧作戰理論與技術之間的閉環迴路，讓兩者互相補充、互為支撐，實現理論與技術的深度融合和良性互動。

注重反人工智慧軍事技術累積。科學技術是產生和提高戰鬥力的重要基礎，有些技術一旦取得突破，影響將是顛覆性的，甚至可能從根本上改變傳統的戰爭攻防格局。當前，世界各主要國家將人工智慧視為顛覆性技術，並將發展軍事智慧化上升為國家戰略。與此同時，也有國家積極進行反人工智慧作戰相關技術研究，探索人工智慧對抗方法，意圖降低對手軍事智慧系統效能。為此，既要探索跟進，加強對前沿技術的跟踪研究，積極發現、推動、催生智能對抗這類具有反顛覆作用的技術發展，在反人工智能作戰起步階段就搶佔技術先機，防敵技術突襲；還要精挑細選，注重保持足夠科學理性和準確判斷，破除技術“迷霧”，避免陷入對手技術陷阱。

研發反人工智慧作戰武器裝備。設計武器裝備就是設計未來戰爭，未來打什麼仗就發展什麼武器裝備。反人工智慧作戰是智慧化戰爭的重要組成部分，反人工智慧武器裝備也將在未來戰場上發揮重要作用。在研發反人工智慧作戰武器裝備時，首先要緊貼戰場需求。緊密結合作戰對手、作戰任務和作戰環境等，加強反人工智慧作戰研究，把反人工智慧作戰場景描述準確，確保反人工智慧作戰武器裝備需求論證科學、準確、合理。其次要樹立成本思維。最新局部戰爭實踐表明，作戰成本控制是影響未來戰爭勝負的重要因素。反人工智慧作戰重在對敵軍事智慧系統的干擾與迷惑，加大誘耗型武器平台研發是一種有效的降本增效方法。通過低成本模擬示假目標欺騙敵智能偵察系統，可將「破智」效應延伸放大，力爭消耗其精確制導導彈等高價值打擊武器。最後要注重邊建邊用邊升級。智慧技術發展速度快、更新迭代快，要緊密追蹤對手前沿軍事智慧技術應用，摸準其智慧模型演算法架構，不斷推動最新反人工智慧技術在武器平台中的運用升級，確保其戰場運用的高效能。

中國原創軍事資源：http://www.81.cn/ll_208543/16387159888.html

#Information Support Force, #intelligent warfare, #intellligentization, Chinese Military Intelligentization, 中國軍事智能化

Chinese Military Militarization of Artificial Intelligence is Constantly Accelerating

Leave a comment

中國軍方人工智慧軍事化進程不斷加速

現代英語：

Adapt to the general trend of technological development and seize the high point of future war system ——

Artificial intelligence is a collective term for cutting-edge technology groups such as big data, automated decision-making, machine learning, image recognition, and spatial situational awareness. The “ cognitive burden ” that liberates human intelligent fitness enables technology users to obtain prophets, preemptive, Preemptive decision-making action advantage. As “ power multiplier ” and “ the basis for future combat ”, artificial intelligence will fundamentally reshape future war patterns, change the country’s traditional security territory, impact existing military technology development patterns, and reconstruct future operations The system and military power system have become important leading forces in the future battlefield.

With the rapid development of technology and the continuous pace of competition, major countries have launched their own artificial intelligence development plans, and accelerated the transformation of organizational mechanisms, scientific and technological research and development, and tactical tactical innovation, promote the use of artificial intelligence military, and seize future war commanding heights.

Speed up organizational innovation

Promote technology conversion applications

Unlike traditional technology, the research and development and transformation of artificial intelligence have its own characteristics. The institutional setting and operation of the traditional defense system make it difficult to adapt to the needs of rapid development of artificial intelligence. To this end, the military of relevant countries has vigorously carried out organizational reforms and innovations, removed institutional obstacles in the process of research and development of artificial intelligence technologies, and accelerated the transformation and application of related technologies.

Emphasize that “ is close to ”. The UK is mainly based on “ Defense Data Office ” and “ Digital Integration and Defense Artificial Intelligence Center ”, integrating energy efficiency such as route planning, specification setting, technical governance and asset development, and breaking down restrictions on the development and application of artificial intelligence technologies Administrative obstacles. The United States is based on the “ Strategic Competency Office ” and “ Chief Numbers and Artificial Intelligence Officer ”, and uses the Army’s Future Command as a pilot to integrate decentralized functions such as theoretical development, technology development, and equipment acquisition. Together, the focus is on “ Digging potential efficiency ” to strengthen the innovative use of existing platforms, while In order to effectively balance real needs with long-term development.

Pay attention to “ research conversion ”. The use of artificial intelligence in the military field will have a profound impact on battlefield methods, tactical tactical choice, etc. Russia has established “ Preliminary Research Foundation ” and “ National Robot Technology R&D Center ” and other institutions to guide the design, research and development and application of Russian military industrial and intelligent technology to improve the practical transformation of scientific research results rate. The United States has set up “ Joint Artificial Intelligence Center ”, relying on “ National Mission Plan ” and “ Military Type Mission Plan ”, focusing on coordinating military-site collaborative innovation and technological achievements transformation to promote artificial intelligence Wide application of the US Department of Defense and various services.

Focus on “ military-civilian integration ”. Russia has set up “Tech City ” and other institutions in Anapa and other places. Based on the “ Advanced Research Foundation ”, it fully absorbs military personnel, actively builds technological production clusters and research clusters, and effectively expands military personnel. Two-way communication mechanism. By setting up “ National Defense Innovation Test Group ” and other institutions in Silicon Valley and other places, the United States can directly enter high-level decision-making by relying on “ National Defense Innovation Committee”. France has established technical research and development institutions such as the Innovation Defense Laboratory and the Defense Innovation Division in the Ministry of National Defense, aiming to solicit private capital investment and cooperation in defense projects to improve scientific research energy efficiency.

Highlight “ combination of technology ”. The Israel Defense Forces established the Digital Transformation System Architecture Department to fully demonstrate new technologies, new theories, and new concepts based on the specific effects of the organic integration of various systems into various military services to determine the corresponding technology research and development priorities and strategic development directions. The United States has re-established the positions of Deputy Secretary of Defense Research and Engineering, created chief numbers and artificial intelligence officers to enhance the control of defense technology innovation and application, and relied on theoretical methods such as red and blue confrontation, analog deduction, and net assessment analysis. New ideas, new ideas, and new methods are tested in practice to select various types of technology research and development focus and strategic tactical attack directions, Achieve benign interaction between technological development and theoretical innovation.

Set up a project for military needs

Seize the opportunity for future development

In recent years, various military powers have aimed at the development of artificial intelligence frontier technology, and have established extensive projects in the fields of situational awareness, data analysis, intelligence reconnaissance, and unmanned combat, with the intention of seizing future development opportunities.

Situation awareness field. Situational awareness in the traditional sense refers to the collection and acquisition of battlefield information by means of satellite, radar, and electronic reconnaissance. However, under the conditions of “ mixed warfare ”, which is ambiguous in peace, unity of soldiers, internal outreach, and integration of all regions, the role of situational awareness in non-traditional fields such as human domain, social domain, and cognitive domain has received unprecedented attention. The US “ Computable Cultural Understanding ” project aims to process multi-source data through natural language processing technology to achieve cross-cultural communication; the “ compass ” project aims to extract cases from unstructured data sources, Integrate key information and respond to different types of “ gray zone ” actions. The French “ Scorpion ” Combat System project aims to use intelligent information analysis and data sharing platforms to enhance the fire support effectiveness of the French’s existing frontline mobile combat platform to ensure the safety of operational personnel.

Data analysis field. Relying on artificial intelligence technology to improve intelligent data collection, identification analysis and auxiliary decision-making capabilities can transform information advantages into cognitive and action advantages. Russia’s “ Combat Command Information System ” aims to provide commanders with multiple types of action plans by using artificial intelligence and big data technology to analyze the battlefield environment. The British “THEIA program ” and the French “The Forge” digital decision support engine are designed to enhance the information processing capabilities of command control, intelligence gathering, etc., and improve the commander’s ability to control complex battlefields. And command effectiveness.

Intelligence reconnaissance field. Compared with traditional intelligence reconnaissance, the use of artificial intelligence algorithms to collect and process intelligence has the advantages of fast access to information, wide content sources, and high processing efficiency. The Japan Self-Defense Force satellite intelligent monitoring system aims to identify and track foreign vessels in the vicinity of key waters that may “ infringe ” their territorial waters. U.S. military “ complex combat environment causal exploration ” project, which aims to use artificial intelligence and machine learning tools to process multi-source information to assist commanders in understanding the cultural drivers, root causes, and factors behind the war; “ Marvin ” The project uses machine learning algorithms, human face recognition technology, etc. to screen and list various suspicious targets from the full dynamic video, Provide technical support for counter-terrorism operations.

No one is fighting. In some technologically advanced countries, the unmanned combat system is maturing and the equipment species spectrum system is becoming more and more perfect. The Israeli M-RCV unmanned combat vehicle can perform diversified tasks such as unmanned reconnaissance, fire strike, carrying and recycling drones under all terrain and full-time conditions. The Russian army “ Outpost-R” UAV system with integrated capabilities can detect, track, and strike military targets in real time. It also has certain anti-reconnaissance and anti-interference capabilities and has been inspected on the battlefield. The US military “ Future Tactical UAV System ” project aims to comprehensively enhance the effectiveness of the US Army in performing reconnaissance and surveillance, auxiliary aiming, war damage assessment, and communications relay operations.

Adapt to future battlefield changes

Continuously explore new ways of warfare

In order to adapt to the tremendous changes in the battlefield environment in the intelligent era, relevant countries have explored a series of new warfare methods by enhancing the energy efficiency of artificial intelligence in key military decisions and operations.

Algorithmic warfare, that is, relying on big data and artificial intelligence technology, to give full play to the powerful potential of combat networks, human-machine collaboration, and autonomous and semi-autonomous weapons, so that the cycle cycle of “ observation-adjustment-decision-action” Always lead the opponent, thereby destroying the enemy’s combat plan and achieving preemption. In December 2015, the Russian army relied on the unmanned reconnaissance and intelligent command information system to guide the ground unmanned combat platform to cooperate with the Syrian government forces to quickly eliminate 77 armed elements within the target range at the cost of 4 minor injuries. In 2021, the US Air Force conducted a test flight of the first intelligent drone “ Air Borg ”, marking a further advancement of the US military algorithm warfare.

Unmanned warfare, guided by a saturated number of attacks and a low-cost war of system attack and defense operations, strives to achieve full-scale posture tracking, dynamic deterrence, and tactical suppression of the enemy defense system through human-computer coordination and group combat models. In May 2021, the Israeli army used artificial intelligence to assist the drone bee colony in the conflict with the Hamas armed group, which played an important role in determining the enemy’s position, destroying the enemy’s target, and monitoring the enemy’s dynamics. In October 2021 and July 2022, the US military launched a drone targeted air strike in northwestern Syria, killing Abdul Hamid Matar, a high-level leader of the “ base ” organization, and the extremist organization “ Islamic State ” Leader Agel.

Distributed warfare, based on artificial intelligence unlimited command and control capabilities and new electronic warfare methods, using shallow footprints such as special forces, low-characteristics, and fast-paced forces to form small groups of mobile formations, spreading infiltration into combat in a multi-diameter multi-domain manner Area, continue to break the shortboard and chain dependence of the enemy system, increasing the difficulty of its fire saturation attack. In this process, “ people are commanding and machines are controlling ”. In recent years, the US military has successively launched “ Golden Tribe ”“ Flexible Network Distributed Marseille Communication ” and other “ distributed operations ” scientific research projects.

Fusion warfare, relying on network quantum communication and other means to build a “ combat cloud ” that is resistant to interference and high rates, in order to eliminate the technical barriers of military data chain interconnection, interconnection and interoperability, and achieve deep integration of combat power. In 2021, the joint general basic platform developed by the United States Artificial Intelligence Center officially possessed initial operational capabilities, which will help the US military break down data barriers and significantly improve data sharing capabilities. During the NATO “ Spring Storm ” exercise held in Estonia in 2021, the British army used artificial intelligence technology to perform intelligent analysis and automated processing of battlefield information of various services, which improved the integration of arms and strengthened joint command and control effectiveness.

現代國語：

中国军网 国防部网 // 2022年9月1日 星期四

适应技术发展大趋势，抢占未来战争制高点——

■程柏华

人工智慧是大數據、自動化決策、機器學習、圖像識別與空間態勢感知等前沿技術群的統稱，可解放人類智能體能的“認知負擔”，使技術使用者獲得先知、先佔、先發製人的決策行動優勢。作為“力量倍增器”和“未來戰鬥的基礎”，人工智慧將從根本上重塑未來戰爭形態、改變國家傳統安全疆域、衝擊現有軍事技術發展格局、重建未來作戰體系和軍事力量體系，成為未來戰場的重要主導力量。

隨著科技的快速發展和競爭的不斷提速，主要國家紛紛推出自己的人工智慧發展規劃，並加速推動組織機制變革、科技研發和戰術戰法創新，推動人工智慧軍事運用，搶佔未來戰爭制高點。

加速組織形態創新

推進技術轉換應用

有別於傳統的技術，人工智慧的研發和轉化有自身的特點，傳統國防體系的機構設置和運作方式，很難適應人工智慧快速發展的需求。為此，相關國家軍隊大力進行組織體制改革與創新，破除人工智慧技術研發過程中的體制障礙，加速推廣相關技術的轉換與應用。

強調「遠近銜接」。英國以「國防資料辦公室」與「數位整合與國防人工智慧中心」為主體，將路線規劃、規範設定、技術治理與資產開發等能效聚攏整合，破除限制人工智慧技術發展應用的行政阻礙。美國以「戰略能力辦公室」和「首席數位與人工智慧長」為依托，以陸軍未來司令部為試點，將理論開發、技術研發、裝備採辦等分散職能整合到一起，重點以「挖潛增效」方式加強現有平台的創新運用，同時為國防高級研究計劃局的中長期技術創新爭取時間，從而有效兼顧現實需求與長遠發展。

重視「研用轉換」。人工智慧在軍事領域的運用，將對戰場戰斗方式、戰術戰法選擇等方面產生深刻影響。俄羅斯透過組成「先期研究基金會」和「國家機器人技術研發中心」等機構，指導俄軍人工智慧技術的設計、研發與應用工作，以提高科學研究成果的實用轉換率。美國透過設立“聯合人工智慧中心”，依托“國家任務計畫”和“軍種任務計畫”，著力統籌軍地協同創新和科技成果轉化，促進人工智慧在美國國防部和諸軍種的廣泛應用。

注重「軍民一體」。俄羅斯在阿納帕等地設立“時代科技城”等機構，依托“高級研究基金會”，充分吸收軍地人才，積極構建科技生產集群和研究集群，有效拓展軍地人才雙向交流機制。美國透過在矽谷等地設立“國防創新試驗小組”等機構，依托“國防創新委員會”，使人工智慧領域的技術創新與理論發展最新成果可以直接進入高層決策。法國在國防部建立創新防務實驗室、防務創新處等技術研發機構，旨在徵集民間資本投資與國防專案合作，提昇科研能效。

突顯「理技結合」。以色列國防軍設立數位轉型體​​系架構部，依據各類系統有機融入各軍兵種的具體效果，對新技術、新理論、新概念進行充分論證，以確定相應技術研發重點與戰略發展方向。美國透過重設國防部研究與工程副部長、創建首席數位與人工智慧長等職位，提升國防技術創新與應用的統管力度，並依托紅藍對抗、模擬推演、淨評估分析等理論方法，對各類新思想、新理念、新方法進行實踐檢驗，以選定各類技術研發焦點與戰略戰術攻關方向，實現技術發展與創新理論的良性互動。

針對軍事需求立項

搶佔未來發展先機

近年來，各軍事強國瞄準人工智慧前線技術研發，在態勢感知、資料分析、情報偵察、無人作戰等領域廣泛立項，意圖搶佔未來發展先機。

態勢感知領域。傳統意義的態勢感知是指依托衛星、雷達和電子偵察等手段收集和取得戰場資訊。然而，在平戰模糊、兵民一體、內外連動、全域融合的「混合戰爭」條件下，人類域、社會域、認知域等非傳統領域態勢感知的作用受到前所未有的重視。美國「可計算文化理解」項目，旨在透過自然語言處理技術處理多源數據，實現跨文化交流；「指南針」項目，旨在從非結構化數據源中提取案例，整合關鍵訊息，應對不同類型的「灰色地帶」行動。法國「蠍子」戰鬥系統項目，旨在運用智慧化資訊分析與資料共享平台，提升法軍現有前線移動作戰平台的火力支援效力，以保障行動人員安全。

數據分析領域。依託人工智慧技術提高智慧化資料蒐集、識別分析和輔助決策能力，可將資訊優勢轉化為認知和行動優勢。俄羅斯“戰鬥指揮資訊系統”，旨在藉助人工智慧與大數據技術分析戰場環境，為指揮官提供多類行動預案。英國「THEIA計畫」和法國的「The Forge」數位決策支援引擎，都旨在增強指揮控制、情報蒐集等方面的資訊處理能力，提高指揮官駕馭複雜戰場的能力和指揮效能。

情報偵察領域。相較於傳統情報偵察，利用人工智慧演算法蒐集處理情報，具備獲取資訊快、內容來源廣、處理效率高等優勢。日本自衛隊衛星智慧監控系統，旨在識別、追蹤重點水域附近可能「侵犯」其領海的外國船隻。美軍「複雜作戰環境因果探索」項目，旨在利用人工智慧和機器學習工具處理多源信息，輔助指揮官理解戰爭背後的文化動因、事件根源和各因素關係；「馬文」項目則透過運用機器學習演算法、人臉辨識技術等，從全動態影片中篩選排列出各類可疑目標，為反恐等行動提供技術支撐。

無人作戰領域。一些技術先進的國家，無人作戰體係日臻成熟、裝備種類譜係日趨完善。以軍M-RCV型無人戰車，可在全地形、全時段條件下，執行無人偵察、火力打擊、運載及回收無人機等多樣化任務。具備察打一體能力的俄軍「前哨-R」無人機系統，可即時偵測、追蹤、打擊軍事目標，也具備一定反偵察和抗干擾能力，已在戰場上經過檢驗。美軍「未來戰術無人機系統」項目，旨在全面提升美陸軍執行偵察監視、輔助瞄準、戰損評估、通訊中繼等作戰任務的效能。

適應未來戰場轉變

不斷探索全新戰法

為適應智慧化時代戰場環境的巨大變化，相關國家透過提升人工智慧在各關鍵軍事決策與行動的參與能效，探索出一系列全新戰法。

演算法戰，即以大數據和人工智慧技術為依托，充分發揮作戰網路、人機協作以及自主和半自主武器的強大潛能，使己方「觀察-調整-決策-行動」的循環週期始終領先對手，進而破壞敵作戰計劃，實現先發製人。 2015年12月，俄軍依托無人偵察與智慧化指揮資訊系統，引導地面無人作戰平台與敘利亞政府軍配合，以4人輕傷代價，迅速消滅了目標範圍內的77名武裝分子。 2021年，美空軍進行了首架智慧無人機「空中博格人」的試飛，標誌著美軍演算法戰進一步向實戰化邁進。

無人戰，以飽和數量攻擊、體系攻防作戰的低成本消耗戰為指導，力求透過人機協同、群體作戰模式，實現對敵防禦體系全方位的態勢追蹤、動態威懾和戰術壓制。 2021年5月，以軍在同哈馬斯武裝組織的衝突中使用人工智慧輔助的無人機蜂群，在確定敵人位置、摧毀敵方目標、監視敵方動態等方面發揮了重要作用。 2021年10月和2022年7月，美軍在敘利亞西北部發起無人機定點空襲，分別擊斃「基地」組織高階領導人阿卜杜勒·哈米德·馬塔爾和極端組織「伊斯蘭國」領導人阿蓋爾。

分佈戰，以人工智慧無限指揮控制能力和全新電子戰手段為依托，利用特種部隊等淺腳印、低特徵、快節奏的兵力，形成小股多群機動編隊，以多向多域方式分散滲入作戰區域，持續破擊敵體系短板和鍊式依賴，增大其火力飽和攻擊的難度。在這個過程中，實現「人在指揮、機器在控制」。近年來，美軍相繼啟動「金色部落」「彈性網路分散式馬賽克通訊」等多個「分散式作戰」科學研究立項。

融合戰，依托網路量子通訊等手段，建構抗干擾、高速率的“作戰雲”，以消除軍兵種數據鏈互通、互聯和互操作技術障礙，實現作戰力量的深度融合。 2021年，美聯合人工智慧中心研發的聯合通用基礎平台正式具備初始操作能力，將協助美軍打破資料壁壘，大幅提升資料共享能力。 2021年在愛沙尼亞舉行的北約「春季風暴」演習期間，英軍運用人工智慧技術，對各軍種戰場資訊進行智慧分析與自動化處理，提升了軍種間的融合度，增強了聯合指揮控制效能。

中國原創軍事資源：http://www.81.cn/jfjbmap/content/2022-09/01/content_323244.htm