Category Archives: 域作战突出属性, 認知戰

Where is the Focus of Chinese Military Cognitive Domain Operations?

中國軍事認知域作戰的重點在哪裡?

劉曙光
2022年10月05日 | 資料來源:解放軍報

現代英語:

● Cognitive domain warfare focuses on full-dimensional attacks, including both cognitive penetration in “peacetime” and cognitive coercion in “wartime”.

● Wartime cognitive domain operations are carried out around the achievement of military objectives, and are implemented in coordination with military operations and support each other.

●In cognitive domain warfare, as the sound of gunfire fades away, the clarion call for a new round of cognitive domain warfare may sound again, and there can be no slackness.

Cognitive domain operations are confrontations conducted at the level of consciousness and thinking. Through selective processing and transmission of information, it influences judgments, changes concepts, and competes for people’s hearts, thereby guiding the reality to develop in a direction that is beneficial to oneself. From the perspective of cognitive shaping, cognitive domain operations focus on full-dimensional attacks, including both cognitive penetration in “peacetime” and cognitive coercion in “wartime”. Therefore, cognitive domain operations do not have a clear boundary between peace and war; at the same time, according to the needs of political or military purposes, its targets can be individuals, organizations, and even countries. Therefore, cognitive domain operations should establish the concept of peacetime and wartime integration, military-civilian integration, cross-domain integration, and joint victory, and sort out basic tasks accordingly.

Focus on the layout tasks of ideology

Ideology is “a system of thought that systematically and consciously reflects the social and economic forms and political systems”. Ideology determines the rational foundation of cognition and has distinct camp characteristics. Although ideology covers all aspects of social life, in the confrontation between countries or political groups, the struggle around belief guidance, attitude acquisition, and concept assimilation is particularly fierce, becoming the focus of cognitive domain operations.

Shaping and guiding political cognition, seizing the initiative to break and establish beliefs. The confrontation between countries or political groups is not only a confrontation of national strength, but also a confrontation of national will, and the confrontation of political beliefs bears the brunt. Shaping and guiding political cognition aims to consolidate or destroy political consensus, strengthen or shake political beliefs, and expand or disintegrate political camps. In cognitive domain operations, through the cognitive guidance of various aspects such as the legitimacy of the ruling party, the rationality of political ideas and systems, and the health of the political ecology, cultivate feelings such as recognition or denial, support or hatred of political positions, beliefs, and practices, and lay a political cognitive layout that is beneficial to oneself and detrimental to the enemy. Political cognition is related to the survival foundation of a country or organization, and is the primary focus of cognitive domain operations.

Shape and guide war cognition, seize the leadership of war attitude. A country can live without war but cannot live without war awareness. War cognition is the basis for the formation and development of will, concept, psychology, and thinking of individuals, organizations, and countries in the war cycle. Through the guidance of cognition of the nature, properties, and legal concepts of war, it is a key issue to build a war cognition thinking system, guide the evaluation trend of the rationality, justice, and legitimacy of war, promote the formation of support or opposition to the possible war, and regulate the fluctuation of the willingness to assume war obligations. War cognition affects war attitude, and the struggle for control over it is a task that must be taken seriously in cognitive domain operations.

Shape and guide value cognition, and seize the control of emotional will. Values ​​affect people’s judgment of beauty, ugliness, right and wrong, and social behavior orientation. In terms of identifying things and judging right and wrong, people’s emotions always tend to support propositions with similar values. Value cognition permeates every corner of life. Through the dissemination of ethical and moral concepts, standards of beauty, ugliness, good and evil, and literary and artistic viewpoints, the competition for the right to guide value concepts, the right to guide life patterns, and the right to judge traditional inheritance is frequent and fierce. In real life, different values ​​often penetrate and entangle with each other. The essence of shaping and guiding value cognition is to strive for the recognition of social emotions, which is a regular task of cognitive domain operations.

Focus on the social psychology of the task of creating momentum

Social psychology provides a perceptual and experiential basis for cognition, and it is formed on the basis of daily life, social activities, practical insights, etc. Social psychological guidance often promotes unpredictable changes in the real situation. It is one of the common modes of confrontation between the two sides, especially in non-military conflict periods, and it is also a task that must be taken seriously in cognitive domain operations.

Guide national psychology and regulate national emotions. National psychology is one of the social psychology that is most likely to cause conflict and confrontation. Attacking national self-esteem can breed national inferiority complex and easily split and disperse. Improving national self-esteem can enhance national cohesion, but the expansion of national self-esteem can easily lead to extreme racism, national chauvinism, etc.; the differences in status, interests, culture, customs, and life among different ethnic groups within the country provide opportunities for people with ulterior motives to stir up national confrontation, while the same living space and cooperation process lay the foundation for eliminating prejudice and even cohesion and tolerance among ethnic groups. The result depends on cognitive guidance. National psychological guidance is sensitive and easy to get out of control, which has a direct impact on social stability. It is a task that needs to be focused on in cognitive domain operations.

Guide group psychology and increase or decrease opposition awareness. Groups generally refer to people of the same kind, such as ethnic groups, regions, classes, professional groups, and even civil groups, non-governmental organizations, etc. If groups are subjectively defined based on the standard of “convergence”, then the “differences” between groups exist objectively. This difference may be political or economic status, or it may be cultural ideas, regional concepts, or other. Guiding the cognition of differences to promote the opposition psychology of different groups such as party opposition, regional opposition, professional opposition, and rich-poor opposition will not only damage the internal unity of the country, but also accumulate and increase the dissatisfaction of all sectors of society with the political authorities, laying the groundwork for instigating social unrest and division. In cognitive domain operations, attention needs to be paid to this kind of social psychology.

Guiding individual psychology and influencing social emotions. In cognitive domain operations, individual psychological guidance is divided into two situations. One is the psychological guidance of important figures, such as sensitive professionals, social intellectuals, academic elites, successful business people, etc. The struggle for their political stance, emotional attitude, etc. is an issue that both sides of the confrontation need to focus on. The other is the use of phenomena that easily trigger individual psychological resonance. For example, in public crises, major accidents, natural disasters, and even some criminal incidents and emergencies in life, intentionally guiding certain emotions may cause group polarization due to the individual’s herd effect, thereby causing changes in public opinion and even social unrest. Both aspects are content that cognitive domain operations need to pay attention to.

Targeting the critical task of wartime cognition

Cognitive domain operations precede military operations and end with them. In wartime, cognitive domain operations are carried out around the achievement of military objectives, coordinated with military operations, and mutually supportive, with the characteristics of violent coercion. In this stage of cognitive domain operations, “offensive” and “defensive” actions are carried out simultaneously, with the combined effects of weapons and propaganda, and the emergence of “enticement”, “attack”, “cheating”, and “control”. This is the key stage of cognitive domain operations.

Attack the enemy’s mind and induce cognition. Cognitive attacks in wartime are mainly carried out to weaken the enemy’s will to resist and induce the enemy to make wrong decisions. Targeted attacks are used to shake the enemy’s will to resist and front-line commanders and fighters, and information deception interference is used to induce decision-making; for armed forces, which are mainly military forces, the use of force to deter and deter is dominant, and the use of public opinion warfare and other style actions and emerging technical means are used to shake their belief in participating in the war, cause panic, undermine their military morale, and dominate their action patterns; for social support forces, strong information is delivered through large-scale military exercises, equipment tests, and propaganda on the lethality of weapons to undermine confidence, induce panic through selective target strikes and the dissemination of battle conditions, and seek understanding through publicity of one’s own humanitarian actions in the war and related international comments.

Build a strong defense line, gather hearts and minds to control the situation. The focus of cognitive defense in wartime is to build a strong defense line of “heart”, “will” and “intelligence” to prevent the loss of fighting spirit under the stimulation of drastic changes in the situation or environment. Education and publicity are the basic ways of cognitive defense in wartime. For the participating forces, stimulate enthusiasm for participation through mobilization and incentives, clarify the truth by refuting rumors, establish the belief in victory by publicizing the results of the war, mobilize morale by setting up models, etc.; for the supporting forces, establish a sense of mission, responsibility and obligation for the whole people through education and publicity on the justice, rationality and legality of the war, stimulate the psychology of common hatred of the enemy by exposing the enemy’s brutal behavior, and stimulate enthusiasm for supporting operations by publicizing the deeds of local participation in the war and supporting the front, etc.

Expand the camp and eliminate hidden dangers. Creating a favorable cognitive atmosphere and providing support for the expansion of one’s own camp is an important aspect of cognitive domain operations during wartime that must be done. In particular, although the pursuit of international support forces is mainly based on political and diplomatic activities, the widespread spread of one’s own positions, ideas, attitudes, etc. often leads to changes in international civil attitudes, which in turn affects decision-making at the political level and provides support for the expansion of one’s own camp. In addition, cognitive domain operations during wartime have an important task that runs through the entire war, that is, to eliminate the adverse hidden dangers caused by various accidents in the war. Especially in the later stages of the war, as the destructive effects of the war appear and spread, people’s cognitive systems will inevitably be repeatedly impacted by different information. During this period, ideological guidance, social psychological shaping, and individual psychological counseling are needed to ensure the consolidation of the results of the war. In cognitive domain operations, as the sound of gunfire dissipates, the horn of a new round of cognitive domain operations may sound again, and there must be no slackness.

現代國語:

要點提示

●認知域作戰著重全維度攻擊,既包括「平時」的認知滲透,也包括「戰時」的認知迫誘。

●戰時認知域作戰圍繞著軍事目的的達成而展開,與軍事行動配合實施、相互支持。

●在認知域作戰中,隨著槍砲聲的消散,新一輪認知域作戰的號角可能再次吹響,不能有絲毫懈怠。

認知域作戰是在意識思維層面進行的對抗,透過選擇性加工和傳遞訊息,影響判斷、改變觀念、爭奪人心,進而引導現實態勢向有利於己的方向發展。從認知塑造來看,認知域作戰著重全維度攻擊,既包括「平時」的認知滲透,也包括「戰時」的認知迫誘。因而,認知域作戰沒有明晰的平、戰界線;同時,根據政治或軍事目的需要,其作用對象可以是個人、組織甚至國家。因此,認知域作戰應該樹立平戰一體、軍地一體、跨域融合、連動制勝的觀念,並依此整理基本任務。

聚焦意識形態的佈局任務

意識形態是「系統性、自覺地反映社會經濟形態和政治制度的思想體系」。意識形態決定了認知的理性根基,具有鮮明的陣營特徵。儘管意識形態涵蓋社會生活的各個層面,但在國家或政治團體之間的對抗中,圍繞著信念引導、態度爭取、觀念同化等方面的鬥爭尤為激烈,成為認知域作戰重點關注的任務。

塑造引導政治認知,奪取信念破立主控權。國家或政治集團之間的對抗不僅是舉國之力的對抗,也是舉國之志的對抗,政治信念的對抗首當其衝。塑造引導政治認知旨在凝聚或破壞政治共識、堅定或動搖政治信念、拓展或瓦解政治陣營。認知域作戰中,透過對執政黨的合法性、政治理念和製度的合理性、政治生態的健康性等各方面的認知引導,培植對政治立場、信念、實踐等的認同或否定、擁護或憎恨等感情,舖設有利於己、不利於敵的政治認知佈局。政治認知關係到國家或組織的生存根基,是認知域作戰的首要關注目標。

塑造引導戰爭認知,奪取戰爭態度領導權。國可無戰事但不能無戰識。戰爭認知是個人、組織、國家在戰爭週期中意志、觀念、心理、思考形成和發展的基礎。透過對戰爭的本質、性質、法理觀念等的認知引導,建構戰爭認知思維體系,引導戰爭合理性、正義性、合法性的評價走向,推動對可能發生戰爭支持或反對態度的形成,調控承擔戰爭義務意願的漲落,是戰爭認知引導的關鍵問題。戰爭認知影響戰爭態度,對其主控權的爭奪是認知域作戰必須重視的任務。

塑造引導價值認知,奪取情感意志控領權。價值觀影響人的美醜是非評判和社會行為取向,在認定事物、判定是非方面,人的情感總是傾向於支持價值觀相近的主張。價值認知滲透於生活的各個角落,透過倫理道德觀念、美醜善惡標準、文學藝術觀點等的傳播,圍繞價值觀念導引權、生活模式導向權、傳統傳承評判權等的爭奪頻繁且激烈。現實生活中,不同的價值觀念往往會互相滲透糾纏。塑造引導價值認知的實質是爭取社會情感的認同,是認知領域作戰的經常性任務。

緊盯社會心理的造勢任務

社會心理為認知提供了感性和經驗基礎,它在日常生活、社會活動、實踐感悟等經驗基礎上形成。社會心理引導常會推動現實情勢產生難測變化,是雙方對抗特別是非軍事衝突期的慣用模式之一,也是認知域作戰必須重視的任務。

導引民族心理,調控民族情緒。民族心理是最容易引發衝突對抗的社會心理之一。打擊民族自尊心可滋長民族自卑心理而易分裂澇散,提升民族自尊心可增強民族凝聚力,但民族自尊心的膨脹又易引發極端種族主義、民族沙文主義等的產生;國家內部不同民族間地位、利益、文化、風俗、生活等的差異性,為別有用心之人挑動民族對立情緒提供了可乘之機,而相同的生存空間、合作歷程等又奠定了民族間消除偏見甚至凝聚包容的基礎,結果取決於認知導引。民族心理導引敏感且容易失控,對社會穩定有直接影響,是認知域作戰需要重點關注的任務。

導引群類心理,漲消對立意識。群類泛指同類的人,如民族、地理、階級、職業團體甚至民間團體、非政府組織等等。如果說群類是以「趨同」為標準而主觀劃定的,那麼群類之間的「差異」就是客觀存在的。這種差異性可能是政治、經濟地位,也可能是文化思想、地域觀念抑或其他。導引差異認知推動黨派對立、地區對立、職業對立、貧富對立等不同群體對立心理,不但會對國家內部團結造成破壞,也會累積增加社會各界對政權當局的不滿情緒,為策動社會動盪分裂留下伏筆。認知域作戰中,需要對此類社會心理予以關注。

導引個體心理,影響社會情緒。認知域作戰中,個體心理導引區分為兩種情境。一種是重要人物心理導引,如敏感工作者、社會公知、學術菁英、商業成功人士等,對其政治立場、情感態度等的爭取,是對抗雙方需要重點關注的議題。一種是對易引發個體心理共鳴現象的利用。如公共危機、重大事故、自然災害甚至生活中的一些犯罪事件、突發情況等,有意導引某種情緒則可能因個體的從眾效應而產生群體極化現象,從而引發民意變化甚至社會動盪。這兩個面向都是認知域作戰需重視的內容。

瞄準戰時認知的關鍵性任務

認知域作戰先於軍事行動開展而後於軍事行動結束。戰時認知域作戰圍繞著軍事目的的達成而展開,與軍事行動配合實施、相互支撐,具有暴力脅迫特徵。此階段的認知域作戰,「攻」「防」行動同步開展,武器影響、宣傳影響綜合致效,「誘」「打」「騙」「控」等手段層出不窮,是認知域作戰的關鍵階段。

攻心奪志,迫誘認知。戰時認知攻擊主要圍繞在削弱敵抵抗意志、誘導敵錯誤決策。針對敵方決策層、一線指戰員等,透過靶向攻擊動搖抵抗意志,透過資訊欺騙幹擾誘導決策;針對以軍隊為主的武裝力量,以武力打擊震懾主導,綜合運用輿論戰等樣式行動以及新興技術手段,動搖其參戰信念、引發其恐慌情緒、瓦解其軍心士氣、支配其行動模式;針對社會面支撐力量,透過大型軍事演習、裝備試驗、宣傳武器殺傷效能等傳遞強硬訊息打擊信心,透過選擇性目標打擊、戰況傳播等誘發恐慌情緒,透過宣傳己方戰爭中的人道行為和國際相關評論爭取理解等。

築牢防線,凝心控局。戰時認知防守的重點是築牢「心」「志」「智」防線,防止在局勢或環境劇烈變化的刺激下喪失鬥志。教育和宣傳是戰時認知防禦的基本途徑。針對參戰力量,透過動員激勵激發參戰熱情,透過批駁謠言澄清事實真相,透過宣傳戰果確立必勝信念,透過樹立典型調動士氣等等;針對支撐力量,透過戰爭的正義性、合理性、合法性教育宣傳,建立全民使命感、責任感、義務感,透過揭露敵方的殘暴行為激發同仇敵愾心理,透過宣傳地方參戰支前事蹟激發支援作戰熱情等等。

拓展陣營,消除隱憂。營造有利的認知氛圍,為己方陣營拓展提供支撐,是戰時認知領域作戰必須有所作為的重要面向。特別是國際支持力量的爭取,雖然在途徑上主要以政治、外交等活動為主,但己方立場、理念、態度等的廣泛擴散,常會帶動國際民間態度的轉變,進而影響到政治層面的決策,為己方拓展陣營提供支撐。此外,戰時認知域作戰還有一項貫穿戰爭始終的重要任務,即消除戰爭中各種意外帶來的不利隱患。特別是戰爭後期,隨著戰爭破壞效應的顯現擴散,人的認知體係必將受到不同資訊的反覆衝擊。這段時期,需要意識形​​態引領、社會心理塑造、個體心理疏導等配合致效,方能確保戰果的鞏固。在認知域作戰中,隨著槍砲聲的消散,新一輪認知域作戰的號角可能再次吹響,不能有絲毫懈怠。

(編按:王子鋒、黃子娟)

中國原創軍事資源:https://military.people.com.cn/n1/2022/1005/c1011-32539888.html

Chinese Intelligent Warfare is Accelerating and Advancing

中國智能化戰爭正在加速推進

中國軍網 國防部網. 2022年3月17日 星期四

現代英語:

With the widespread application of artificial intelligence in the military field, intelligent warfare has gradually become a hot topic. History has repeatedly proved that the evolution of war forms will lead to profound changes in the winning mechanism. In today’s era when information warfare is developing in depth and intelligent warfare is beginning to emerge, the armies of major countries in the world have made great efforts to promote military intelligence, and many of these trends are worthy of attention.

Strengthen top-level design

Outlining a “roadmap” for intelligent warfare

Driven by a new round of scientific and technological revolution and industrial revolution, intelligent military transformation is developing in depth. The United States, Russia, Japan and other countries have regarded artificial intelligence as a disruptive technology that “changes the rules of the war game” and have made early arrangements, strengthened top-level design and planning guidance, and explored the direction of military application of artificial intelligence.

The U.S. military has detailed the current status and development plan of artificial intelligence in documents such as “Preparing for the Future of Artificial Intelligence”, “National Artificial Intelligence Research and Development Strategic Plan”, “Artificial Intelligence and National Security”, “Integrated Roadmap for Unmanned Systems, Fiscal Year 2017-2042”, and “American Artificial Intelligence Initiative: First Annual Report”, and has elevated the development of artificial intelligence to the national strategic level. In 2021, the U.S. military pointed out in its “U.S. Department of Defense Artificial Intelligence Posture: Assessment and Improvement Recommendations” that the U.S. military should consider three guiding questions in developing artificial intelligence: what is the current state of artificial intelligence related to the U.S. military; what is the current situation of the U.S. military in artificial intelligence; and what internal actions and potential legislative or regulatory actions may enhance the U.S. military’s artificial intelligence advantage.

Russia has invested a lot of resources to maintain a balance with the United States in the competition for the application of artificial intelligence in the military field. In 2021, Russian President Vladimir Putin stated at the first Defense Ministry meeting of the year that artificial intelligence will greatly promote changes in the military field, and the Russian Federation Armed Forces must accelerate the research and development of artificial intelligence application technologies such as robots, intelligent individual systems, and intelligent weapon modules, so as to form core technical capabilities and battlefield competitive advantages as soon as possible. Documents such as “Special Outline for the Research and Development of Future Military Robot Technology and Equipment before 2025”, “Future Russian Military Robot Application Concept”, and “The Development Status and Application Prospects of Artificial Intelligence in the Military Field” have established a series of mechanisms at the national level for the Russian military to promote the military application of artificial intelligence.

The Japanese government has also issued an “Artificial Intelligence Strategy” to lead the research and development of artificial intelligence technology and industrial development. In the “Robotics and Artificial Intelligence” strategic plan formulated by the United Kingdom, the application of artificial intelligence in battlefield construction is emphasized. In January 2021, the Australian Department of Defense released “Fighting the Artificial Intelligence War: Operational Concepts for Future Intelligent Warfare”, which explores how to apply artificial intelligence to land, sea and air combat.

Innovative combat concepts

Promoting the “Thinking First” Approach to Intelligent Warfare

The innovation of operational concepts has an ideological driving effect on the development of military science and technology and the evolution of war forms. In the past, people’s understanding and grasp of war mainly came from the summary of practical experience, and operational concepts were empirical concepts. In the future era of intelligent warfare, operational concepts are not only empirical concepts, but also the conception, design and foresight of operations.

The U.S. Army has proposed the concept of “multi-domain warfare”, which requires deep integration and close coordination of combat capabilities in various domains such as land, sea, air, space, electromagnetic, and network. To this end, the U.S. Army has successively issued white papers such as “Multi-Domain Warfare: The Development of Synthetic Arms in the 21st Century (2025-2040)”, “U.S. Army Multi-Domain Warfare (2028)”, and “Using Robotics and Autonomous Technologies to Support Multi-Domain Warfare”. In March 2021, the U.S. Department of the Army issued the document “Army Multi-Domain Transformation: Preparing to Win in Competition and Conflict”, indicating that “multi-domain warfare” has become a “flag” leading the transformation and development of the U.S. Army. The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency proposed the concept of “mosaic warfare”, which aims to create a highly decentralized and highly adaptable “kill net” composed of different combat functional units, based on advanced computer technology and network technology. The U.S. Department of Defense strongly supports the concept of “joint all-domain operations”. In March 2020, the U.S. Air Force took the lead in writing “joint all-domain operations” into the doctrine to explore how the Air Force can play a role in “joint all-domain operations”.

The Russian military proposed the concept of “charge disintegration”. “Disintegration” is one of the most important operational concepts in Russia at present. The Russian electronic warfare forces set the goal of making the enemy’s information, charge, electronic warfare and robot systems ineffective, and believe that this goal will “determine the fate of all military operations”. Disrupting the command and control of enemy forces and weapon systems and reducing the efficiency of enemy reconnaissance and use of weapons are the primary tasks of electronic warfare. At present, the Russian military is considering forming 12 types of electronic warfare forces. The Russian military also proposed the concept of “non-nuclear containment system”, the core of which is to use non-nuclear offensive strategic weapons to contain opponents. The non-nuclear offensive strategic weapons it defines include all ballistic missiles equipped with non-nuclear warheads, as well as strategic bombers and long-range air-based and sea-based cruise missiles. In addition, the Russian military also proposed the concept of “hybrid warfare”, hoping to use artificial intelligence systems to seek battlefield information advantages.

The British Ministry of Defense has proposed the concept of “multi-domain integration” and will develop a new command and control system with intelligent capabilities to achieve comprehensive, persistent, accurate and rapid battlefield perception and force coordination.

Focus on technology research and development

Shaping the Intelligent Warfare Operational Model

The key to the effectiveness of artificial intelligence is the combination with other technologies, which is also described as the “AI stack”. Various technologies interact to produce a combined effect, thereby enhancing the capabilities and effects of each technology. In the intelligent warfare supported by artificial intelligence technology, the collaborative combat mode of “man-machine integration, cloud brain control”, the cluster combat mode of “mixed formation, group intelligence”, and the cognitive combat mode of “intelligence-led, attacking with intelligence first” will constantly update people’s understanding of war.

Focus on the research and development of innovative projects. The US military is vigorously promoting the application of artificial intelligence chips in existing weapons and equipment systems, adding “intelligent brains” to weapons to enable them to have human-like thinking and autonomous interaction capabilities. In October 2021, the US Navy launched the “Beyond Plan”, which is regarded as the “current highest priority”. It aims to accelerate the delivery of artificial intelligence and machine learning tools by building a military Internet of Things for maritime operations, integrating manned and unmanned joint formations, supporting a new intelligent naval architecture, enhancing large-scale firepower killing, and realizing intelligent distributed operations of the navy. In addition, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency has also carried out cognitive electronic warfare projects such as “Adaptive Electronic Warfare Behavior Learning”, “Adaptive Radar Countermeasures”, and “Communications under Extreme Radio Frequency Spectrum Conditions”, and developed a prototype of a cognitive radar electronic warfare system. The Russian Ministry of Defense’s Intelligent Technology and Equipment Research and Experimental Center cooperated with the Institute of Control Problems of the Russian Academy of Sciences to develop and test autonomous intelligent algorithms including drone swarm command and control, and also jointly developed an object automatic recognition software system based on neural network principles with the National Aviation System Research Institute.

Establish innovative R&D institutions. The continuous emergence of new technologies is an inexhaustible driving force for the vigorous development of military intelligence. High-level military intelligence construction cannot be separated from the technical research and development of professional institutions. Some countries and militaries have established R&D centers, focusing on innovative development from a technical level. The U.S. Department of Defense has established a joint artificial intelligence center, which is planned to be built into a national key laboratory to lead the promotion of hundreds of artificial intelligence-related projects and ensure the efficient use of artificial intelligence-related data and information to maintain the United States’ technological advantage in this field. Russia has established an artificial intelligence and big data alliance, a national artificial intelligence center, and a robotics technology research and experimental center under the Ministry of Defense, mainly conducting theoretical and applied research in the fields of artificial intelligence and information technology. France has established an innovative defense laboratory, the United Kingdom has set up an artificial intelligence laboratory, and India has established an artificial intelligence task force to explore related technologies.

Strengthen equipment research and development and deployment. In recent years, many countries have attached great importance to the research and development of intelligent weapons and equipment, and unmanned aerial vehicles, unmanned combat vehicles, unmanned ships, unmanned submarines, etc. have continued to emerge. At present, the US Air Force has begun to practice the combat concept of “man-machine collaboration, man in the loop” on the F-35 fighter. The US XQ-58A “Valkyrie” stealth drone previously mainly carried out man-machine collaborative operations with F-35 and F-22 fighters. In April 2021, the stealth drone successfully launched the ALTIUS-600 small drone system, further enhancing its manned and unmanned collaborative combat capabilities. Russia is focusing on reconnaissance and surveillance, command and decision-making, firepower strikes, combat support and other fields, and is developing and deploying intelligent equipment. It plans to increase the proportion of unmanned combat systems in weapons and equipment to more than 30% by 2025. Russia’s ground unmanned combat weapons, represented by the “Uranus” series and “Platform-M” and “Argo” models, are developing rapidly. Among them, the Nerekhta unmanned combat vehicle can be equipped with remote-controlled machine guns and rocket launchers. In addition to the combat capabilities of ordinary armored vehicles, it also has transportation and reconnaissance functions. In addition, the Japanese Self-Defense Forces plan to officially deploy an unmanned aerial formation with strong combat capabilities in 2035.

(Author’s unit: National University of Defense Technology)

國語中文:

■賈珍珍 丁 寧 陳方舟

隨著人工智慧在軍事領域的廣泛應用,智慧化戰爭逐漸成為備受矚目的焦點話題。歷史多次證明,戰爭形態的演進將引發致勝機理的深刻改變。在資訊化戰爭向縱深發展、智慧化戰爭初露端倪的當今時代,世界主要國家軍隊紛紛下大力推動軍事智慧化,其中的諸多動向值得關注。

加強頂層設計

勾勒智能化戰爭“路線圖”

在新一輪科技革命與產業革命推動下,智慧化軍事變革正向縱深發展。美國、俄羅斯、日本等國紛紛把人工智慧視為「改變戰爭遊戲規則」的顛覆性技術,並事先佈局,加強頂層設計和規劃引領,探索人工智慧的軍事應用方向。

美軍在《為人工智慧的未來做好準備》《國家人工智慧研究與發展戰略計畫》《人工智慧與國家安全》《2017至2042財年無人係統綜合路線圖》《美國人工智慧計畫》:在首個年度報告》等文件中,詳述了人工智慧的發展現狀和發展規劃,並將人工智慧發展提升至國家戰略層面。 2021年,美軍在發布的《美國防部人工智慧態勢:評估與改進建議》中指出,美軍發展人工智慧應考慮三個指導性問題:與美軍相關的人工智慧現處於何種狀態;美軍目前在人工智慧方面的態勢如何;哪些內部行動以及潛在的立法或監管行動可能會增強美軍的人工智慧優勢。

俄羅斯投入大量資源,以維持與美國在人工智慧軍事領域應用競爭的平衡。 2021年,俄總統普丁在年度首場國防部會議上表示,人工智慧將大幅推動軍事領域變革,俄國聯邦武裝力量要加速機器人、智慧單兵系統和武器智慧化模組等人工智慧應用技術的研發工作,早日形成核心技術能力和戰場競爭優勢。 《2025年前未來軍用機器人技術裝備研發專題綱要》《未來俄軍用機器人應用構想》《人工智慧在軍事領域的發展現狀以及應用前景》等文件,從國家層面為俄軍推動人工智慧軍事應用確立了一系列機制。

日本政府也推出了《人工智慧戰略》,旨在引領人工智慧技術研發和產業發展。在英國制定的《機器人與人工智慧》戰略規劃中,強調了人工智慧在戰場建設中的應用。 2021年1月,澳洲國防部發布《打好人工智慧戰爭:未來智慧化戰爭之作戰構想》,這份文件探討如何將人工智慧應用到陸、海、空作戰領域。

創新作戰概念

推動智慧化戰爭“思想先行”

作戰概念創新對軍事科技發展、戰爭形態演變具有思想牽引作用。過去人們對戰爭的認識與掌握,主要源自於對實踐經驗的歸納總結,作戰概念即經驗概念。未來智慧化戰爭時代,作戰概念不僅是經驗概念,更是對作戰的構想、設計與前瞻。

美陸軍提出「多域戰」概念,要求陸、海、空、天、電磁、網路等各域作戰能力深度整合與密切協同。為此,美陸軍先後發布《多域戰:21世紀合成兵種的發展(2025至2040)》《美國陸軍多域戰(2028)》《運用機器人與自主技術支援多域戰》等白皮書。 2021年3月,美陸軍部發布文件《陸軍多域轉型:準備在競爭和衝突中取勝》,顯示「多域戰」已成為引領美陸軍轉型發展的一面「旗幟」。美國防高級研究計畫局提出「馬賽克戰」概念,旨在打造一種由不同作戰功能單元構成的、以先進電腦技術與網路技術為基礎的、高度分散、具有高度適應性的「殺傷網」。美國防部大力支持「聯合全域作戰」概念。 2020年3月,美空軍率先將「聯合全域作戰」寫入條令,探討空軍如何在「聯合全域作戰」中發揮作用。

俄軍提出「指控瓦解」概念。 「瓦解」是當前俄羅斯最重要的作戰概念之一,俄軍電子戰部隊把使敵人的訊息、指控、電子戰和機器人系統失效作為目標,認為這一目標將「決定所有軍事行動的命運」。擾亂敵方部隊和武器系統的指揮和控制,降低敵方偵察和使用武器的效率,是進行電子戰的首要任務。目前,俄軍正在考慮組建12種類型的電子戰部隊。俄軍也提出「非核武遏制體系」概念,核心是使用非核武進攻性戰略武器來遏制對手。其所定義的非核武攻擊性戰略武器既包括所有裝備非核彈頭的彈道飛彈,也包括戰略轟炸機和遠程空基、海基巡航飛彈。此外,俄軍也提出「混合戰爭」概念,希望利用人工智慧系統謀求戰場資訊優勢。

英國防部提出「多域融合」概念,將發展具備智慧化能力的新型指控系統,以實現全面、持久、準確、快速的戰場感知與力量協同。

注重技術研發

塑造智慧化戰爭作戰模式

人工智慧發揮效用的關鍵是與其他多種技術的組合,這種組合也被描述為「人工智慧堆疊」。各種技術透過互動的方式產生組合效應,進而提升每項技術所產生的能力與效果。在人工智慧技術支援的智慧化戰爭中,「人機一體、雲腦控制」的協同作戰模式,「混搭編組、群體智慧」的集群作戰模式,「智慧主導、攻智為上」的認知作戰模式等,將不斷更新人們對戰爭的認知。

聚焦創新專案研發。美軍正在大力推廣人工智慧晶片在現有武器裝備系統中的應用,為武器加上“智慧大腦”,使之具備類人思考和自主互動能力。 2021年10月,美海軍推出被視為“當前最高優先事項”的“超越計劃”,旨在通過構建海上作戰軍事物聯網,整合有人無人聯合編隊,加速交付人工智能和機器學習工具,支撐全新的智慧化海軍架構,提升大規模火力殺傷、實現海軍智慧化分散式作戰。此外,美國防高級研究計畫局也進行了「自適應電子戰行為學習」「自適應雷達對抗」「極端射頻頻譜條件下的通訊」等認知電子戰項目,研發出認知雷達電子戰系統原型機。俄國防部智慧技術裝備科研試驗中心與俄聯邦科學院控制問題研究所合作,開發測試了包括無人機群指揮控制在內的自主智慧演算法,也與國家航空系統科研所共同開發基於神經網路原理的物體自動辨識軟體系統。

組成創新研發機構。新技術的不斷湧現是軍事智慧化蓬勃發展的不竭動力,高水準的軍事智慧化建設離不開專職機構的技術研發。一些國家和軍隊組成研發中心,注重從技術層面創新發展。美國國防部建立了聯合人工智慧中心,計劃將該中心打造成國家級重點實驗室,用於領導數百個與人工智慧相關的項目,確保對人工智慧相關數據資訊的高效利用,以保持美國在該領域的技術優勢。俄羅斯組成了人工智慧和大數據聯盟、國家人工智慧中心和隸屬國防部的機器人技術科研試驗中心,主要進行人工智慧和資訊科技領域的理論和應用研究。法國成立了創新國防實驗室,英國設立了人工智慧實驗室,印度組成了人工智慧特別工作小組,進行相關技術探索。

加強裝備研發列裝。近年來,多國重視研發智慧武器裝備,無人飛行器、無人戰車、無人艦艇、無人潛航器等不斷湧現。目前,美空軍已開始在F-35戰機上實踐「人機協同,人在迴路」的作戰理念。美XQ-58A「女武神」隱身無人機先前主要與F-35和F-22戰機進行人機協同作戰,2021年4月該隱身無人機成功投放ALTIUS-600小型無人機系統,進一步提升了其有人無人協同作戰能力。俄羅斯正聚焦偵察監視、指揮決策、火力打擊、作戰支援等多個領域,展開智慧裝備研發和列裝工作,計畫到2025年將無人作戰系統在武器裝備中的比例提高到30%以上。以“天王星”系列和“平台-M”“阿爾戈”等型號為代表的俄地面無人作戰武器發展迅速。其中,Nerekhta無人戰車可搭載遙控機槍和火箭發射器,除擁有一般裝甲車的戰鬥力外,還兼具運輸和偵察功能。此外,日本自衛隊計劃在2035年正式部署具有較強作戰能力的無人空中編隊。

(作者單位:國防科技大學)

中國軍事資料來源:https://www.81.cn/jfjbmap/content/2022-03/17/content_311555.htm

How the Chinese Military Identify Key Targets for Cognitive Domain Operations

中國軍隊如何辨識認知域作戰的關鍵目標

現代英語:

Cognitive domain combat targets refer to the specific role of cognitive domain combat. In cognitive domain combat, compared with combat targets, combat targets solve the problem of precise aiming, that is, to let commanders understand and grasp the precise coordinates of what to hit, where to hit, and to what extent. Only by deeply understanding the connotation and characteristics of cognitive domain combat targets can we accurately find key targets through appearances and thus seize the initiative in future combat.

Cognitive focus that influences behavioral choices

The cognitive focus is the “convergence point” of the cognitive subject’s multi-dimensional thinking cognition in war activities. As a dynamic factor, it affects the cognitive process and behavioral results. Generally speaking, the cognitive factors that affect individual behavioral choices in war activities mainly include political attribute cognition, interest-related cognition, group belonging cognition, risk loss cognition, emotional orientation cognition, war morality cognition, etc. For war activities and groups or individuals who pay attention to war activities, the cognitive focus that affects their attitudes, tendencies and behaviors is not the same. Judging from the local wars and regional conflicts in the world in recent years, there are obvious differences in the cognitive focus of different groups or individuals. Politicians pay more attention to political attribute cognition and interest-related cognition, those who may intervene in the war pay more attention to risk loss cognition and interest-related cognition, ordinary people pay more attention to interest-related cognition and emotional orientation cognition, and people in other countries outside the region generally pay more attention to war morality cognition and group belonging cognition because their own interests will not be directly lost. In combat practice, foreign militaries are good at targeting the cognitive focus of different objects, accurately planning topics, and pushing related information to induce specific behavioral choices. For example, before the Gulf War, the Hill Norton public relations company fabricated the non-existent “incubator incident” by using Naira, the daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador to the United States, as a “witness” to show the “inhumanity” of the Iraqi army, induce the American people’s ethical and moral cognition, and then support the US government to send troops to participate in the Gulf War.

Style preferences that constrain command decisions

Cognitive style directly affects decision-making behavior preferences. Cognitive style refers to the typical way of individual cognition, memory, thinking, and problem solving. According to the preference of command decision-making style, commanders can be divided into calm cognitive style and impulsive cognitive style. Commanders with calm cognitive style pay attention to accuracy but not speed in the decision-making process. The quality of the decisions they make is high, but they are prone to fall into the comparison and analysis of various intelligence information sources and overemphasize the accuracy and objectivity of information analysis. Commanders with calm cognitive style are often easily disturbed by the diverse and diverse information stimulation in battlefield cognitive offensive and defensive operations, and their mental energy is easily disturbed and dissipated, which may lead to missed opportunities. Commanders with impulsive cognitive style pay attention to speed but not accuracy. The decision-making reaction speed is fast, but the quality is not high. They are easily emotional and prone to conflict with team members. Commanders with impulsive cognitive style are also prone to over-interpret the ambiguous external security environment, and constantly look for “evidence” to strengthen and verify individual erroneous thinking, narrowing individual attention and leading to command decision-making deviations. In combat practice, foreign armies pay more attention to analyzing the decision-making style of commanders of combat opponents, and then select specific information to influence them psychologically. For example, during the U.S. invasion of Panama, when besieging the hiding place of Panamanian President Noriega, the U.S. military repeatedly played rock and heavy metal music, and used language that stimulated and humiliated Noriega to carry out cognitive and psychological attacks on him, causing Noriega to gradually collapse physically and mentally.

Backdoor channel to control thinking and cognition

Once a computer is infected with a “Trojan” virus, it will send a connection request to the hacker control terminal at a specific time. Once the connection is successful, a backdoor channel will be formed, allowing the hacker to control the computer at will. Similarly, the human brain also has a cognitive “backdoor” and may be controlled by others. Cognitive psychologists have found that by sending information to the target object’s audio-visual perception channel, carefully pushing information content that the target object recognizes and accepts, catering to the target object’s existing experience memory, conforming to the target object’s thinking habits, and stimulating the target object’s emotional pain points, it is possible to control and interfere with the target object’s cognition and promote its instinctive emotional and behavioral reactions. With the support of cutting-edge cognitive science and technology, using the two modes of automatic start and control processing of brain information processing, the target object can easily fall into a “cognitive cocoon”. In cognitive domain operations, by immersing individuals in massive amounts of artificially constructed information, and continuously providing them with “evidence” to prove that their judgments and cognitions are “correct”. Over time, the individual’s cognitive vision becomes smaller and smaller, and the ability to perceive the external environment gradually decreases. Eventually, they will not be able to see the truth of the matter and will be immersed in the “cognitive cocoon” and unable to extricate themselves. When foreign militaries conduct operations in the cognitive domain, they often target their opponents’ cognitive biases on a certain issue and continuously push situational information and intelligence information through various channels to support their opponents’ so-called “correct cognition,” causing errors and deviations in their opponents’ command decisions.

Sensory stimuli that induce attention

Effective perceptual stimulation is the first prerequisite for attracting the attention of the target object. The human brain will perceive and react to stimuli within the perceptual range. Cognitive psychology experimental research has found that information such as dynamic, dangerous, relevant, survival safety, and contrast between before and after is more likely to attract the attention of the human brain. In the era of intelligence, the psychological cognitive process of the target object often follows the law of “attracting attention, cultivating interest, actively searching, strengthening memory, actively sharing, and influencing others”. In combat, foreign troops often use exclusive revelations, intelligence leaks, authoritative disclosures, on-site connections, and other methods, and cleverly use exaggeration, contrast, association, metaphor, suspense, and contrast to push information that subverts common sense, cognitive conflicts, and strong contrasts to attract the attention of the target object. For example, the “Lin Qi rescue incident” created by the US military in the Iraq War and the “Gaddafi Golden Toilet” in the Libyan War mostly choose stories familiar to the audience as the blueprint, hiding the purpose and embedding the viewpoint in the story plot, which attracted the attention of the general public. In addition, the human brain will also process stimuli outside the perceptual range. In recent years, the military of Western countries has attached great importance to the research of subthreshold information stimulation technology, and has developed subthreshold visual information implantation technology, subthreshold auditory information implantation technology, subthreshold information activation technology, subconscious sound manipulation technology of the nervous system, etc., continuously expanding the application scope of neurocognitive science and technology in the military field.

Meta-value concepts that give rise to cognitive resonance

In cognitive theory, cognitive resonance refers to information that can cross the cognitive gap between the two parties and trigger the ideological and psychological resonance and cognitive empathy of both parties, thereby achieving the deconstruction and reconstruction of the other party’s cognitive system. In cognitive domain warfare, this cognitive energy-gathering effect is not a simple concentration of power, but an internal accumulation of system synergy. Under the diffusion and dissemination of modern information media, this cognitive resonance effect can spread rapidly to all parts of the world in a short period of time, and produce secondary indirect psychological effects or more levels of derivative psychological effects, presenting a state of cumulative iteration. Once it exceeds the psychological critical point, it will present a state of psychological energy explosion, thereby changing the direction or outcome of the event. The targets that can induce this cognitive resonance are mainly value beliefs, moral ethics, common interests, etc. In war, if one party touches or violates human meta-values, common emotional orientation, etc., it is very easy to induce collective condemnation, bear the accusation of violating human morality, and fall into a moral trough. For example, a photo during the Vietnam War shows a group of Vietnamese children, especially a 9-year-old girl, running naked on the road because of burns after being attacked by US napalm bombs. In 1972, this photo caused a huge sensation after it was published, setting off an anti-war wave in the United States and even the world, and accelerating the end of the Vietnam War.

Cognitive gaps in a split cognitive system

In daily life, seemingly hard steel is very easy to break due to the brittleness of the material due to factors such as low temperature environment, material defects, and stress concentration. The same is true for the cognitive system. Cognitive gaps refer to the cracks, pain points, weaknesses, and sensitive points in the cognitive thinking of the target object, which are mainly manifested as the individual’s worry that he is unable to cope with or adapt to the environment, and under the influence of anxiety, cognitive vulnerability is formed. The experience of security threats, the looseness of group structure, the confusion of beliefs and ideals, and the loss of voice of authoritative media will all cause cognitive conflicts and tearing of the target object. In cognitive domain operations, sometimes seemingly powerful combat opponents hide a large number of thinking cracks and psychological weaknesses behind them. Often a news event can shake the cognitive framework of the combat opponent and puncture the cognitive bubble. In addition, this cognitive psychological conflict will also cause moral damage and psychological trauma to individuals. In recent years, the U.S. and Western countries’ troops carrying out overseas missions have faced “enemies disguised as civilians” that appear anytime and anywhere, and their uncertainty about the battlefield environment has continued to increase. They generally lack the perception of the significance of combat, and are filled with guilt and sin. A large number of soldiers developed post-traumatic stress disorder, the number of self-harm on the battlefield, post-war suicides and crimes increased sharply, and the number of suicides among veterans of the war even exceeded the number of deaths on the battlefield.

(Author’s unit: Political Science Academy of National Defense University)

國語中文:

引言

認知域作戰標靶是指認知域作戰的具體作用指向。在認知域作戰中,相較於作戰對象,作戰標靶解決的問題是精確瞄準,也就是讓指揮官了解掌握具體打什麼、往哪裡打、打到什麼程度的精準座標問題。只有深刻理解認知域作戰標靶的內涵特點,才能透過表象準確找到關鍵標靶,以便在未來作戰中掌握先機。

影響行為選擇的認知重心

認知重心是戰爭活動中認知主體多元思維認知的“匯聚點”,作為一種能動因素影響認知進程和行為結果。一般而言,影響戰爭活動中個人行為選擇的認知因素,主要包含政治屬性認知、利益關聯認知、群體歸屬認知、風險損失認知、情緒定向認知、戰爭道德認知等。對於戰爭活動以及關注戰爭活動的群體或個體而言,影響其態度、傾向和行為的認知重心並不相同。從近年來的世界局部戰爭和地區衝突來看,不同群體或個體關注的認知重心有著明顯差異,政治人物更加關注政治屬性認知和利益關聯認知,戰爭可能介入者更關注風險損耗認知和利益關聯認知,一般民眾更關注利益關聯認知和情感定向認知,而域外他國民眾由於自身利益不會受到直接損失,普遍更關注戰爭道德認知和群體歸屬認知。外軍在作戰實踐中,善於針對不同對象的認知重心,精準策劃主題,推送關聯訊息,誘發特定的行為選擇。如同在海灣戰爭前,希爾·諾頓公關公司炮製了根本不存在的“育嬰箱事件”,就是利用科威特駐美大使的女兒娜伊拉“做證”,展現伊拉克軍隊的“慘無人道”,誘發美國民眾的倫理道德認知,進而支持美國政府派兵參加海灣戰爭。

制約指揮決策的風格偏好

認知風格直接影響決策行為偏好。認知風格是指個體認知、記憶、思考、解決問題的典型方式。根據指揮決策風格偏好,指揮家可以分為冷靜型認知風格和衝動型認知風格。冷靜型認知風格的指揮者在決策過程中重視準確但不重視速度,作出的決策品質較高,但容易陷入對各類情報資訊來源的比對分析,過度強調資訊分析的準確客觀。冷靜型認知風格的指揮在戰場認知攻防行動中,常常容易受到紛繁多元的信息刺激幹擾,心智精力容易被擾亂和耗散,進而可能貽誤戰機。衝動型認知風格的指揮者重視速度但不重視準確度,作出的決策反應速度較快,但品質不高,且容易情緒激動,易與團隊成員發生衝突。衝動型認知風格的指揮者也容易將模稜兩可的外在安全環境進行過度曲解,並不斷尋找「證據」強化和驗證個體錯誤思維,使個體注意力變窄,導致出現指揮決策偏差。外軍在作戰實務中,比較著重分析作戰對手指揮官決策風格,進而選擇特定資訊對其進行心理影響。如美軍入侵巴拿馬戰爭中,在圍攻巴拿馬總統諾列加躲藏處時,美軍反複播放搖滾和重金屬音樂,運用刺激和羞辱諾列加的語言對其進行認知打擊和心理進攻,使諾列加身心逐漸崩潰。

控制思維認知的後門通道

電腦一旦中了「木馬」病毒,會在特定時間向駭客控制端發送連線請求,一旦連線成功就會形成後門通道,使得駭客可以隨心所欲地控制電腦。與之相似,人類大腦也存在認知“後門”,也可能被他人控制。認知心理學家研究發現,透過給目標對象視聽感知通道發送訊息,精心推送目標對象認可的、接受的信息內容,迎合目標對像已有的經驗記憶,順應目標對象思維習慣,刺激目標對象的情感痛點,就可以控制干擾目標物認知,促進其產生本能情緒行為反應。在尖端認知科學技術的支撐下,運用大腦資訊加工的自動啟動和控制加工兩種模式,目標物很容易陷入「認知繭房」之中。認知域作戰中,透過讓個體沉浸在人為構設的海量資訊之中,並源源不斷地為其提供「證據」用來佐證其判斷和認知是「正確」的。長此以往,個體的認知視野就變得越來越小,對外在環境的感知能力逐漸降低,最終會看不到事情的真相,沉湎於「認知繭房」中無法自拔。外軍在認知域作戰中,常常針對作戰對手對某一問題的認知偏差,持續透過多種管道推送佐證作戰對手自以為「正確認知」的態勢訊息和情報訊息,使作戰對手指揮決策出現失誤和偏差。

誘發關注的感知覺刺激

有效的知覺刺激是引發目標對象關注的首要前提。人類大腦對感知覺範圍內的刺激會有所察覺,並做出各種反應。認知心理學實驗研究發現,動態、危險、利害關係人、生存安全、前後反差等類別資訊更容易引起人類大腦的注意。在智慧化時代,目標對象的心理認知過程往往遵循「引起注意、培養興趣、主動搜尋、強化記憶、主動分享、影響他人」的規律。外軍在作戰中,常運用獨家爆料、情報外洩、權威揭露、現場連線等方式,巧用誇張、對比、聯想、比喻、懸念、襯託等手法,推播顛覆常識、認知衝突、對比強烈等訊息,來引發目標對象注意。例如伊拉克戰爭中美軍塑造的“營救女兵林奇事件”,利比亞戰爭中的“卡扎菲黃金馬桶”,大多選擇受眾對象熟知的故事為藍本,藏目的、寓觀點於故事情節,吸引了廣大民眾的注意力。此外,人類大腦也會對感知覺範圍外的刺激進行加工。近年來,西方國家軍隊非常重視知覺閾下資訊刺激技術的研究,開發發展了閾下視覺訊息植入技術、閾下聽覺訊息植入技術、閾下訊息啟動技術、神經系統潛意識聲音操控技術等,不斷擴大神經認知科學技術在軍事領域的應用範圍。

催生認知共振的後設價值概念

認知理論中,認知共振是指跨越雙方認知鴻溝,能夠引發雙方思想心理與認知共鳴共感的訊息,進而實現對對方認知體系的解構與重建。在認知域作戰中,這種認知聚能效應不是簡單意義上的力量集中,而是體系合力的內在累積。在現代資訊傳媒的擴散傳播作用下,這種認知共振效應能在短時間內迅速擴散到全球各地,並產生二次間接心理效應或更多層次的衍生心理效應,呈現出一種累積迭代的狀態,一旦超過心理臨界點,即呈現出心理能量爆發狀態,從而改變事件走向或結果。能夠誘發這種認知共振的靶標,主要有價值信念、道德倫理、共通利益等。戰爭中,若某一方觸及或違反人類元價值觀、共同情感指向等,則極易誘發集體聲討,承擔違背人類道德的指責,陷於道義低谷。如越戰期間的一張照片,畫面呈現的是遭遇美軍凝固汽油彈襲擊後,一群越南孩子特別是一名9歲女孩在公路上因為燒傷而裸體奔跑。 1972年,這張照片刊登後引發巨大轟動,掀起美國乃至全球的反戰浪潮,加速了越戰的結束。

分裂認知體系的認知縫隙

日常生活中,看似堅硬的鋼鐵,受低溫環境、材質缺陷、應力集中等因素影響,非常容易因材料脆性而斷裂,認知體係也是如此。認知縫隙是指目標對象認知思考中的裂縫、痛點、弱點與敏感點,主要表現為個體擔心自己沒有能力應對或無法適應環境的想法,並在焦慮情緒的作用下,構成認知脆弱性。安全威脅的經驗、團體結構的鬆散、信念理想的迷惘、權威媒介的失聲等,都會使得目標物出現認知上的衝突與撕裂。認知域作戰中,有時看似強大的作戰對手,背後卻潛藏著大量的思維裂隙與心理弱點,往往一個新聞事件就能動搖作戰對手的認知框架,刺破認知泡沫。此外,這種認知心理衝突也會使個體產生道德損傷和心理創傷。近年來,執行海外任務的美西方國家軍隊面對隨時隨地出現的“偽裝成平民的敵人”,對戰場環境的不確定感不斷提升,普遍缺乏作戰意義感知,進而內心充滿內疚與罪惡。大量士兵產生戰爭創傷後壓力障礙,戰場自殘自傷、戰後自殺與犯罪人數激增,參戰老兵自殺人數甚至超過戰場死亡人數。

(作者單位:國防大學政治學院)唐國東

中國軍網 國防部網 // 2023年3月23日 星期四

中國原創軍事資源:https://www.81.cn/jfjbmap/content/2023-03/23/content_336888.htm

Chinese Military Considers Metaverse the New Frontier for Future Cognitive Warfare

中國軍方認為元宇宙是未來認知戰的新領域

現代英語翻譯:

●The essence of the metaverse is a highly developed virtual world that exists in parallel with the real world but also reacts to the real world.

●Parallel with the real world, reaction to the real world, and integration of multiple high technologies are the three major characteristics of the future metaverse.

●The metaverse provides a new way of thinking to understand and discover the operating behaviors, states and laws of complex real systems, as well as a new means to explore objective laws and transform nature and society.

● Strengthening the follow-up research on the role of the metaverse in cognitive warfare and highlighting the exploration of the mechanism of the role of the metaverse in cognitive warfare will help enrich and promote the construction of cognitive warfare theory.

The essence of the metaverse is a highly developed virtual world that exists in parallel with the real world but reacts to the real world. When virtual technologies such as digital, Internet, augmented reality and modern communications, blockchain, artificial intelligence and other technologies develop to a certain stage, the metaverse will emerge. Being parallel to the real world, reacting to the real world, and integrating multiple high technologies are the three major characteristics of the future metaverse. The operation of the metaverse conforms to the natural law of human understanding and transformation of the world. It directly acts on human thinking and cognition but is not bound by the essential attributes of thinking and cognition, which determines that it carries the operating laws of the real world, provides a new way of thinking to understand and discover the operating behavior, state and laws of complex systems in reality, and a new means to explore objective laws and transform nature and society. At the same time, it is itself a complex cognitive body, so it has immeasurable cognitive warfare application value.

The basic mechanism of cognitive warfare in the metaverse

The difference between the metaverse and other technologies is that it builds a complete digital world. Its operation is not supported by a single or a few technologies, but by a complex high-tech complex. This complex is built by humans, is a product of cognition, and continues to develop and evolve with the development of human cognitive practice. Its cognitive application has a unique regular mechanism.

System enhancement mechanism. The digital world constructed by the metaverse is itself a highly developed cognitive world. In this special cognitive world, technology not only exists as an additional role such as support and guarantee, but also directly participates in the shaping of cognition itself as a basic element of cognition. In other words, the technology that constitutes the metaverse itself has a distinct cognitive background, which not only supports the operation of cognition but also realizes the self-construction, revolution and transcendence of cognition; it not only provides a series of necessary technical services, but also creates a holographic technical soil for human cognition to operate independently and fight independently. The effect of the metaverse on cognition is not one-dimensional, but full-dimensional; not single-line, but full-system; not independent, but immersive; not fragmentary, but continuous; not cyclical, but full-life process. How far the thinking cognition develops, how far the metaverse develops, and thus it can shape people’s thinking cognition more comprehensively, deeply and lastingly. Therefore, humans have used high technology to create “Avatar”, a complex system combining man and machine, and have also created a life form on “Pandora” that can think independently, recognize itself, and think and act on its own. This life form, which was created by humans and is independent of humans, has achieved self-improvement and development in the new universe.

The mechanism of mutual construction of technology and knowledge. Unlike the one-way effect of individual technologies such as artificial intelligence and information networks on thinking and cognition, the metaverse provides a space for mutual construction of technology and cognition, and influence and counter-influence. In this space, we can simulate, demonstrate, simulate, and verify the process and results of this two-way mutual construction and promotion, so as to understand cognition more accurately and efficiently, improve cognitive warfare methods, and directly engage in real cognitive confrontation. The metaverse provides a parallel cognitive space that digitally twins real combat scenes, where cognitive warfare can be promoted efficiently, enhanced at a fast pace, and presented in a panoramic manner. It is reported that the US military uses virtual technology to verify the performance of new weapons and equipment, test the effectiveness of the use of new tactics, and conduct combat simulation training, relying on the deployment of forces, combat terrain, human characteristics, and other scenes similar to actual combat constructed in virtual spaces such as the metaverse. At the same time, more and more countries and armies are conducting direct cognitive attacks and defenses with their opponents through virtual spaces, confusing their minds, misleading their directions, and eroding their will.

Active reflection mechanism. As a virtual existence parallel to the real world, the metaverse is not a simple digital copy of the three-dimensional space, but has its own operating rules and can actively act on the real world. This active action is the focus of the cognitive application of the metaverse. The metaverse space game reflects the characteristics of cognitive warfare. The war results deduced in the metaverse through virtual simulation may directly affect the real world, extending to the conscious cognitive competition game through sensory touch, thereby winning the dominant position in cognitive warfare. In the cognitive perspective, the metaverse is both a new cognitive space and the main battlefield of cognition, as well as an extended domain of cognition and a new cognitive component. At present, the military of many countries uses sandbox operations, war games and even computer simulations to formulate and test strategies and tactics, revise the application of tactics, improve training methods, and improve weapons and equipment. This is a typical example of the virtual world reacting to reality. With the continuous development and integration of the metaverse technology group, cognitive confrontation will inevitably shift more and faster from the real world to a hybrid world combining virtuality and reality.

The basic characteristics of cognitive warfare in the metaverse

Existence determines consciousness, and technology drives creation. The metaverse has many characteristics, such as parallelism with the real world, initiative in the real world, and comprehensiveness that integrates multiple technologies. These prominent characteristics determine the different characteristics and laws of its effects on thinking and cognition.

Cross-domain construction. The formation, development and evolution of cognition are rarely determined by a single factor, but are often the result of the combined effect of multiple factors. The metaverse originates from the real world and is presented in the virtual space. It has the characteristics of multi-domain interconnection that runs through the real and virtual worlds. As the saying goes, “a lot of gossip can melt gold, and accumulated criticism can destroy bones.” This cross-domain characteristic that spans different fields and opens up related spaces can best influence and shape people’s thinking and cognition from different angles. The most typical case is that game developers are increasingly focusing on using virtual stories based on historical facts and real feelings to attract and infect people. The United States has used this cross-domain shaped surreal “real” experience to spread values. At present, the most representative “metaverse” themed science fiction work is “Ready Player One” directed by Spielberg. The play focuses on depicting the era background of the birth of the “metaverse” and the huge contrast between the real status and virtual status of the protagonist. Through the plot and special effects shots, it delicately portrays the real sense of human participation, thereby spreading the American ideology, especially the values ​​of gaining wealth, status, love and friendship through “bloodless” struggle in the virtual world.

Integrated influence. The important fulcrums of cognitive warfare are strategy and technology. With the development of science and technology and the progress of society, the proportion of technology in cognitive warfare is increasing and its role is becoming more and more prominent. It can be said that cognitive warfare without scientific and technological support is cognitive warfare without power, and cognitive warfare with advanced technology is more likely to win. As a complex system integrating multiple cutting-edge technologies, the metaverse has a natural advantage in the use of cognitive warfare. Many people, including adults, are deeply trapped in the virtual world and indulge in online games. It is very important that the virtual space gives game operators a super-time and space experience and a sense of achievement. If martial arts novels are fairy tales for adults, then the metaverse, which can “do whatever you want”, creates a super fairy tale world, which has an immeasurable impact on people’s thinking, cognition, value pursuit, moral concepts, emotional will, and behavior patterns.

Compromising influence. A big difference between the metaverse and other technical means is that it constructs a virtual world that originates from the real world but reacts to the real world. In this complex domain space, people’s thinking and cognition go back and forth between the real world and the virtual space, verify each other, repeatedly confirm, and constantly correct, thereby generating new thinking and cognition, and exerting a dynamic influence on both worlds. This two-way interactive compromising influence, on the one hand, is conducive to the formation and development of correct thinking and cognition, making the cognition of the real world more imaginative with the wings of the virtual world’s thoughts, and at the same time, it also makes the cognition of the virtual space find the material support of the real world and become more scientific. On the other hand, if it is not operated properly, it is likely to cause great safety hazards and ethical problems. In recent years, the U.S. military has relied on artificial intelligence and virtual technology to remotely control drones to attack opponents, which is a typical example of the virtual world reacting to the real world. This attack is far away from the tragic scene of face-to-face fighting, which greatly dilutes the drone operator’s awe of life and lowers the threshold for remotely controlling the opponent. At the same time, due to the imperfect reconnaissance and identification technology, incidents of accidental shooting, injury, and killing of civilians, friendly forces, and even their own troops often occur.

The basic style of cognitive warfare in the metaverse

Metaverse cognitive warfare is based on reality and leads future development. It involves both the virtual and real worlds, penetrates multiple fields, covers multiple technologies, and has a variety of combat styles. There is great uncertainty, but it is not without rules. Comprehensive analysis shows that there are three basic styles.

Platform confrontation. In terms of its relationship with human thinking and cognition, the metaverse itself is a complex cognitive actor, a derivative of human thinking and cognition, and an important component and platform of cognitive warfare. When hostile countries and armies regard the metaverse as an important position for cognitive warfare, cognitive offensive and defensive operations between different camps within the metaverse exist in reality. On this platform, all technologies, resources and forces of the metaverse are integrated and operated with thinking and cognition as the center. Metaverse operations are prominently manifested as cognitive offensive and defensive operations aimed at disrupting, delaying, blocking, destroying and eliminating the existence and operation of the opponent’s metaverse. In this field, whoever has higher-end strategic planning, more flexible tactical application, more advanced technical force and more solid material support will be able to gain the initiative in metaverse cognitive warfare.

System attack. The metaverse is a cognitive system composed of a series of cutting-edge technologies, and systemicity is its inherent attribute and vitality guarantee. Advanced technologies such as digital foundation, efficient communication, blockchain identity authentication, holographic AR imaging, artificial intelligence, and high-performance Internet constitute a unified body with tight structure, functional coupling, and complete system. The components are indispensable for the formation and development of thinking cognition and offensive and defensive confrontation. It is difficult to imagine that the metaverse still has the possibility of existence without the support of advanced technology groups such as high-level digitization, high-quality communication, and high-speed computing. Using superior forces to force or use asymmetric tactics to attack and block the key nodes and technological operation chains of the opponent’s metaverse system, hinder its operation, suppress its functions, and destroy its existence is an important style and efficient path of metaverse cognitive warfare.

Divert the flow. An important value and significance of the existence and development of the metaverse lies in serving and supporting the related activities of the real world. Under normal circumstances, the metaverse can demonstrate, display, review and predict the related activities of the real world in a digital form. Once the communication between the virtual and real worlds is disturbed or the self-operation of the metaverse is disordered, it is easy to cause the situation reflected to be untrue, the information analyzed to be distorted, the conclusions derived to be invalid, and the suggestions provided to be wrong, causing the related activities of the real world to deviate. It is based on this that we can concentrate our efforts on inducing attacks on the internal operation of the opponent’s metaverse or the communication technology devices of the two worlds, and use extremely confusing and deceptive information and scenes to divert the flow, confuse their cognition, interfere with their judgment, and mislead their decision-making. Therefore, we should strengthen the tracking research on the cognitive warfare of the role of the metaverse, highlight the exploration of the cognitive warfare mechanism of the role of the metaverse, and strengthen and promote the construction of cognitive warfare theory.

(Author’s unit: Military Political Work Research Institute of the Academy of Military Sciences)

現代國語:

●元宇宙本質是與現實世界平行存在但又反作用於現實世界的高度發展的虛擬世界。

●與現實世界平行、反作用於現實世界、多種高技術綜合,是未來元宇宙的三大特徵。

●元宇宙提供了理解和發現現實複雜系統運作行為、狀態和規律的全新思維方式,以及探知客觀規律、改造自然和社會的新手段。

●加強元宇宙作用認知戰追蹤研究,突顯元宇宙作用認知戰機制探索,將有助於豐富促進認知戰理論建構。

元宇宙本質是與現實世界平行存在但又反作用於現實世界的高度發展的虛擬世界。當數位、網路、擴增實境等虛擬技術和現代通訊、區塊鏈、人工智慧等技術發展到一定階段,元宇宙就橫空出世。與現實世界平行、反作用於現實世界、多種高技術綜合,是未來元宇宙的三大特徵。元宇宙運作符合人類認識世界、改造世界的自然規律,其直接作用於人的思維認知但又不拘泥於思維認知的本質屬性,決定其本身承載了現實世界的運作規律,提供了理解和發現現實複雜系統運作行為、狀態和規律的全新思維方式和探知客觀規律、改造自然和社會的新手段,同時它本身就是一個複雜的認知體,因而具有不可估量的認知戰應用價值。

元宇宙作用認知戰的基本機制

元宇宙相對於其他技術的差異在於構築了一個完整的數位世界,支撐其運作的不是單一或幾個技術,而是一個複雜的高科技複合體。這個複合體是人構築的,是認知的產物並隨人類認知實踐的發展不斷發展演變,其認知運用具有獨特的規律機制。

體系增強機理。元宇宙構築的數位世界本身就是一個高度發展的認知世界,在這個特殊的認知世界裡,科技不僅以支撐和保障等附加角色存在,也直接作為認知的基本元素參與認知本身的塑造。也就是說構成元宇宙的技術本身俱有鮮明的認知底色,既支撐了認知的運作又實現了認知的自我建構、革命與超越;既提供了一系列必要的技術服務,又打造了一個人類認知自我運作、獨立作戰的全息技術土壤。元宇宙對認知的作用不是單向度的,而是全維度的;不是單線的,而是全系統的;不是獨立式的,而是沉浸型的;不是片段的,而是持續型的;不是周期階段型的,而是全壽命流程的。思維認知發展有多遠,元宇宙發展就有多遠,因而能夠更全面更深入、更持久地塑造人的思維認知。於是,人類既用高科技打造了「阿凡達」這個人機結合的複雜系統,同時也打造了一個在「潘朵拉星球」上能夠自主思維、自我認知、自行思想與行動的生命體,這個產生於人又獨立於人的生命體在新的宇宙空間中實現了自我完善與發展。

技知互構機理。與人工智慧、資訊網路等單一技術對思考認知的單向作用不同,元宇宙提供了一個技術與認知作用與反作用、影響與反影響的互構空間。在這個空間裡,我們能夠模擬、展示、模擬、驗證這種雙向互構共促的過程與結果,進而更加精準高效地認識認知、改進認知戰方式,同時也可以直接進行真刀真槍的認知對抗。元宇宙提供了一個將現實作戰場景數位孿生的平行認知空間,在這裡認知戰得以高效率推進、快節奏增強、全景式呈現。據悉,美軍將虛擬技術運用於新武器裝備性能驗證、新戰法運用效果檢驗及作戰模擬訓練等,依託的就是在元宇宙等虛擬空間中構建的兵力佈置、作戰地形、人文特徵等近似實戰的場景。同時,也有越來越多的國家和軍隊透過虛擬空間與對手進行直接的認知攻防,迷茫其心智,誤導其方向,銷蝕其意志。

能動反射機理。元宇宙作為與現實世界平行的虛擬存在,不是簡單地將三維空間數位化複製,而有著自身運行規則並能動作用於現實世界,這種能動作用即是元宇宙認知運用的著力點。元宇宙空間博弈體現認知戰特點,透過虛擬模擬在元宇宙中推演出的戰爭結果,可能直接作用於現實世界,透過感官觸覺延伸到意識認知的爭奪博弈,從而贏得認知戰主導權。在認知視域下,元宇宙既是認知的新空間也是認知的主戰場,既是認知的延伸域也是認知的新構件。目前,不少國家軍隊透過沙盤作業、兵棋推演甚至電腦模擬模擬來發展和檢驗戰略戰術、修訂戰法運用、完善訓練方法、改進武器裝備,就是虛擬世界反作用於現實的典型案例。隨著元宇宙技術群不斷發展融合,認知對抗必將更多、更快由現實世界向虛實結合的混合世界發展轉進。

元宇宙作用認知戰的基本特徵

存在決定意識,技術驅動創造。元宇宙具有與現實世界的平行性、對現實世界的能動性、融多種技術於一體的綜合性等諸多特徵。這些突出特徵,決定其作用於思考認知的不同特徵規律。

跨領域構塑。認知的形成發展演變很少由單一因素決定,往往是多種因素綜合作用的結果。元宇宙源自現實世界、呈現於虛擬空間,具有貫穿現實與虛擬的多域連結特徵。所謂“眾口鑠金,積毀銷骨”,這種跨越不同領域、打通關聯空間的跨域特質,最能從不同角度影響和塑造人的思維認知。最典型的案例就是遊戲開發商越來越注重用建立在歷史事實和現實感受基礎上的虛擬故事吸引人感染人。美國已將這種跨領域塑造的超現實「真實」體驗用於價值觀的傳播。目前最具代表性的「元宇宙」主題科幻作品是史匹柏導演的《頭號玩家》,該劇聚焦於描繪「元宇宙」誕生的時代背景及主角的現實地位與虛擬地位之間的巨大反差,透過故事情節和特效鏡頭細膩地刻畫人類的真實參與感,從而傳播在虛擬世界裡透過「不流血」的鬥爭也能獲得財富、地位、愛情和友誼的美式意識形態特別是價值觀。

融合式影響。認知戰運作依託的重要支點是謀略和技術,隨著科技的發展和社會的進步,技術之於認知戰構成所佔比重越來越大、作用越來越突出。可以說,缺乏科技支撐的認知戰是缺乏力量的認知戰,有先進科技加持的認知戰獲勝的可能性更大。元宇宙作為融多種前沿科技於一體的複雜系統,在認知戰運用上具有天然優勢。不少人包括成年人深陷虛擬世界、沉湎網路遊戲,很重要的是虛擬空間賦予遊戲操盤手的超時空體驗和成就快感。如果說武俠小說是成人的童話,那麼可以「隨心所欲」縱橫馳騁的元宇宙,則打造了一個超級童話世界,其對人的思維認知、價值追求、道德觀念、情感意志、行為模式等的影響不可限量。

折衝性浸染。元宇宙與其他技術手段的一個很大不同,在於其建構的是一個源自現實世界但又反作用於現實世界母體的虛擬世界。在這個複雜領域空間中,人的思維認知在現實世界與虛擬空間之間往來折衝、相互印證、反覆確認、不斷修正進而產生新的思考認知,並對兩個世界都產生施動性影響。這種雙向互動的折衝性浸染,一方面有利於正確思維認知的形成與發展,使現實世界的認知插上虛擬世界思想放飛的翅膀而更富想像力,同時也使虛擬空間的認知找到現實世界的物質支撐而更科學。另一方面如果操作不當,很可能產生極大的安全隱患和倫理問題。這些年美軍依賴人工智慧和虛擬技術遙控的無人機攻擊對手,就是虛擬世界反作用於現實世界的典型案例。這種攻擊因遠離面對面搏殺的慘烈現場,極大淡化了無人機操作員對生命的敬畏,降低了其遙控攻擊對手的門檻。同時,由於偵察辨識技術不完善,誤擊誤傷誤殺平民、友軍甚至自己軍隊的事時有發生。

元宇宙作用認知戰的基本樣式

元宇宙作用認知戰基於現實基礎、引領未來發展,涉及虛實兩界、貫通多個領域、涵蓋多種技術,作戰樣式多種多樣,有很大的不確定性,但並非無規律可循。綜合分析,基本樣式有以下三種。

平台對抗。元宇宙就其與人的思維認知的關係而言,本身就是一個複雜的認知行為體,是人類思維認知的衍生品,也是認知戰的重要構件和平台。當敵對國家和軍隊都將元宇宙視為認知戰的重要陣地時,元宇宙內部不同陣營間的認知攻防作戰就會現​​實存在。在這個平台上,元宇宙的一切技術、資源和力量都以思維認知為中心來整合運作。元宇宙作戰突顯為以擾亂、遲滯、阻擋、摧毀、消滅對手元宇宙存在和運作為目的的認知攻防作戰。在這個領域中,誰的戰略運籌更高端、戰術運用更靈活、技術力量更先進、物質支撐更堅實,誰就能取得元宇宙認知戰主動權。

體系破襲。元宇宙是由一系列前沿技術所構成的認知系統,而體系性則是其固有屬性和活力保證。數位基礎、高效通訊、區塊鏈身分認證、全像AR成像、人工智慧、高效能互聯網等先進科技,構成結構緊密、功能耦合、體系完整的統一體,其中構件對思維認知的形成發展與攻防對抗缺一不可。很難想像缺乏高階階數位化、高品質通聯、高速度計算等先進技術群的支撐,元宇宙還有存在的可能性。運用優勢力量高壓強製或以非對稱戰法攻擊和阻斷對手元宇宙體系的關鍵節點和科技運行鏈條,阻遏其運作、壓制其功能、摧毀其存在,是元宇宙認知戰的重要樣式和高效路徑。

曲嚮導流。元宇宙存在發展的一個重要價值和意義在於服務支持現實世界關聯活動。正常情況下,元宇宙能夠以數位形式全景展示、展示、複盤和預測現實世界的相關活動。一旦虛實兩個世界的通聯受擾受阻或元宇宙內部自運行失序,很容易導致其反映的情況失實、分析的信息失真、推導的結論失效、提供的建議失策,使現實世界的關聯活動跑偏走向。正是基於此,可集中力量對對手元宇宙內部運作或兩個世界的通聯技術裝置進行誘導攻擊,用極具迷惑性欺騙性的信息和場景曲嚮導流,迷茫其認知,幹擾其判斷,誤導其決策。因此,應加強元宇宙作用認知戰追蹤研究,突顯元宇宙作用認知戰機制探索,強化促進認知戰理論建構。

(作者單位:軍事科學院軍事政治工作研究院)

中國軍事資源:https://www.81.cn/jfjbmap/content/2022-03/03/content_310888.htm

Chinese Military Values Attack & Defense as the Important Focus of Combat in Cognitive Domain Operations

中國軍隊把攻防當作認知域作戰作戰的重要著力點

現代英語翻譯:

Value attack and defense is an important way to conduct cognitive domain operations from a strategic level. Usually, value attack and defense is achieved by intervening in people’s thinking, beliefs, values, etc., in order to achieve the purpose of disintegrating the enemy’s consensus, destroying the enemy’s will, and then gaining comprehensive control over the battlefield. Accurately grasping the characteristics, mechanisms, and means of value attack and defense is crucial to gaining future cognitive domain combat advantages.

Characteristics of the cognitive domain of value attack and defense

Value attack and defense refers to the intervention and influence on relatively stable cognitive results by inducing deep logical thinking and value judgment changes of individuals or groups, in order to reconstruct people’s cognitive abilities such as will, thinking, psychology, and emotions. Value attack and defense mainly has the following characteristics:

Soft confrontation. Traditional warfare mainly relies on violent means to weaken and disintegrate the enemy’s military capabilities, and usually has a high intensity of war. Cognitive domain warfare will no longer be limited to hard confrontations such as siege and conquest, but will focus more on infiltration and counter-infiltration, attack and counter-attack, control and counter-control around value positions. By competing for the dominance of cognitive domain confrontation, the combat effectiveness of the physical domain and information domain will be further stimulated, thereby seizing the initiative on the battlefield and even achieving the effect of defeating the enemy without fighting. In practice, value offense and defense often focus on the cultural traditions, values ​​and social psychology of a country or nation, and ultimately achieve the purpose of destroying the enemy’s will, cognitive manipulation, and mental control.

Full-dimensional release. Modern warfare is increasingly characterized by being holistic, multi-domain, and all-time. Cognitive domain warfare aims to influence battlefield effects by intervening in human consciousness, and the relative stability of consciousness determines that people’s worldviews, beliefs, and other values ​​are generally relatively stable. Therefore, value offense and defense need to be carried out in a long-term, uninterrupted, holographic, and full-dimensional manner. From a temporal perspective, value offense and defense blurs the boundaries between peace and war, and is always at war, constantly accumulating and gradually releasing combat effectiveness; from a spatial perspective, value offense and defense blurs the boundaries between the front and rear of combat, and is carried out in all directions in tangible and intangible spaces; from a field perspective, value offense and defense blurs the boundaries between military and non-military, and occurs not only in the military field, but also in the political, economic, diplomatic, and cultural fields, showing the characteristics of full-domain coverage.

Empowered by science and technology. Cognitive domain warfare is a technology-intensive and complex system engineering. The full-process penetration of emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence, brain science, and quantum computing is triggering iterative upgrades and profound changes in cognitive domain warfare. Intelligent tools fundamentally enhance the ability of cognitive domain combatants to manipulate and interfere with the opponent’s thinking. Human-machine hybrid as a new means and new style of combat power will change the main body of future wars. Autonomous confrontation and cloud brain victory may become the mainstream attack and defense mode. In recent years, NATO has launched cognitive electronic warfare equipment aimed at changing the opponent’s value cognition and behavior through information attack and defense. Technological development has also triggered a cognitive revolution. The rapid spread of information has further accelerated the differences in public value cognition. Cognitive islands have exacerbated the value gap between different subjects. The social structure changes brought about by intelligence are profoundly changing the political and cultural pattern. From this point of view, in future cognitive domain warfare, it is crucial to grasp the “bull’s nose” of scientific and technological innovation and master key core technologies to seize the initiative on the battlefield.

The mechanism of cognitive domain of value attack and defense

Value attack and defense is a high-level confrontation in cognitive domain operations, and the target of action is people’s deep cognition. Consciousness is the reflection of social existence in the brain. The regulation of social existence, the guidance of public consciousness and the change of human brain function can strengthen or reverse human consciousness. If you want to win the opponent in the attack and defense confrontation, you must follow the laws of thinking and cognition and grasp the winning mechanism of value attack and defense.

Impacting the value “protection zone”. Occupying the commanding heights of values ​​is the logical starting point for conducting value offense and defense. Social consciousness is often composed of relatively stable core values ​​and peripheral auxiliary theories. Various theories such as economy, politics, religion, and culture can be constructed and adapted to protect core values ​​from external shocks, and therefore also bear the impact and challenge of other values. In the eyes of foreign militaries, value offense and defense is to continuously impact the “protection zone” of the opponent’s ideology through cultural infiltration, religious conflict, strategic communication and other means, in conjunction with actions in the physical and information domains. This often requires seizing the values, political attitudes, religious beliefs, etc. that affect the opponent’s cognition, disrupting their social group psychology, inducing value confusion, shaking their will to fight, destroying cultural identity, and even changing and disintegrating their original cognitive system, so as to instill or implant new values ​​that are beneficial to themselves in order to achieve combat objectives.

Ignite the “trigger point” of conflict. Cognitive domain warfare involves multiple categories such as history and culture, political system, national sentiment, and religious beliefs. The main body of the war has also expanded from simple military personnel to ordinary people. It will become an important means of cognitive domain warfare to stimulate cognitive conflicts among ordinary people by hyping up topic disputes and public events. In recent local conflicts, it is not uncommon for the warring parties to ignite national sentiments through purposeful narratives, trigger political crises and thus affect the war situation. In future wars, some countries will use hot and sensitive events to detonate public opinion, rely on network technology to gather, absorb, mobilize, accurately manipulate and induce ordinary people, thereby promoting general conflicts to rise to disputes of beliefs, disputes of systems, and disputes of values. It will become the norm.

Control the cognitive “fracture surface”. Cognitive space, as an existence at the conceptual level, is composed of the superposition of the subjective cognitive spaces of all combat individuals. It is a collection of differentiated, differentiated, and even conflicting values. However, ideology has a “suturing” function. Through cognitive shaping and discourse construction, it can effectively “suturing” the broken cognition, condense the scattered values, and form a relatively stable cognitive system. After World War II, France had carried out effective cognitive “suturing” on the trauma of defeat. It used a whole set of independent narrative logic to explain how the war provided France with “new opportunities”, which greatly condensed the political identity of the French people with the government. In the battle for value positions in cognitive domain operations, we should focus on the cognitive fracture surface within the enemy, find the cognitive connection points between the enemy and us, and “suturing” the cognition, so as to unite the forces of all parties to the greatest extent and isolate and disintegrate the enemy.

The main means of cognitive domain in value attack and defense

Value attack and defense expands cognitive confrontation from public opinion, psychology and other levels to thinking space, and from the military field to the overall domain, thus achieving a blow to the enemy’s deep political identity. At present, the world’s military powers are strengthening strategic pre-positioning, aiming at the profound changes in target subjects and tactics, changing combat thinking, and actively controlling the initiative of cognitive domain operations.

Aiming at deep destruction. Cognitive domain warfare directly affects people’s brain cognition, and is easier to achieve deep strategic intentions than physical domain warfare. In particular, once the “high-level cognition” of people’s language level, thinking level, and cultural level is broken through, it will help to strategically reverse the battlefield situation and achieve the political purpose of the war. Based on this, cognitive domain warfare often begins before the war, by intervening in the opponent’s internal and foreign affairs, shaking its ideological and value foundations, etc.; during war, it focuses on influencing the enemy’s war decision-making, campaign command, and combat implementation. The value judgment, attack or weaken the decision-making ability and resistance will of combatants, etc. All hostile parties try to “maintain their own world while increasing the destructive pressure of the opponent” in order to achieve decision-making advantages by competing for cognitive advantages, and then achieve the goal of action advantages.

Centered on ordinary individuals. In the future, the subjects of cognitive domain operations will no longer be limited to military personnel. Broadly speaking, individuals who can communicate and disseminate information may become participating forces. Compared with elites in the social field, ordinary people are more likely to accept and disseminate diverse values, and their cognitive space is more likely to be manipulated. At present, online media is becoming the main channel for information exchange and dissemination in the social field, and the purpose of cognitive shaping can be achieved through targeted information guidance and information delivery. Foreign military practices have proved that with the help of cognitive shaping of ordinary individuals, progressive infiltration and cognitive interference can be caused from bottom to top, causing a deviation in the consciousness and ideas between ordinary people and social decision-makers, and failing to reach an effective consensus in key actions.

In the form of protracted warfare. Unlike the direct attack and destruction of “hard” targets in the physical domain military struggle, the potential target of cognitive domain warfare is human cognition. The value attack and defense is aimed at changing the concepts, beliefs, will, emotions, etc. of the combat targets, which often requires subtle influence and step-by-step operations. Effective cognitive offense is generally launched in the combat preparation stage and runs through the entire war. By collecting the opponent’s cognitive situation, decision-making habits, thinking patterns, etc., targeted actions such as creating a situation and changing the atmosphere are carried out. Therefore, cognitive domain warfare needs to strengthen the overall design, especially focusing on coordinating multiple forces, and strengthening pre-positioned preparations in multiple positions such as public opinion field creation and diplomacy, so as to form an overall combat force.

現代國語:

價值攻防是從戰略層面進行認知域作戰的重要方式,通常價值攻防是透過幹預人的思維、信念、價值觀等,以達成瓦解敵方共識,摧毀敵方意志,進而掌控戰場綜合控制權的目的。精確掌握價值攻防的特性、機制、手段,對奪取未來認知域作戰優勢至關重要。

價值攻防作用認知域的特點

價值攻防是指透過引發個體或群體的深層邏輯思辨、價值判斷改變,完成其對相對穩定的認知結果的干預和影響,以期重構人的意志、思維、心理、情感等認知能力。價值攻防主要有以下幾個特點:

軟性對抗。傳統戰爭主要依賴暴力手段來削弱瓦解敵方的軍事能力,通常具有較強的戰爭強度。認知域作戰將不再侷限於攻城略地等硬性對抗,而更著重於圍繞價值陣地展開滲透與逆滲透、攻擊與反攻擊、控制與反控制,透過爭奪認知域對抗的主導權,進一步激發物理域和資訊域的作戰效能,從而奪取戰場主動,甚至達到不戰而屈人之兵的效果。在實踐中,價值攻防往往著眼於一個國家、民族的文化傳統、價值觀念和社會心理展開,最終達到對敵方意志摧毀、認知操縱、精神控制的目的。

全維度釋放。現代戰爭日益呈現總體性、多域性、全時性特徵。認知域作戰旨在透過幹預人的意識進而影響戰場效果,而意識的相對穩定決定了人的世界觀、信仰等價值觀念一般情況下往往較為穩固,因此價值攻防需要長期的、不間斷的、全息全維度地進行。從時間上看,價值攻防模糊了平戰邊界,常態在戰、隨時在戰,持續積累、逐步釋放作戰效能;從空間上看,價值攻防模糊了作戰前後方界限,在有形空間與無形空間全方位展開;從領域上看,價值攻防模糊了軍事與非軍事的界限,不僅發生在軍事領域,也存在於政治、經濟、外交、文化等領域,呈現出全局覆蓋的特徵。

科技賦能。認知域作戰是一項技術密集的複雜系統工程。人工智慧、腦科學、量子運算等新興技術手段全流程滲透,正在引發認知域作戰的迭代升級與深刻變革。智慧化工具從根本上增強了認知域作戰人員操縱對手思想和乾預對手思維的能力,人機混合作為作戰力量新手段新樣式將改變未來戰爭主體,自主對抗、雲腦制勝或成為主流攻防模式。近年來,北約推出的認知電子戰設備,旨在透過資訊攻防來改變對手價值認知及行為。科技發展也引發了認知革命,資訊的快速傳播進一步加速了大眾價值認知差異,認知孤島加劇了不同主體之間的價值鴻溝,智能化帶來的社會結構變遷則深刻改變著政治文化格局。從這點出發,在未來認知域作戰中,牽住科技創新的“牛鼻子”,掌握關鍵核心技術,對於奪取戰場主動至關重要。

價值攻防作用認知域的機理

價值攻防是認知域作戰的高階對抗,作用對象指向的是人的深層認知。意識是社會存在在大腦中的反映,對社會存在的調節、對大眾意識的引導和人腦作用的改變,都能強化或扭轉人的意識。要在攻防對抗中製勝對手,就要遵循思考認知規律,掌握價值攻防制勝機理。

衝擊價值「保護帶」。佔領價值制高點是開展價值攻防的邏輯起點。社會意識往往由相對穩定的核心價值觀念和外圍的輔助性理論所構成,經濟、政治、宗教、文化等各種理論都能被建構調適以用來保護核心價值觀念免受外來衝擊,因此也承受著其他價值觀的衝擊挑戰。在外軍看來,價值攻防就是要透過文化滲透、宗教衝突、戰略傳播等手段,配合物理域和資訊域的行動,不斷衝擊對手意識形態的「保護帶」領域。這往往需要抓住影響對手認知的價值觀念、政治態度、宗教信仰等,透過擾亂其社會群體心理,誘發價值困惑,動搖作戰意志,摧毀文化認同,甚至改變瓦解其原有的認知體系,從而灌輸或植入新的、於己有利的價值觀念,以實現作戰目的。

點燃衝突“引爆點”。認知域作戰涉及歷史文化、政治制度、民族情感、宗教信仰等多個範疇,戰爭主體也從單純軍事人員拓展到一般民眾。透過炒作話題爭端、公共事件,激發一般民眾的認知衝突,將成為認知領域作戰的重要手段。在近幾場局部衝突中,交戰各方透過有目的性的敘事點燃國家民族情緒,引發政治危機進而影響戰局已屢見不鮮。未來戰爭,一些國家利用熱點敏感事件引爆輿論,依托網路技術對一般民眾進行聚攏吸附、煽動動員、精準操控和誘導塑造,從而推動一般性衝突上升為信仰之爭、制度之爭、價值之爭將成為常態。

控制認知「斷裂面」。認知空間作為觀念層面的存在,由全部作戰個體的主觀認知空間疊加而成,是分化的、差異性的乃至衝突性的價值集合體。然而,意識形態具有「縫合」功能,透過認知塑造、話語建構,可以把斷裂的認知有效地「縫合」起來,把分散的價值凝聚起來,形成相對穩固的認知體系。二戰後法國對戰敗創傷曾進行過有效的認知“縫合”,其運用一整套獨立敘事邏輯,闡述戰爭如何為法國提供了“新的機會”,極大地凝聚了法國人民對政府的政治認同。在認知域作戰中開展價值陣地爭奪,應注重敵方內部的認知斷裂面,尋找敵我之間的認知連接點進行認知“縫合”,最大限度地團結各方力量,孤立瓦解敵人。

價值攻防作用認知域的主要手段

價值攻防使認知對抗從輿論、心理等層面拓展到思維空間,從軍事領域拓展到整體全局,從而實現了對敵方深層的政治認同的打擊。當前世界軍事強國都在加強戰略預置,瞄準目標主體、戰法手段的深刻變化,變革作戰思維,積極掌控認知域作戰的主動權。

以深層摧毀為目標。認知域作戰直接作用於人的大腦認知,相較於物理域作戰,更容易實現深層的戰略意圖。特別是人的語言層級、思維層級和文化層級的「高階認知」一旦被突破,有助於從戰略上扭轉戰場態勢,實現戰爭的政治目的。基於此,認知域作戰往往始於未戰,透過幹預對手內政外交,動搖其意識形態和價值觀基礎等;戰時則注重影響敵方戰爭決策、戰役指揮、戰鬥實施的價值判斷,打擊或削弱作戰人員的決策能力和抵抗意誌等。敵對各方都試圖做到“維繫自己的世界,同時增加對手的破壞性壓力”,以通過爭奪認知優勢實現決策優勢,進而取得行動優勢的目標。

以普通個體為中心。未來認知域作戰的主體將不再局限於軍事人員,廣義上講,可以進行資訊交流傳播的個體都可能成為參戰力量。相較於社會領域的精英,一般民眾更容易接受和傳播多元價值,其認知空間被操縱的機率更大。目前,網路媒體正成為社會領域資訊交流傳播的主要管道,透過有針對性的訊息引導、訊息傳遞,進而達到認知塑造的目的。外軍實踐證明,借助對一般個體的認知塑造,可以造成從下到上的遞進滲透和認知幹擾,使一般民眾與社會決策層之間的意識觀念產生背離,在關鍵行動中無法達成有效共識。

以持久作戰為形式。與物理域軍事鬥爭直接打擊摧毀「硬」目標不同,認知域作戰的潛在目標為人的認知,價值攻防指向的是改變作戰對象的觀念、信念、意志、情感等,往往需要潛移默化、步步為營。有效的認知進攻一般在作戰準備階段就發起,並貫穿戰爭始末,透過收集對手的認知態勢、決策習慣、思考模式等情況,有針對性地進行營造態勢、改變氛圍等行動。因此,認知域作戰更需要加強整體設計,尤其要注重協調多方力量,在輿論場營造、外交等多個陣地多點強化預置準備,進而形成整體作戰合力。

中國軍事資源:https://www.163.com/dy/article/HDOT8JIM0511DV4H888.html

中國軍事認知域作戰:關注對手思想與情感衝突-認知域作戰的突出屬性

Chinese Military Cognitive Domain Operations: Focus on the Adversary Mind and Emotional Conflict – Prominent Attributes of Cognitive Domain Operations

要點提示

●實務證明,認知域作戰打破了傳統意義上的線上線下的資料壁壘,透過統合利用電信網路、網際網路、物聯網等管道,借助先進演算法,發起者可以有效切換各種空間,優選作戰樣式 ,甚至聚焦在私人空間、公共空間精準釋放乾擾訊息,以達到傳統作戰方式無法達到的效果。

●在未來的認知域作戰中,科學和邏輯等理性因素對個體認知的影響極有可能被削弱,認知對抗或將成為情感與情感的較量。

目前,智慧化科技的快速發展,正全方位變革訊息傳播的邏輯,使訊息對思維意識的影響更加深刻和全面,人的大腦認知真正上升為軍事對抗的重要場域。 智慧化時代,資訊傳播機制的不斷演進將從多面向體系化重塑認知對抗,進而推動認知域作戰發生根本性變革。

人工智慧成為認知域作戰的主要驅動力

智慧化時代,資訊傳播以數據為依托,人工智慧技術貫穿資訊收集、生產、回饋等全過程。 人工智慧這項顛覆性技術在軍事領域的廣泛深入應用,將是未來認知域作戰規劃和實施等整個過程的關鍵支撐。

人工智慧技術將貫穿未來認知域作戰多場景。 在認知域作戰行動部署、節奏把控等過程中,參戰各方依托先進算法作為行動的“調控者”“把關人”,來自各個作戰域的大量關於戰場行動的信息,為交戰各方 高效率決策和實施認知域作戰提供驅動力。 實踐證明,認知域作戰打破了傳統意義上的線上線下的資料壁壘,透過統合利用電信網路、互聯網、物聯網等管道,借助先進演算法,發起者可以有效切換各種空間,優選作戰樣式, 甚至聚焦在私密空間、公共空間精準釋放乾擾訊息,以達到傳統作戰方式無法達到的效果。

此外,人工智慧從賦能單環節朝向連結作戰各環節、全流程演變。 目前,人工智慧在資訊傳播中也局限於定位目標受眾,以提高資訊和信宿的匹配率。 未來認知域作戰,人工智慧將在認知域作戰規劃和實施各環節「一站式」發揮作用,並不斷強化各環節之間的耦合。 外軍認為,未來認知域作戰中,可利用數據差異化投送,啟動機器人瞬時製造輿論潮流,影響認知效果。 戰略戰役層面,可基於長期追蹤數據和不斷調整優化的演算法策略,計算不同地域、群體認知態勢,輔助決策者規劃核心敘事、主要議題等,從而調控行動實施和協同動作。

自主對抗成為認知域作戰的顯著特徵

隨著智慧程式從協同傳播、參與傳播到自主傳播,以及智慧終端的連結生態的不斷擴大,未來戰場上,官兵將越來越多地可以接收到智慧程式、智慧終端發送的各類訊息。 而在虛擬空間,數位孿生體、虛擬人之間的互動溝通,將會傳導作用於現實世界人的認知。 從智慧化條件下的認知域作戰的發展趨勢來看,人的介入度將逐漸降低,資訊彈藥的採集、合成、發送將更加自主高效,話語策略、行動策略的製定執行更趨自主化, 整個流程節奏空前快速。 但就結果而言,人仍是認知域作戰的最終目標,由自主化武器賦能加速的流程會持續強化對人認知的控制。

借助智慧程式、智慧終端、數位孿生體、虛擬人等自主對抗工具,參戰各方將在認知域作戰態勢佈設、時空運用、資訊內容設計等方面擁有更多彈性,資訊真偽對抗將更加 突出。 未來的認知域作戰,自主化武器將有可能突破力量與時空的限制,行動樣式更趨複雜。 外軍實踐表明,運用網路進行面向大眾的「噴灌式」傳播、面向特定群體的「滴灌式」傳播,將成為認知域作戰的常見樣式。 智慧程式、智慧終端機由於具有大量複製部署、不間歇運轉等特點,能夠支援開發更多更複雜的行動樣式。 如可圍繞特定議題、瞄準特定攻擊對象,迅即調動海量社交機器人,輪番集中擴散信息,或利用圍繞特定個體的智能設備採集相關數據,運用對話機器人、虛擬人與個體長期伴生互動、持續誘導,以 達成作戰目的。

未來認知域作戰,自主化武器隱蔽操控認知域戰場將成為常態,社交機器人可以根據需要製造假輿情、假熱點,從而產生更多的個體感知迷霧;智能合成技術將降低虛假信息製作門檻, 從而增加鑑偽成本和難度;機器人帳號、虛擬人信源將更難以甄別,而「一對一」的認知詐欺日益普遍。

情感衝突成為認知域作戰的突出屬性

智能化時代,新科技將拓寬人類的認知範圍、加深人們的感知程度。 擴展現實、元宇宙等技術將更全像、透明地呈現戰場環境、事件現場等,且場景可觸可感可交互,受眾在認知事件真相時將會更加受制於感性邏輯的影響。

得益於行動互聯網的發展,資訊傳播的迅捷度快速提高,透過大批次的資訊短時間內集中釋放,可極大壓縮個體的反應時間,使個體難以進行深度思考。 在事件全貌完整展現之前,受眾往往已形成立場傾向甚至將注意力轉向新焦點,依據碎片化線索輸出結論的模式加劇了對訊息的非理性、情緒化反應。 在未來的認知域作戰中,科學和邏輯等理性因素對個體認知的影響極有可能被削弱,認知對抗或將成為情感與情感的較量。 在訴諸理性與訴諸感性的抉擇中,參戰各方越發注重以情動人,透過感性手段激盪、佔據甚至極化目標對象心智,主導認知域對抗態勢。

智能化時代,認知撬動愈加倚重感性爭取。 一方面,以情緒喚醒策略增強認知共鳴。 未來的認知域作戰,行動發起者透過把殘酷激烈的交戰畫面、戰後慘像或參戰士兵傷亡過程與現狀有所選擇地呈現於受眾眼前,以此強烈刺激受眾情緒,喚醒受眾內心深處 的情感認同。 人作為傳播網絡的節點,透過智慧演算法可蒐集各類體徵數據,使行動發起者得以較準確地研判訊息所產生的情緒效果,進而動態調整內容,強化情緒反應。 行動發起者透過數據計算選定具有相似理解語境、相同情感特質的群體,或選定易受影響、具有較大影響價值的特定個體,透過靶向傳播同質化的信息流,從而激發其 群體認知共鳴。

另一方面,以道德裹挾策略激發價值認同。 面對累積加重的片段化、非理性認知反應模式,作戰行動發起者可透過二元對立的話語體系佔據道德高點、匯聚利己價值認知洪流,進而實現裹挾效果。 智慧傳播環境下豐富的呈現形態、直抵民眾的社群管道,為行動發起者運用此策略提供了便捷手段。 近年來的局部戰爭中,科技演進對道德裹挾策略的促進已逐步體現,如社群媒體將以往的秘密外交暴露於民眾面前,交戰各方首腦政要運用這一手段,直播或全程公開與別處決策 層、菁英群等的溝通細節,話語策略也愈發突顯道德仲裁與批判,進而影響、刺激國際民眾支持己方價值立場。

萬物互聯擴展認知域作戰的戰場空間

隨著資訊傳播技術的發展,社群媒體逐漸成為塑造認知的主要戰場,交戰各方的機構、個人與民眾透過社群媒體可以直接接觸並產生相互關聯,從而使全天候的認知爭奪成為可能。

智慧傳播時代,萬物互聯成為新的社會連結模式,傳播主體、傳播行為無所不在。 在此影響下,認知域作戰空間將擴展至智慧物聯終端、場景,並延伸至實體空間和虛擬空間兩個世界。 萬物互聯導致認知域作戰空間的泛在,將進一步推動作戰主體的泛在,自然人、具備資訊收發能力的智慧終端,甚至網路世界中的虛擬角色都有可能成為作戰主體,認知域作戰參戰 力量的類型將會大大拓展,認知域作戰的組織方式將會向分散式協同方向轉變。

未來的認知域作戰,深處衝突腹地的人與機器都將成為作戰的重要力量,在智慧化技術的支撐下,將協同繪製戰場圖景、參與「書寫」戰爭全過程。 前線士兵透過社群網路源源不絕地將個人戰場經歷,經過個人化包裝後適時推送展現給世人,單兵裝備、作戰平台將擔負戰場影像擷取、傳輸任務,並根據預設程序觸發自動處理和發布機制 ,以多種方式配合實體空間作戰行動,爭奪制資訊權和製腦權。 隨著通訊技術的不斷發展,前線士兵、智慧裝備還可以根據上級指令,有針對性地對所掌握的資訊進行再加工、再處理,從而更加便捷地、全景全像地呈現己方所要表達的戰場景象 ,實現認知域作戰攻心奪志的最終目標。

外語英語翻譯:

Important tips

●Practice has proven that cognitive domain operations break the traditional online and offline data barriers. By integrating the use of telecommunications networks, the Internet, the Internet of Things and other channels, and with the help of advanced algorithms, the initiator can effectively switch between various spaces and optimize the combat style. , and even focus on private spaces and public spaces to accurately release interference information, thereby achieving effects that traditional combat methods cannot achieve.

●In future battles in the cognitive domain, the influence of rational factors such as science and logic on individual cognition is likely to be weakened, and cognitive confrontation may become a battle between emotion and emotion.

At present, the rapid development of intelligent technology is changing the logic of information dissemination in all aspects, making the impact of information on thinking and consciousness more profound and comprehensive, and human brain cognition has truly become an important field of military confrontation. In the era of intelligence, the continuous evolution of information dissemination mechanisms will systematically reshape cognitive confrontation from many aspects, thereby promoting fundamental changes in cognitive domain operations.

Artificial intelligence becomes the main driving force for cognitive domain operations

In the era of intelligence, information dissemination is based on data, and artificial intelligence technology runs through the entire process of information collection, production, and feedback. The extensive and in-depth application of artificial intelligence, a disruptive technology in the military field, will be a key support for the entire process of planning and implementation of future cognitive domain operations.

Artificial intelligence technology will run through multiple scenarios of future cognitive domain operations. In the process of deployment and rhythm control of combat operations in the cognitive domain, all parties involved in the war rely on advanced algorithms as the “regulators” and “gatekeepers” of the action. A large amount of information about battlefield operations from various combat domains provides the warring parties with Provide driving force for efficient decision-making and implementation of cognitive domain operations. Practice has proven that cognitive domain operations break the traditional online and offline data barriers. By integrating the use of telecommunications networks, the Internet, the Internet of Things and other channels, and with the help of advanced algorithms, the initiator can effectively switch between various spaces and optimize the combat style. It even focuses on private spaces and public spaces to accurately release interference information, thereby achieving effects that traditional combat methods cannot achieve.

In addition, artificial intelligence has evolved from empowering a single link to connecting all links and the entire process of combat. At present, artificial intelligence is still limited to locating target audiences in information dissemination to improve the matching rate between information and information sources. In future cognitive domain operations, artificial intelligence will play a “one-stop” role in the planning and implementation of cognitive domain operations, and will continue to strengthen the coupling between various links. Foreign militaries believe that in future operations in the cognitive domain, differentiated delivery of data can be used to activate robots to instantly create public opinion trends and influence cognitive effects. At the strategic and campaign level, based on long-term tracking data and continuously adjusted and optimized algorithm strategies, we can measure the cognitive status of different regions and groups, assist decision-makers in planning core narratives, major issues, etc., thereby regulating the implementation of actions and coordinated actions.

Autonomous confrontation has become a distinctive feature of cognitive domain operations

As intelligent programs move from collaborative and participatory dissemination to independent dissemination, and the connection ecology of intelligent terminals continues to expand, on the future battlefield, officers and soldiers will increasingly be able to receive various types of information sent by intelligent programs and intelligent terminals. In the virtual space, the interactive communication between digital twins and virtual people will affect people’s cognition in the real world. Judging from the development trend of cognitive domain operations under intelligent conditions, human intervention will gradually decrease, the collection, synthesis, and transmission of information ammunition will become more autonomous and efficient, and the formulation and execution of discourse strategies and action strategies will become more autonomous. The whole process is faster than ever. But in terms of results, people are still the ultimate target of cognitive domain operations, and the process accelerated by autonomous weapon empowerment will continue to strengthen the control of human cognition.

With the help of autonomous countermeasures tools such as intelligent programs, intelligent terminals, digital twins, and virtual humans, all parties involved in the war will have more flexibility in cognitive domain combat situation layout, time and space application, and information content design. Information authenticity confrontation will be more protrude. In future cognitive domain operations, autonomous weapons will likely break through the limitations of power and time and space, and their action patterns will become more complex. The practice of foreign military forces shows that using the Internet to carry out “sprinkler-type” communication for the general public and “drip-type” communication for specific groups will become a common pattern of cognitive domain operations. Smart programs and smart terminals can support the development of more and more complex behavior patterns due to their features such as batch copy deployment and non-intermittent operation. For example, you can focus on specific issues and target specific attack targets, quickly mobilize a large number of social robots, and take turns to spread information, or use smart devices around specific individuals to collect relevant data, and use conversational robots and virtual humans to interact with individuals for a long time and continue to induce them. achieve combat objectives.

In future cognitive domain operations, autonomous weapons covertly control the cognitive domain battlefield will become the norm. Social robots can create fake public opinions and fake hot spots as needed, thereby generating more individual perception fog; intelligent synthesis technology will lower the threshold for producing false information. This will increase the cost and difficulty of identifying counterfeiting; it will be more difficult to identify robot accounts and virtual human information sources, and “one-on-one” cognitive fraud will become increasingly common.

Emotional conflict becomes a prominent attribute of cognitive domain operations

In the era of intelligence, new technologies will broaden the scope of human cognition and deepen people’s perception. Technologies such as extended reality and the metaverse will present battlefield environments, event scenes, etc. more holographically and transparently, and the scenes will be touchable, perceptible, and interactive. The audience will be more subject to the influence of perceptual logic when recognizing the truth of events.

Thanks to the development of the mobile Internet, the speed of information dissemination has increased rapidly. The centralized release of large batches of information in a short period of time can greatly shorten the reaction time of individuals, making it difficult for individuals to think deeply. Before the full picture of the incident is fully revealed, the audience has often formed a stance or even turned their attention to a new focus. The mode of outputting conclusions based on fragmented clues intensifies irrational and emotional reactions to the information. In future battles in the cognitive domain, the influence of rational factors such as science and logic on individual cognition is likely to be weakened, and cognitive confrontation may become a battle between emotion and emotion. In the decision between appealing to reason and appealing to emotion, all parties involved in the war are paying more and more attention to moving people with emotion, using emotional means to stir up, occupy and even polarize the minds of the target objects, and dominate the confrontation situation in the cognitive domain.

In the era of intelligence, cognitive leveraging relies more and more on rational competition. On the one hand, emotional arousal strategies are used to enhance cognitive resonance. In future cognitive domain operations, action initiators will selectively present cruel and fierce battle scenes, post-war tragedies, or the casualties and current status of soldiers participating in the war to the audience, thereby strongly stimulating the audience’s emotions and awakening the audience’s innermost feelings. emotional identification. As a node in the communication network, people can collect various physical data through intelligent algorithms, allowing action initiators to more accurately judge the emotional effects of information, thereby dynamically adjusting content and strengthening emotional responses. Action initiators use data calculations to select groups with similar understanding contexts and the same emotional characteristics, or select specific individuals who are susceptible to influence and have greater influence value, and target and disseminate homogeneous information flows to stimulate them. Group cognitive resonance.

On the other hand, moral coercion strategies are used to stimulate value recognition. Faced with the accumulation of fragmented and irrational cognitive response patterns, combat action initiators can occupy the moral high ground through a binary oppositional discourse system, gather a torrent of self-interested value cognition, and then achieve a coercion effect. The rich presentation formats and social channels that directly reach the public in the intelligent communication environment provide convenient means for action initiators to use this strategy. In local wars in recent years, technological evolution has gradually promoted moral coercion strategies. For example, social media has exposed past secret diplomacy to the public. Leaders and politicians of warring parties have used this method to live broadcast or make the entire decision-making process public with other countries. The details of communication among political leaders, elite groups, etc., and the discourse strategies increasingly highlight moral arbitration and criticism, thereby influencing and stimulating the international public to support one’s own value position.

The Internet of Everything expands the battlefield space for cognitive domain operations

With the development of information communication technology, social media has gradually become the main battlefield for shaping cognition. Institutions, individuals and the public on all warring parties can directly contact and interact with each other through social media, making it possible to compete for cognition around the clock.

In the era of intelligent communication, the Internet of Everything has become a new social connection model, and communication subjects and communication behaviors are everywhere. Under this influence, the cognitive domain battle space will expand to smart IoT terminals and scenarios, and extend to both the physical space and the virtual space. The Internet of Everything has led to the ubiquity of the cognitive domain battle space, which will further promote the ubiquity of combat subjects. Natural people, intelligent terminals with information sending and receiving capabilities, and even virtual characters in the online world may become combat subjects, and cognitive domain operations will participate in the war. The types of forces will be greatly expanded, and the organization method of cognitive domain operations will shift towards distributed collaboration.

In future cognitive domain operations, humans and machines deep in the hinterland of conflicts will become important forces in combat. With the support of intelligent technology, they will collaborate to draw battlefield pictures and participate in “writing” the entire process of war. Frontline soldiers continuously share their personal battlefield experiences through social networks, then push them to the world in a timely manner after personalized packaging. Individual soldier equipment and combat platforms will be responsible for collecting and transmitting battlefield images, and trigger automatic processing and release mechanisms according to preset procedures. , cooperate with physical space combat operations in various ways to compete for information and brain control. With the continuous development of communication technology, frontline soldiers and intelligent equipment can also reprocess and reprocess the information they have in a targeted manner according to superior instructions, so as to more conveniently and panoramically present the battlefield scene that one wants to express. , to achieve the ultimate goal of cognitive domain operations to capture the mind and capture the will.

中國軍事原文來源:https://www.81.cn/yw_208727/10208858.html