Category Archives: Dissipative Warfare

China's Informatization - 中國信息化, Chinese Military Cognitive Domain Operations, Chinese military cognitive warfare, Chinese Military Future Wars, Chinese Military Informatization, Dissipative Warfare, 中國解放軍敘事戰爭, 以認知為中心的戰爭：應對複雜戰爭的作戰概念, 認知戰

Chinese Military Will Identify Key Targets for Cognitive Domain Operations

Leave a comment

中國軍方將確定認知域作戰的關鍵目標

外文原文音譯：

The target of cognitive domain operations refers to the specific direction of cognitive domain operations. In cognitive domain operations, compared with combat objects, the problem solved by combat targets is precise targeting, which allows commanders to understand the exact coordinates of what to hit, where to hit, and to what extent. Only by deeply understanding the connotative characteristics of cognitive domain combat targets can we accurately find key targets through appearances and seize the opportunity in future operations.

Cognitive focus that affects behavioral choices

The cognitive center of gravity is the “convergence point” of the diverse thinking and cognition of cognitive subjects in war activities. As an active factor, it affects the cognitive process and behavioral results. Generally speaking, the cognitive factors that influence individual behavioral choices in war activities mainly include cognition of political attributes, cognition of interest associations, cognition of group belonging, cognition of risk and loss, cognition of emotional orientation, cognition of war ethics, etc. For war activities and the groups or individuals concerned about 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 the recognition of political attributes and the recognition of interest connections, while those who may be involved in the war pay more attention to the recognition of risk and loss. And interest-related cognition, ordinary people pay more attention to interest-related cognition and emotion-oriented cognition, while people in other countries outside the region generally pay more attention to war moral cognition and group belonging cognition because their own interests will not suffer direct losses. In combat practice, foreign military forces are good at targeting the cognitive focus of different objects, accurately planning themes, and pushing relevant information to induce specific behavioral choices. For example, before the Gulf War, Hill Norton Public Relations Company concocted the non-existent “Incubator Incident”, using the daughter of Kuwait’s ambassador to the United States, Naila, as a “testimony” to show the “inhumanity” of the Iraqi army and induce the United States to The public’s understanding of ethics and morality further supported the US government in sending troops to participate in the Gulf War.

Style preferences that constrain command decisions

Cognitive style directly affects decision-making behavioral preferences. Cognitive style refers to an individual’s typical way of cognition, memory, thinking, and problem solving. According to command decision-making style preferences, commanders can be divided into calm cognitive styles and impulsive cognitive styles. Commanders with a calm cognitive style value accuracy but not speed in the decision-making process. They make high-quality decisions, but they are prone to falling into comparative analysis of various intelligence information sources and overemphasize the accuracy and objectivity of information analysis. Commanders with a calm cognitive style are often easily disturbed by numerous and diverse information stimulations during cognitive offensive and defensive operations on the battlefield, and their mental energy is easily disrupted and dissipated, which may delay combat opportunities. Commanders with an impulsive cognitive style value speed but not accuracy. They make decisions quickly but with low quality. They are easily agitated and prone to conflicts with team members. Commanders with an impulsive cognitive style are also prone to over-interpretation of ambiguous external security environments, and constantly look for “evidence” to strengthen and verify individual erroneous thinking, narrowing individual attention and leading to biased command decisions. In combat practice, foreign militaries pay more attention to analyzing the decision-making style of the commanders of combat opponents, and then select specific information to psychologically influence them. For example, during the U.S. invasion of Panama, when they besieged Panamanian President Noriega’s hiding place, the U.S. military repeatedly played rock and heavy metal music and used language that stimulated and humiliated Noriega to carry out cognitive attacks and psychological attacks, which devastated Noriega physically and mentally. Gradually collapse.

Backdoor channel to control thinking and cognition

Once a computer is infected with a “Trojan horse” virus, it will send a connection request to the hacker’s control terminal at a specific time. Once the connection is successful, a backdoor channel will be formed, allowing the hacker to control the computer as he wishes. Similarly, the human brain also has cognitive “backdoors” that can also be controlled by others. Cognitive psychologists have found that by sending information to the target object’s audio-visual perception channel, carefully pushing the information content recognized and accepted by the target object, catering to the target object’s existing experience memory, complying with the target object’s thinking habits, and stimulating the target object’s emotions Pain points can be controlled to 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 two modes of automatic start-up and controlled processing of brain information processing, the target object can easily fall into a “cognitive cocoon”. In cognitive domain operations, individuals are immersed in a massive amount of artificially constructed information and are continuously provided with “evidence” to prove that their judgment and cognition are “correct”. Over time, an individual’s cognitive vision becomes smaller and smaller, and his ability to perceive the external environment gradually decreases. Eventually, he will not be able to see the truth of things, and he will be addicted to the “cognitive cocoon” and cannot extricate himself. In operations in the cognitive domain, foreign military forces often respond to the opponent’s cognitive bias on a certain issue and continue to push situational information and intelligence information through multiple channels that support the opponent’s “correct perception”, allowing the opponent to make command decisions. Mistakes and deviations occur.

attention-inducing sensory stimulation

Effective sensory stimulation is the primary prerequisite to attract the attention of the target object. The human brain will detect stimuli within the range of perception and respond in various ways. Experimental research in cognitive psychology has found that dynamic, dangerous, interest-related, survival safety, contrast and other types of information are more likely to attract the attention of the human brain. In the era of intelligence, the target object’s psychological cognitive process often follows the rules 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, etc., and skillfully use exaggeration, contrast, association, metaphor, suspense, foil and other techniques to push information that subverts common sense, cognitive conflict, and strong contrast. information to attract the attention of the target audience. For example, the “Rescue of Female Soldier Lynch Incident” portrayed by the US military in the Iraq War and the “Gaddafi Golden Toilet” in the Libyan War were mostly based on stories familiar to the audience. The purpose and point of view were integrated into the storyline, which attracted a large number of audiences. people’s attention. In addition, the human brain also processes stimuli outside the range of sensory perception. In recent years, the military of Western countries has attached great importance to the research of subliminal information stimulation technology, and has developed subliminal visual information implantation technology, subliminal auditory information implantation technology, subliminal information activation technology, nervous system subconscious sound control technology, etc. , and continue to expand the application scope of neurocognitive science and technology in the military field.

A meta-value concept that generates cognitive resonance

In cognitive theory, cognitive resonance refers to information that crosses the cognitive gap between the two parties and can arouse the ideological, psychological and cognitive resonance of both parties, thereby achieving the deconstruction and reconstruction of the other party’s cognitive system. In cognitive domain operations, this cognitive energy concentration effect is not a concentration of power in a simple sense, but an internal accumulation of the combined force of the system. Under the diffusion of modern information media, this cognitive resonance effect can quickly spread 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, showing a cumulative and iterative effect. Once the state exceeds the psychological critical point, it will show a state of psychological energy explosion, thereby changing the direction or outcome of the event. The targets that can induce this kind of cognitive resonance include value beliefs, moral ethics, common interests, etc. In a war, if one party touches or violates human meta-values, common emotional orientation, etc., it can easily trigger collective denunciation, bear the accusation of violating human morality, and fall into a moral low. For example, a photo from the Vietnam War showed a group of Vietnamese children, especially a 9-year-old girl, running naked on the road after being attacked by napalm bombs from the US military. In 1972, this photo caused a huge sensation after being published, setting off an anti-war wave in the United States and even around the world, accelerating the end of the Vietnam War.

The cognitive gap that splits the cognitive system

In daily life, seemingly hard steel is easily broken due to the brittleness of the material due to factors such as low-temperature environments, material defects, stress concentration, and so is the cognitive system. Cognitive gaps refer to the cracks, pain points, weaknesses and sensitivity points in the cognitive thinking of the target object. It is mainly manifested in the individual’s worry that he or she is unable to cope with or adapt to the environment, and under the influence of anxiety, it constitutes cognitive vulnerability. . The experience of security threats, loose group structure, confusion of beliefs and ideals, and the loss of voice of authoritative media, etc., will all cause cognitive conflicts and tears among the target objects. In cognitive domain operations, sometimes a seemingly powerful opponent has a lot of mental gaps and psychological weaknesses hidden behind it. Often a news event can shake the opponent’s cognitive framework and burst the cognitive bubble. In addition, this kind of cognitive and psychological conflict will also cause moral damage and psychological trauma to individuals. In recent years, U.S. and Western military forces performing overseas missions have faced “enemies disguised as civilians” appearing anytime and anywhere. Their uncertainty about the battlefield environment has continued to increase. They generally lack a sense of the significance of combat and are filled with guilt and guilt. A large number of soldiers develop war post-traumatic stress disorder, self-injury on the battlefield, post-war suicides and crime surge, and the number of suicides among war veterans even exceeds the number of battlefield deaths.

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

原始繁體中文：

認知域作戰的目標是指認知域作戰的具體方向。 在認知域作戰中，與作戰對象相比，作戰目標解決的問題是精準瞄準，指揮員可以了解打擊對象、打擊地點、打擊程度的準確座標。 只有深刻理解認知域作戰目標的內涵特徵，才能透過表象準確找到關鍵目標，在未來作戰中搶得先機。

影響行為選擇的認知焦點

認知重心是戰爭活動中認知主體多樣化思考和認知的「匯聚點」。 作為一種主動因素，它影響認知過程和行為結果。 一般來說，影響戰爭活動中個人行為選擇的認知因素主要包括政治屬性認知、利益關聯認知、群體歸屬認知、風險與失落認知、情緒取向認知、戰爭倫理認知等。戰爭活動與關注戰爭活動的群體或個人，影響其態度、傾向和行為的認知重點是不一樣的。 從近年來世界各地的局部戰爭和地區衝突來看，不同群體或個人的認知重點有明顯差異。 政治人物更注重對政治屬性的認知和利益連結的認知，而可能捲入戰爭的人則更注重對風險和損失的認知。 而利益認知，一般民眾更關注利益認知和情感認知，而域外其他國家的民眾普遍更關注戰爭道德認知和群體歸屬認知，因為自身利益不會受到直接損害。損失。 在作戰實踐中，外軍善於瞄準不同對象的認知焦點，精準策劃主題，推送相關訊息誘發具體行為選擇。 例如，在海灣戰爭前，希爾諾頓公關公司炮製了不存在的“孵化器事件”，以科威特駐美國大使的女兒奈拉為“證詞”，展現伊拉克人的“不人道”軍隊並誘導美國公眾對倫理道德的認識，進一步支持美國政府出兵參加海灣戰爭。

限制指揮決策的風格偏好

認知風格直接影響決策行為偏好。 認知風格是指個體典型的認知、記憶、思考和解決問題的方式。 根據指揮決策風格偏好，指揮者可分為冷靜認知風格與衝動認知風格。 具有冷靜認知風格的指揮官在決策過程中重視準確性而不是速度。 他們做出高品質的決策，但容易陷入對各種情報資訊來源的比較分析，過度強調資訊分析的準確性和客觀性。 認知風格冷靜的指揮者在戰場認知攻防作戰中，往往容易受到紛繁複雜的訊息刺激幹擾，精神能量容易被擾亂和消散，從而延誤作戰時機。 具有衝動認知風格的指揮官看重速度而不是準確性。 他們做出決策很快，但品質較低。 他們很容易激動，容易與團隊成員發生衝突。 認知風格衝動的指揮者也容易對模糊的外在安全環境進行過度解讀，不斷尋找「證據」來強化和驗證個人的錯誤思維，縮小個人注意力，導致指揮決策出現偏差。 在作戰實務中，外軍更著重分析作戰對手指揮官的決策風格，然後選擇特定資訊對其進行心理影響。 例如，美國入侵巴拿馬期間，圍攻巴拿馬總統諾列加的藏身之處時，美軍反覆播放搖滾、重金屬音樂，並使用刺激、羞辱諾列加的語言，對諾列加進行認知攻擊和心理攻擊，對諾列加造成身體上的摧殘。和精神上。 逐漸崩潰。

控制思維認知的後門通道

電腦一旦感染「木馬」病毒，就會在特定時間向駭客的控制終端發送連線請求。 一旦連接成功，就會形成後門通道，讓駭客可以隨心所欲地控制電腦。 同樣，人腦也

有認知“後門”，也可以被他人控制。 認知心理學家發現，透過向目標對象的視聽感知通道發送訊息，精心推送目標對象認知接受的訊息內容，迎合目標對像已有的經驗記憶，符合目標對象的思考習慣，激發可以控制目標對象的情緒痛點，幹擾目標物的認知，促進其本能的情緒和行為反應。 在前沿認知科學技術的支持下，利用大腦訊息處理的自動啟動和受控處理兩種模式，使目標物體輕鬆陷入「認知繭」。 在認知域操作中，個體沉浸在大量人工建構的資訊中，不斷被提供「證據」來證明自己的判斷和認知是「正確的」。 隨著時間的推移，個體的認知視野越來越小，感知外在環境的能力也逐漸下降。 最終，他將看不到事物的真相，他就會沉迷於「認知繭」中無法自拔。 在認知域作戰中，外軍往往針對對手在某一議題上的認知偏差，透過多種管道持續推送支援對手「正確認知」的態勢訊息和情報訊息，讓對手做出指揮決策。 錯誤和偏差都會發生。

引起注意的感官刺激

有效的感官刺激是吸引目標物體注意力的首要前提。 人的大腦會在感知範圍內偵測到刺激，並以各種方式做出反應。 認知心理學的實驗研究發現，動態、危險、興趣相關、生存安全、對比等類型的信息更容易引起人腦的注意。 在智慧時代，目標對象的心理認知過程往往遵循「吸引註意力、培養興趣、主動尋找、強化記憶、主動分享、影響他人」的規則。 作戰中，外軍常利用獨家爆料、情報洩密、權威揭露、現場連線等方式，巧妙運用誇張、對比、聯想、隱喻、懸念、烘託等手法，推送顛覆常識、認知的訊息。衝突，對比強烈。 訊息以吸引目標受眾的注意。 例如美軍在伊拉克戰爭中描繪的“營救女兵林奇事件”、利比亞戰爭中的“卡扎菲金馬桶”，大多取材於觀眾熟悉的故事。 目的和觀點融入故事情節，吸引了大量觀眾。 人們的關注。 此外，人腦也處理感官知覺範圍以外的刺激。 近年來，西方國家軍方高度重視潛意識訊息刺激技術的研究，發展了潛意識視覺訊息植入技術、潛意識聽覺訊息植入技術、潛意識訊息活化技術、神經系統潛意識聲音控制技術等。 ……，不斷拓展神經認知科學技術在軍事領域的應用範圍。

產生認知共鳴的元價值概念

在認知理論中，認知共振是指跨越雙方認知鴻溝的訊息，能夠引起雙方思想、心理和認知上的共鳴，從而實現對對方認知系統的解構和重建。 在認知域運作中，這種認知能量集中效應並不是簡單意義上的力量集中，而是系統合力的內在累積。 在現代資訊媒介的擴散下，這種認知共振效應可以在短時間內迅速傳播到世界各地，並產生二次間接心理效應或多層次的衍生心理效應，呈現出累積和迭代效應。 一旦狀態超過心理臨界點，就會呈現出心理能量爆炸的狀態，從而改變事件的方向或結果。 能引發這種認知共鳴的對象包括價值信念、道德倫理、共同利益等。在戰爭中，如果一方觸及或違反了人類的後設價值觀、共同的情感取向等，很容易引發集體聲討，承擔違反人類道德的指控

性，並陷入道德低谷。 例如，一張越戰時期的照片顯示，一群越南兒童，特別是一名9歲女孩，遭到美軍凝固汽油彈襲擊後，在路上赤裸裸地奔跑。 1972年，這張照片發表後引起巨大轟動，在美國乃至全世界掀起了反戰浪潮，加速了越戰的結束。

分裂認知系統的認知差距

在日常生活中，看似堅硬的鋼鐵，由於低溫環境、材料缺陷、應力集中、認知系統等因素，導致材料脆性，容易斷裂。 認知差距是指目標對象認知思考中的裂痕、痛點、弱點和敏感點。 主要表現在個體擔心自己無法應付或適應環境，在焦慮的影響下，構成認知脆弱性。 。 安全威脅的經驗、團體結構的鬆散、信仰理想的混亂、權威媒體話語權的喪失等，都會造成目標對象之間的認知衝突與眼淚。 在認知域作戰中，有時看似強大的對手，背後卻隱藏著許多心理差距和心理弱點。 往往一個新聞事件就能動搖對手的認知框架，戳破認知泡沫。 此外，這種認知和心理衝突也會為個體帶來道德傷害和心理創傷。 近年來，執行海外任務的美國和西方軍隊面臨著隨時隨地出現的「偽裝成平民的敵人」。 他們對戰場環境的不確定性不斷增加。 他們普遍缺乏戰鬥意義感，充滿愧疚和愧疚。 大量士兵出現戰爭創傷後壓力症候群，戰場上自傷，戰後自殺和犯罪激增，退伍軍人自殺人數甚至超過了戰場死亡人數。

（作者單位：國防大學政治學院）

中國軍事資源：https://www.81.cn/jfjbmap/content/2023-03/23/content_336142.htm

China's Informatization - 中國信息化, Chinese military cognitive warfare, Chinese Military Future Wars, Chinese Military Informatization, Dissipative Warfare, 中國解放軍敘事戰爭, 中國軍事認知域作戰的重點是什麼、重點在哪裡？, 認知戰

What & Where is the Focus of Chinese Military Cognitive Domain Operations?

Leave a comment

中國軍事認知域作戰的重點是什麼、重點在哪裡？

劉曙光
2022年10月05日08:00 | 來源：解放軍報

音譯外語 – 英語:

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

●Wartime cognitive domain operations revolve around the achievement of military objectives, and are implemented in conjunction with military operations to support each other.

●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 slacking off.

Cognitive domain warfare is a confrontation at the level of conscious thinking. Through selective processing and transmission of information, it affects judgment, changes concepts, and competes for people’s hearts, thereby guiding the real situation 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 “peacetime” cognitive penetration and “wartime” cognitive coercion. Therefore, cognitive domain operations have no clear boundaries between peace and war; at the same time, according to the needs of political or military purposes, its targets can be individuals, organizations or even countries. Therefore, cognitive domain operations should establish the concepts of peacetime and wartime integration, military-civilian integration, cross-domain integration, and joint victory, and sort out basic tasks accordingly.

Focus on ideological layout tasks

Ideology is “an ideological system that systematically and consciously reflects the socio-economic formation and political system.” Ideology determines the rational foundation of cognition and has distinct camp characteristics. Although ideology covers all aspects of social life, in confrontations between countries or political groups, the struggle around belief guidance, attitude struggle, and concept assimilation is particularly fierce, and has become a focus of cognitive domain operations.

Shape and guide political cognition and seize control of belief and establishment. Confrontation between countries or political groups is not only a confrontation of national strength, but also a confrontation of national aspirations. The confrontation of political beliefs bears the brunt. Shaping and guiding political cognition aims to condense or destroy political consensus, strengthen or shake political beliefs, and expand or dissolve political camps. In cognitive domain operations, through cognitive guidance on the legitimacy of the ruling party, the rationality of political ideas and systems, and the health of the political ecology, we cultivate recognition, denial, and support of political positions, beliefs, practices, etc. Or hatred and other emotions, laying out 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 and seize the right to lead war attitudes. A country can be without war, but it cannot be without a sense of war. War cognition is the basis for the formation and development of the will, concepts, psychology, and thinking of individuals, organizations, and countries in the war cycle. Through cognitive guidance on the essence, nature, legal concepts, etc. of war, we build a war cognitive thinking system, guide the evaluation direction of the rationality, justice, and legality of war, promote the formation of support or opposition attitudes towards possible wars, and regulate The rise and fall of willingness to assume war obligations is a key issue in cognitive guidance of war. War cognition affects war attitudes, and the struggle for its control is a task that must be paid attention to in cognitive domain operations.

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

Pay close attention to social psychology and the task of building momentum

Social psychology provides a perceptual and experiential basis for cognition. It is formed on the basis of daily life, social activities, practical insights and other experiences. Social psychological guidance often promotes unpredictable changes in the actual situation. It is one of the usual modes of confrontation between the two sides, especially during non-military conflicts. It is also a task that must be paid attention to 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 conflicts and confrontations. Attacking national self-esteem can breed national inferiority complex and easily lead to disintegration. Improving national self-esteem can enhance national cohesion, but the expansion of national self-esteem can easily lead to the emergence of extreme racism, national chauvinism, etc.; the status, interests, and culture of different ethnic groups within the country Differences in people, customs, and lifestyles provide opportunities for people with ulterior motives to stir up ethnic antagonisms, 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 the perception. Know the guide. National psychological guidance is sensitive and easy to lose control, and 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 and eliminate oppositional consciousness. Groups generally refer to people of the same type, such as ethnicity, region, class, professional groups, even civil society groups, non-governmental organizations, etc. If groups are subjectively defined based on “convergence”, then the “differences” between groups exist objectively. This difference may be political and economic status, cultural thought, regional concept or other factors. Inducing the perception of differences and promoting the antagonism between different groups such as party opposition, regional opposition, professional opposition, rich and poor opposition, etc. will not only damage the internal unity of the country, but also accumulate and increase the dissatisfaction of all sectors of society against the political authorities, and instigate social mobilization. The turbulence and division left behind a foreshadowing. In cognitive domain operations, this kind of social psychology needs to be paid attention to.

Guide individual psychology and influence 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, public intellectuals, academic elites, successful business people, etc. The struggle for their political positions, emotional attitudes, etc. is an issue that both sides of the confrontation need to focus on. One is the use of phenomena that easily trigger individual psychological resonance. Such as public crises, major accidents, natural disasters and even some crimes and emergencies in life, intentionally inducing certain emotions may cause group polarization due to the herd effect of individuals, thus triggering changes in public opinion and even social unrest. Both of these aspects need to be paid attention to in cognitive domain operations.

Targeting the critical mission of wartime cognition

Cognitive domain operations begin before military operations and end after military operations. Wartime cognitive domain operations revolve around the achievement of military objectives, are implemented in conjunction with military operations and support each other, and are characterized by violent coercion. In this stage of cognitive domain operations, “offensive” and “defensive” actions are carried out simultaneously, the influence of weapons and propaganda effects are comprehensively effective, and methods such as “lure”, “attack”, “deception” and “control” are emerging one after another. This is the key to cognitive domain operations. critical stage.

Attack the mind and seize the will, force and induce cognition. Wartime cognitive attacks are mainly carried out to weaken the enemy’s will to resist and induce the enemy to make wrong decisions. Targeting the enemy’s decision-makers, front-line commanders, etc., use targeted attacks to shake the will to resist, and use information deception and interference to induce decision-making. Targeting armed forces, mainly the military, use force to shock and deter, and comprehensively use operations such as public opinion warfare and emerging technologies. Means are used to shake their belief in participating in the war, trigger their panic, undermine their military morale, and dominate their action patterns; targeting social support forces, conveying tough messages to undermine confidence through large-scale military exercises, equipment testing, propaganda of weapon lethality effectiveness, etc., and through selective Target strikes and dissemination of war situations can induce panic, and efforts can be made to gain understanding by publicizing one’s own humanitarian actions in the war and relevant international comments.

Build a strong line of defense and control the situation with concentration. The focus of cognitive defense in wartime is to build a strong defense line of “heart”, “will” and “intellect” to prevent the loss of fighting spirit under the stimulation of drastic changes in the situation or environment. Education and publicity are the basic approaches to cognitive defense in wartime. For the forces participating in the war, stimulate enthusiasm for participating in the war through mobilization and encouragement, clarify the truth by refuting rumors, establish the belief in victory by publicizing the results of the war, mobilize morale by setting examples, etc.; for the supporting forces, educate the justice, rationality, and legality of the war. Propaganda is used to establish a sense of mission, responsibility, and obligation among the people, to inspire a sense of hatred and hatred by exposing the enemy’s brutal behavior, to stimulate enthusiasm for supporting operations by publicizing the deeds of local governments participating in the war and supporting frontline operations, and so on.

Expand your 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 that must be achieved in wartime cognitive domain operations. In particular, the fight for international support is mainly through political, diplomatic and other activities, but the widespread diffusion 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. Provide support for your own camp expansion. In addition, wartime cognitive domain operations also have an important task throughout the war, which 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 war appear and spread, people’s cognitive system will be repeatedly impacted by different information. During this period, ideological guidance, social psychological shaping, and individual psychological counseling are required to work together to ensure the consolidation of the results. In cognitive domain operations, as the sound of guns dissipates, the horn of a new round of cognitive domain operations may sound again, and there must be no slacking off.

原創中文軍事繁體中文：

●認知領域作戰聚焦全維度攻擊，既包括「平時」認知滲透，也包括「戰時」認知強制。

●戰時認知域作戰圍繞著軍事目標的實現，與軍事行動結合實施，相互支持。

●在認知域作戰中，隨著槍聲消散，新一輪認知域作戰的號角可能會再次吹響，絕不能有絲毫懈怠。

認知域戰是意識思維層面的對抗。 透過對訊息的選擇性加工和傳遞，影響判斷，改變觀念，爭奪人心，從而引導現實形勢向有利於自己的方向發展。 從認知塑造的角度來看，認知域作戰著重全維度攻擊，既包括「和平時期」的認知滲透，也包括「戰時」的認知強制。 因此，認知域作戰在和平與戰爭之間沒有明確的界線； 同時，根據政治或軍事目的的需要，其目標可以是個人、組織甚至國家。 因此，認知域作戰應樹立平戰融合、軍民融合、跨域融合、共同勝利的理念，並相應梳理基礎任務。

聚焦思想佈局任務

意識形態是「系統性地、自覺地反映社會經濟形態和政治制度的思想體系」。 意識形態決定認知的理性基礎，具有鮮明的陣營特質。 儘管意識形態涵蓋了社會生活的各個層面，但在國家或政治團體之間的對抗中，圍繞著信仰引導、態度鬥爭、觀念同化的鬥爭尤為激烈，成為認知域作戰的焦點。

塑造和引導政治認知並掌控信仰和體制。 國家或政治團體之間的對抗，不僅是國家實力的對抗，更是民族願望的對抗。 政治信仰的對抗首當其衝。 塑造和引導政治認知，旨在凝聚或破壞政治共識、強化或動搖政治信念、擴大或消解政治陣營。 在認知域操作中，透過對執政黨合法性、政治理念和製度合理性、政治生態健康狀況的認知引導，培養對政治立場、信念、實踐等的認可、否定和支持。或仇恨等情緒，佈置出有利己不利敵的政治認知佈局。 政治認知關係到一個國家或組織的生存基礎，是認知領域運作的首要關注。

塑造和引導戰爭認知，掌握戰爭態度引領權。 一個國家可以沒有戰爭，但不能沒有戰爭意識。 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、法律概念等的認知引導，建構戰爭認知思維體系，引導對戰爭合理性、正義性、合法性的評價方向，促進對可能發生的戰爭形成支持或反對態度。承擔戰爭義務意願的盛衰是戰爭認知引導的關鍵問題。 戰爭認知影響戰爭態度，對其控制權的競爭是認知域作戰必須重視的任務。

塑造和引導價值認知，抓住情感和意志的控制。 價值觀影響著人們對美醜、是非的判斷以及社會行為取向。 在辨識事物和判斷是非方面，人類的情感總是傾向於支持具有相似價值觀的主張。 價值認知滲透到生活的各個角落。 透過倫理觀念、美醜善惡標準、文學藝術觀點等的傳播，對價值引導權、生活方式引導權、傳統傳承判斷權的爭奪頻繁而激烈。兇猛的。 。 現實生活中，不同的價值觀常常互相滲透、糾纏。 塑造和引導價值認知的本質是爭取社會和情感認可，這是認知領域中運作的常規任務。

密切關注社會心理和造勢任務

社會心理學為認知提供了感性和經驗基礎。 它是在日常生活、社會活動、實踐感悟和其他經驗的基礎上形成的。 社會的

心理疏導往往會促使實際情況發生不可預測的變化。 這是雙方通常的對抗模式之一，特別是在非軍事衝突期間。 這也是認知域操作中必須重視的任務。

引導民族心理，調節民族情緒。 民族心理是最容易引起衝突和對抗的社會心理之一。 攻擊民族自尊，會滋長民族自卑感，容易導致民族解體。 提高民族自尊可以增強民族凝聚力，但民族自尊的膨脹很容易導致極端種族主義、民族沙文主義等的出現； 國內不同民族的地位、利益、文化、民俗、生活方式的差異，為別有用心的人煽動民族對立提供了機會，而相同的生存空間和合作進程，則為消除偏見和發展奠定了基礎。甚至族群之間的凝聚力和包容性。 結果取決於感知。 了解指南。 國民心理疏導敏感、容易失控，直接影響社會穩定。 這是認知域操作中需要重點關注的任務。

引導群體心理，增加和消除對立意識。 群體一般指同一類型的人，如種族、地區、階級、職業群體，甚至民間團體、非政府組織等。如果群體是基於「趨同」來主觀定義的，那麼群體之間的「差異」群體是客觀存在的。 這種差異可能是政治經濟地位、文化思想、地域觀念或其他因素。 誘導差異認知，助長黨派反對派、地區反對派、職業反對派、貧富對立等不同群體之間的對立，不僅會損害國家內部的團結，還會積累和增加各方的不滿情緒。社會各界反對政治當局，並煽動社會動員。 動盪和分裂留下了伏筆。 在認知域操作中，需要關注這種社會心理。

引導個體心理，影響社會情緒。 在認知域操作中，個別心理引導分為兩種情況。 一是重要人物的心理疏導，如敏感專業人士、公共知識分子、學術精英、成功商界人士等，他們的政治立場、情感態度等鬥爭是對抗雙方都需要重點關注的問題。 一是利用容易引發個體心理共鳴的現象。 例如公共危機、重大事故、自然災害甚至生活中的一些犯罪和突發事件，刻意誘發某些情緒可能會因個體的羊群效應而造成群體極化，從而引發輿論變化甚至社會動盪。 認知域操作中需要注意這兩方面。

瞄準戰時認知的關鍵使命

認知域操作在軍事行動之前開始，在軍事行動之後結束。 戰時認知域作戰圍繞著實現軍事目標，與軍事行動結合實施、相互支持，具有暴力強制的特質。 此階段的認知域作戰，「進攻」和「防禦」行動同時進行，武器影響力和宣傳效果綜合有效，採用「誘」、「攻」、「欺騙」、「控制」等手段。 」紛紛湧現。 這是認知域操作的關鍵。 關鍵階段。

攻心奪意志，強行誘發認知。 戰時認知攻擊主要是為了削弱敵方抵抗意志、誘導敵方做出錯誤決策而進行的。 針對敵方決策者、第一線指揮等，利用定向攻擊動搖抵抗意志，利用資訊欺騙和乾擾誘導決策。 針對以軍隊為主的武裝力量，以武力震懾、威懾，綜合運用輿論戰、新興技術等作戰手段。 用手段動搖他們的參戰信念，引發他們的恐慌，削弱他們的軍心，主導他們的行動模式； 針對社會支持力量，透過大規模軍事演習、裝備測試、武器殺傷效能宣傳等方式傳遞強硬訊息，破壞信心，透過選擇性地進行目標打擊、傳播戰況，引發恐慌，努力

透過宣傳自己在戰爭中的人道主義行動和相關國際評論來獲得理解。

構築堅固防線，集中力量掌控事態。 戰時認知防禦的重點在於建構「心」、「意志」、「智」的堅固防線，防止在局勢或環境急劇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。 對參戰力量，透過動員激勵激發參戰熱情，透過闢謠澄清真相，透過宣傳戰爭成果樹立勝利信念，透過樹立榜樣調動士氣等； 對支援部隊進行戰爭正義、合理、合法性教育。 宣傳是為了在人民群眾中建立使命感、責任感、義務感，透過揭露敵人的殘暴行徑，激發仇恨感和仇恨感，透過宣傳地方政府參戰事蹟，激發支援作戰熱情以及支援前線行動等等。

擴大你的營地並消除隱患。 營造良好的認知氛圍，為己方陣營的擴張提供支持，是戰時認知領域作戰必須做到的重要面向。 特別是，爭取國際支持主要是透過政治、外交等活動，但自身立場、理念、態度等的廣泛傳播，往往會導致國際民間態度的變化，進而影響各國的決策。政治層面。 為您自己的營地擴展提供支援。 此外，戰時認知域作戰還有一項貫穿整場戰爭的重要任務，就是消除戰爭中各種意外事件造成的不良隱患。 尤其是在戰爭後期，隨著戰爭破壞性效應的顯現和蔓延，人們的認知系統會一再受到不同資訊的衝擊。 在此期間，需要思想引導、社會心理塑造、個人心理疏導等共同努力，確保成果的鞏固。 在認知域作戰中，隨著槍聲消散，新一輪認知域作戰的號角可能會再次吹響，絕不能有絲毫懈怠。

中國原創軍事資源：https://military.people.com.cn/BIG5/n1/2022/1005/c1011-32539888.html

China's Informatization - 中國信息化, Chinese Military Cognitive Domain Operations, Chinese military cognitive warfare, Chinese Military Future Wars, Chinese Military Informatization, Dissipative Warfare, 中國解放軍敘事戰爭, 中國軍事認知領域作戰, 認知域操作, 認知戰

Chinese People’s Liberation Army Exploring Ways to Win in Cognitive Domain Operations

Leave a comment

中國人民解放軍探索認知域作戰制勝之道

外語音譯:

Judging from the latest local war practice, cognitive domain operations have become an important variable that profoundly affects the direction of war. In cognitive domain operations, all parties compete fiercely for control of public opinion, information guidance, and cognitive shaping. There are not only physical confrontations, but also competitions in virtual space, demonstrating the distinctive characteristics of “technology +” in the digital era. Exploring the way to win in cognitive domain operations is of great practical significance for controlling the initiative in cognitive domain operations and winning future wars.

Seizing control of the brain has become the ultimate goal of cognitive domain operations

The brain is the material basis of all thinking activities and the command center that influences and controls human behavior changes. Feeling, perception and consciousness constitute the three aspects of the world that the brain reflects. How to win the right to control the brain has increasingly become the focus of research and attention by all warring parties in the field of cognitive domain operations.

Actively fight for sensory control. Feeling is the reaction caused by the characteristics of objective things in the human brain, and is the basis for various complex psychological processes. With the rapid development of brain science, molecular biology, neurochemistry and other disciplines, humans have gradually gained the ability to intervene and control the brain at the physiological level. According to foreign experimental results, inhaling oxytocin will make people more trusting of others and more empathetic, thereby affecting a person’s prosociality and moral performance. In future operations, the warring parties will use physical stimulation such as sound, light and electricity, or chemical drugs to act on the target’s hearing, vision, smell and other sensory systems. They may even directly act on the human brain to stimulate the target’s brain. Specific emotional reactions can achieve cognitive influence and control on the physiological level.

Effective competition for perceptual suppression. Perception is a psychological process formed on the basis of sensation and reflects the overall image and surface connection of objective things. Among them, the individual’s attitude, motivation, interest, as well as past experience and future expectations are the key variables that affect the individual’s perception of the perceptual target. During wartime, warring parties aim at the target’s psychological doubts, weaknesses, and needs, seize favorable opportunities, and use specific information to emotionally influence, mentally induce, or disrupt the target’s perception in order to increase the target’s perception of the target. The expectation of war risks weakens their will to resist and their determination to fight, thereby achieving the purpose of subduing the enemy with a small war, less fighting or even no fighting.

Comprehensive competition for the right to shape consciousness. Consciousness is realized through psychological processes such as feeling, perception, and thinking, and is manifested as the unity of knowledge, emotion, and intention. The fundamental purpose of war is to force the enemy to surrender. Judging from the war practice at home and abroad in ancient and modern times, in order to win the right to shape consciousness, the warring parties will do their best to mobilize all available military power and comprehensively use political, economic, cultural, diplomatic and other means to carry out political disintegration and diplomatic measures against the enemy. Isolation, guidance of public opinion, and declaration of legal principles can trigger rational thinking, ethical resonance, or value recognition of target individuals or groups, thereby changing their worldview, outlook on life, and values, forming a relatively stable and long-term cognitive influence or control, thereby achieving “complete victory.” “the goal of.

Controlling information becomes the key to cognitive domain operations

The weapon and ammunition of cognitive domain operations is information. Mastering the initiative in the generation, identification, acquisition, dissemination and feedback of information is the key to gaining battlefield advantage in the cognitive domain.

Actively implement strong psychological stimulation to promote information penetration. Modern warfare is fierce and complex, with various elements of confrontation unfolding in multi-dimensional and multi-domain contexts, and fighter jets fleeting. The forces and methods acting in the cognitive domain must keep up with the development and changes of the battlefield situation, and make extensive use of strong psychological stimulation methods such as subliminal information implantation, acousto-optical electromagnetic psychological nuisance damage, and non-contact emotional control to take the initiative to induce the target. The subject’s emotions, will, thoughts, beliefs, etc. appear chaotic, confused or radically changed, thereby achieving the purpose of controlling and influencing the cognitive system of the target subject.

Extensive use of intelligent algorithms to achieve accurate push. As the Internet penetrates into every aspect of human life, everyone will leave massive amounts of data and information online. During wartime, warring parties will use modern information technologies such as big data, cloud computing, the Internet of Things, and blockchain to analyze the target’s social data, trajectory data, financial data, online shopping records, search records, personal communication records and other network data. The information is deeply mined and associated to achieve a “cognitive portrait” of the target object, and the target object’s interest preferences, behavioral trends, interpersonal relationships and value orientations are systematically analyzed, thereby three-dimensionally grasping the characteristics of relevant individuals or specific groups. Then, with the help of intelligent algorithm technology, personalized and customized cognitive information is accurately pushed to the target object, thereby affecting the target object’s attitude, emotion and value judgment towards the war, thereby promoting the realization of one’s own combat objectives and political intentions.

Effectively aggregate social support systems to achieve overall linkage. The social support system is the material and spiritual help and support that a person can obtain from others in his or her social network. It is a key factor that affects and determines the emotional support and cognitive direction of an individual. It can be said that for the success of cognitive domain operations, it is crucial to obtain the support and assistance of the target’s social support system. With the help of modern information technology, we can effectively connect to the target’s relatives, friends, classmates, partners and other specific social relations. By exerting targeted influence on the above-mentioned relations, we can gain the understanding, support and trust of the other party, and mobilize the specific relations to When the target object exerts influence, it is easier to win the trust and acceptance of the target object, and it is easier for the target object to undergo cognitive changes, thereby achieving the purpose of cognitive influence and control on the target object.

Virtual space becomes the main battlefield for cognitive domain operations

With the continuous expansion of human virtual space, virtual space is becoming the main battlefield of modern warfare, especially cognitive domain warfare, which determines the outcome of future wars to a certain extent.

Emerging communication forms have become new means of warfare in the cognitive domain. With the continuous development of mobile Internet technology, emerging communication forms represented by social media have gradually become a new platform and mainstream position for cognitive confrontation. Judging from recent local wars, the status and role of social media has become more and more prominent. All warring parties use personal blogs, forums and other platforms to publish battlefield pictures, videos, and comments in real time, which has not only become a global mobile online media terminal. It has also become the main battleground for the value perception game among different countries and different factions around the world. Emerging communication forms such as social media, with their unique decentralization and interactivity characteristics, have broken the information monopoly and information control in traditional communication methods and spawned numerous product styles. While meeting people’s information needs, they are also Unknowingly changing people’s perceptions. It is foreseeable that social media will play an increasingly prominent role in cognitive domain operations in the future.

Cyberspace has become a new space for cognitive domain operations. Under the conditions of informatization and intelligence, the threshold of network technology has been greatly reduced, making it possible to watch the game in real time around the world. Modern warfare has developed from “living room warfare” in the television era to “handheld warfare” in today’s all-media era. Online live broadcast is more intuitive and richer than any form of battlefield reporting, and “global synchronicity” has become a prominent feature. Through live broadcasts on the Internet, videos and pictures of fierce battles between the two warring parties, as well as numerous burned tanks and armored vehicles, as well as homes destroyed by the war and refugees fleeing their homes, can be visually presented. People can see the micro-state of individual civilians and soldiers on both sides through the Internet. The “transparency” of the battlefield makes any attempt to conceal the truth and false statements more and more difficult. But on the other hand, the emergence of technologies such as intelligent voice cloning and video portrait simulation replacement means that what people see may not necessarily be “as seen” and what they hear may not be “as heard”. Cognition under online live broadcasts Domain operations add more room for possibility and imagination.

The intelligent network army has become a new force in cognitive domain warfare. The development of information networks has broken through the authenticity limitations of interpersonal communication, and it is difficult for us to determine whether the other end of the network is a real person. Based on the needs of large-scale interaction, intelligent, automated, and large-scale cyberspace robots are emerging. They are widely active in every corner of cyberspace. These intelligent network armies have the capabilities of intelligent recognition, intelligent response and even brain-like thinking. They are tireless and work around the clock. Intelligent network armies are becoming an important force in future cognitive domain operations. Judging from the current development trends of related technologies, major countries and even business organizations in the world are focusing on the potential prospects of network robots in group penetration, live broadcast follow-up, shaping public opinion, and managing network crises. In the flexible guidance of network intelligent robots, Increase research and development efforts on key technologies such as automatic acquisition of technology groups, automatic cultivation and group penetration, and provide intelligent and efficient technical support for public opinion guidance, cognitive shaping, and behavioral guidance and control by discovering and effectively utilizing the behavioral patterns of network users.

中國人民解放軍探索認知域作戰制勝之道

原始繁體中文：

從最新的局部戰爭實踐來看，認知域作戰已成為深刻影響戰爭走向的重要變因。 在認知域作戰中，各方對輿論控制、資訊引導、認知塑造等方面展開激烈競爭。 不僅有實體對抗，還有虛擬空間的較量，展現出數位時代「科技+」的鮮明特質。 探索認知域作戰的致勝之道，對於掌控認知域作戰主動權、贏得未來戰爭具有重要的現實意義。

奪取大腦控制權成為認知域作戰的終極目標

大腦是一切思考活動的物質基礎，是影響和控制人類行為改變的指揮中心。 感覺、知覺和意識構成了大腦反映的世界的三個面向。 如何贏得大腦的控制權，日益成為認知域作戰領域交戰各方研究與關注的焦點。

積極爭取感官控制。 感覺是人腦對客觀事物特徵所引起的反應，也是各種複雜心理過程的基礎。 隨著腦科學、分子生物學、神經化學等學科的快速發展，人類逐漸具備了在生理層面介入和控制大腦的能力。 根據國外實驗結果，吸入催產素會使人更信任他人，更有同理心，進而影響一個人的親社會性和道德表現。 在未來的行動中，交戰雙方將利用聲音、光、電等物理刺激或化學藥物作用於目標的聽覺、視覺、嗅覺等感覺系統。 它們甚至可能直接作用於人腦，刺激目標大腦。 特定的情緒反應可以在生理層面上實現認知影響和控制。

知覺抑制的有效競爭。 知覺是在感覺基礎上形成的心理過程，反映客觀事物的整體形象和表面連結。 其中，個體的態度、動機、興趣以及過去的經驗和未來的期望是影響個體對感性目標感知的關鍵變數。 戰時，交戰雙方針對目標的心理疑慮、弱點和需求，抓住有利時機，利用特定訊息對目標進行情緒影響、精神誘導或擾亂感知，以增加目標對目標的感知。 對戰爭風險的預期削弱了他們的抵抗意志和戰鬥決心，從而達到以小戰、少戰甚至不戰克敵的目的。

全面競爭塑造意識。 意識是透過感覺、知覺、思考等心理過程實現的，表現為知、情感、意圖的統一。 戰爭的根本目的是迫使敵人投降。 從古今中外的戰爭實踐來看，交戰雙方為了贏得意識塑造權，都會竭盡全力調動一切可以動用的軍事力量，綜合運用政治、經濟、文化、外交等多種手段。手段是對敵人實施政治瓦解和外交措施。 隔離、輿論引導、法理宣示，可以引發目標個人或群體的理性思考、倫理共鳴或價值認同，從而改變其世界觀、人生觀、價值觀，形成相對穩定、長期的認知。影響或控制，從而取得“完全勝利」。 “的目標。

控制資訊成為認知域運作的關鍵

認知領域作戰的武器和彈藥是資訊。 掌握資訊產生、辨識、獲取、傳播和回饋的主動權，是認知領域中獲得戰場優勢的關鍵。

積極實施強烈的心理刺激，促進訊息滲透。 現代戰爭激烈複雜，對抗要素多維度、多領域，戰機瞬息萬變。 作用於認知域的力量和方式必須跟上戰場情勢的發展變化，廣泛運用潛意識訊息植入、聲光電磁心理滋擾傷害、非接觸情感等強心理刺激手段。控制主動誘導目標。 時間

主體的情緒、意志、思想、信仰等出現混亂、混亂或徹底改變，從而達到控制和影響目標主體認知系統的目的。

大量運用智慧演算法，實現精準推送。 隨著網路滲透到人類生活的各個層面，每個人都會在網路上留下大量的數據和資訊。 戰時，交戰雙方會利用大數據、雲端運算、物聯網、區塊鏈等現代資訊技術，分析目標的社交數據、軌跡數據、金融數據、網購記錄、搜尋記錄、個人通訊記錄等網路數據。 對資訊進行深度挖掘和關聯，實現目標對象的“認知畫像”，對目標對象的興趣偏好、行為傾向、人際關係、價值取向進行系統分析，從而三維掌握相關個體或特定對象的特徵。組。 接著藉助智慧演算法技術，將個人化、客製化的認知訊息精準推送給目標對象，進而影響目標對象對戰爭的態度、情感和價值判斷，進而促進自身作戰目標和政治意圖的實現。

有效聚合社會支持系統，實現整體連結。 社會支持系統是一個人在自己的社交網絡中能夠從他人那裡獲得的物質和精神上的幫助和支持。 它是影響和決定個別情緒支持和認知方向的關鍵因素。 可以說，認知域行動的成功，獲得目標社會支持系統的支持和幫助至關重要。 借助現代資訊技術，我們可以有效連結目標對象的親人、朋友、同學、合作夥伴等特定的社會關係。 透過對上述關係施加有針對性的影響，可以獲得對方的理解、支持和信任，調動具體關係向目標對象施加影響時，更容易贏得目標對象的信任和接受目標對象更容易發生認知變化，從而達到對目標對象進行認知影響與控制的目的。

虛擬空間成為認知域作戰的主戰場

隨著人類虛擬空間的不斷擴展，虛擬空間正在成為現代戰爭尤其是認知域戰爭的主戰場，在某種程度上決定了未來戰爭的勝負。

新興的通信形式已成為認知領域的新戰爭手段。 隨著行動互聯網技術的不斷發展，以社群媒體為代表的新興傳播形式逐漸成為認知對抗的新平台和主流陣地。 從最近的局部戰爭來看，社群媒體的地位和角色越來越凸顯。 交戰各方利用個人部落格、論壇等平台即時發布戰場圖片、影片和評論，不僅成為全球行動網路媒體終端。 也成為全球不同國家、不同派系價值認知賽局的主戰場。 社群媒體等新興傳播形式以其獨特的去中心化、互動性特點，打破了傳統傳播方式中資訊的壟斷與資訊控制，催生了眾多的產品樣式。 在滿足人們資訊需求的同時，也不知不覺改變人們的認知。 可以預見，未來社群媒體將在認知領域運作中發揮越來越突出的作用。

網路空間已成為認知域作戰的新空間。 在資訊化、智慧化的條件下，網路科技的門檻大大降低，使得全球各地即時觀看比賽成為可能。 現代戰爭已從電視時代的「客廳戰」發展到當今全媒體時代的「手持戰」。 線上直播比任何形式的戰地報道都更直觀、更豐富，「全球同步」成為顯著特徵。 透過網路直播，交戰雙方激烈戰鬥的影片和圖片，以及無數被燒毀的坦克和裝甲車，以及被戰爭摧毀的家園和逃離家園的難民的影片和圖片都可以直觀地呈現。 人們可以透過網路看到雙方個別平民和士兵的微觀狀態。 戰場的「透明」使得任何企圖隱瞞真相和虛假言論的行為

越來越困難。 但另一方面，智慧語音克隆、視訊人像模擬替換等技術的出現，意味著人們看到的不一定是“所見”，聽到的也不一定是“所聞”。 線上直播下的認知領域運作增加了更多可能性和想像空間。

智慧網路軍隊已成為認知域戰爭的生力軍。 資訊網路的發展突破了人際互動的真實性限制，我們很難判斷網路的另一端是否是真人。 基於大規模互動的需求，智慧化、自動化、大規模的網路空間機器人不斷湧現。 他們廣泛活躍在網路空間的各個角落。 這些智慧網路軍隊具備智慧辨識、智慧響應甚至類腦思維的能力。 他們不知疲倦，日夜不停地工作。 智慧網路軍隊正成為未來認知域作戰的重要力量。 從目前相關技術的發展趨勢來看，全球主要國家甚至商業組織都在關注網路機器人在群體滲透、直播跟進、輿論塑造、網路危機管理等方面的潛在前景。 在網路智慧機器人彈性引導方面，加大科技群自動取得、自動培育、群體滲透等關鍵技術的研發力度，為輿情引導、認知塑造、行為引導等提供智慧高效的技術支援。透過發現並有效運用網路使用者的行為模式進行控制。

中國原創軍事資源及作者：https://www.81.cn/jfjbmap/content/2022-09/01/content_323888.htm

孫志友　　孫海濤

China National Cyber Security Strategy, China's Informatization - 中國信息化, Chinese Military Cognitive Domain Operations, Chinese military cognitive warfare, Chinese Military Future Wars, Chinese Military Informatization, Dissipative Warfare, 中國解放軍敘事戰爭, 中國軍事未來戰爭, 中國軍事認知戰, 中國軍民融合計劃, 中國軍用反衛星武器研製, 中國軍隊聚焦認知域戰是主攻戰場對抗的新著力點, 國家網絡空間安全戰略

Chinese Military Focusing on Future Wars and Fighting the “Five Battles” of Cognition

Leave a comment

中國軍隊聚焦未來戰爭打好認知“五場戰役”

外國現代英文音譯：

Most of the local wars and armed conflicts in recent years have been “hybrid” confrontations carried out in multiple dimensions and fields, emphasizing the use of military, political, economic and other means to implement systematic control in the dimension of comprehensive decision-making, creating all kinds of chaos in the dimension of international communication, and creating various chaos in the dimension of international communication. Conduct targeted strikes in the strategic focus dimension, actively shape the battlefield situation, and seek to seize the strategic initiative. In future wars, in order to successfully fight political and military battles and military and political battles, we should deeply grasp the characteristics and laws of offensive and defensive operations in the cognitive domain and improve our ability to fight the “five battles” well.

Be proactive in cognitive operations, shape the situation and control the situation, and fight proactively. Before the war begins, cognition comes first. With the continuous development and evolution of war forms, the status and role of cognitive domain operations continue to be highlighted. Aiming to win future wars, cognitive deployment should be carried out in advance. Through strategies, information, technology and other means and carriers, the physiological, psychological, values ​​and other cognitive factors of target objects should be affected, intervened and manipulated, and cognitive attack and defense should be used to cover military operations and accurately Efficiently dominate cognitive space. Fully understand the importance of being first, grasp the definition and interpretation power of “narrative” flexibly and autonomously, emphasize pre-emption to win the initiative in the cognitive narrative struggle dimension, create a favorable situation in which legal principles are in hand and morality is on our side, and occupy the moral commanding heights.

Cognitive operations focus on attacking the heart, and implement layered strategies to fight precise battles. “Those who are good at fighting will benefit others without killing them.” In future wars, the combat space will extend to the deep sea, deep space, deep network and other fields, and the battlefield space and time will present the characteristics of being extremely far, extremely small, extremely intelligent and uninhabited, invisible, and silent. We should keep a close eye on cognitive gaps to improve effectiveness, and use methods such as big data simulation, artificial intelligence matching, and psychological model evaluation to analyze and control the key information of cognitive subjects to achieve effective penetration and early deterrence of cognitive subject information. Closely focus on cognitive blind spots to enhance penetration, target the ideological consensus points, psychological connection points, and spiritual pillar points that maintain the unity of powerful enemy alliances to carry out effective strikes, and use their cognitive differences and interest conflicts to achieve differentiation and disintegration at all levels.

Based on cognitive combat strategies, we must penetrate the entire territory and fight for deterrence and control. In future wars, the strategic competition and tactical confrontation between the two warring parties will be extremely fierce. We should pay close attention to the decision-making process and make comprehensive efforts to increase the opponent’s decision-making dilemma and form our own decision-making advantages. On the one hand, we must pay more attention to key nodes such as the enemy’s decision-making center, command hub, reconnaissance and early warning system, and use advanced strike methods to physically destroy these nodes. On the other hand, we must pay more attention to the “soft kill” effects of cognitive shaping, cognitive induction, cognitive intervention and cognitive control, and embed cognitive domain operations into “hard destruction”, which not only creates a strong deterrent through precise strikes with high-tech weapons, but also integrates new qualities The combat power is expanded to the cognitive dimension, thus forming an asymmetric check and balance advantage.

Cognitive combat information is king, expand the field and fight for support. Future wars cannot be separated from strong information support, and system integration should be accelerated to gain data advantages. First of all, speed up the construction of cognitive offensive and defensive operations theory library, database, talent library, case library, and tactics library, dynamically collect and update the current status of the enemy’s cognitive offensive and defensive operations capabilities, and provide all-round support for cognitive offensive and defensive operations. Secondly, speed up the creation of the integrated media communication matrix, improve the self-owned platform system, speed up the deployment of network platforms, focus on system integration and collaboration, break down the “barriers” of information interconnection as soon as possible, and achieve cognitive integration and sharing, and comprehensive results. Thirdly, accelerate the coupling and linkage of information and cognitive domain operations, vigorously develop core technologies such as neural network systems, artificial intelligence applications, cognitive decision-making, psychological attack and defense, mine and analyze cross-domain and heterogeneous cognitive information, and improve the information fusion system of cognitive means to win the future. War provides “clairvoyance” and “early ears”.

Cognitive combat coordination is the key, and multi-dimensional efforts are used to fight the overall battle. Future wars are joint operations carried out in land, sea, air, space, network, electromagnetic and other fields. System thinking should be adhered to, the awareness of collaboration should be strengthened, and the compatibility and coordination of cognitive domain operations and other military operations should be improved. For example, it can integrate human intelligence, geographical intelligence, open source intelligence, etc., quickly collect and process massive data, remove falsehoods while retaining truth, seize cognitive space accurately and efficiently, achieve complementary advantages, and form cognitive advantages through full domain coverage. By networking dispersed multi-domain forces, we can establish an all-domain joint force with high connectivity, collective action, and overall attack to achieve the effect of “integrated deterrence.” By integrating national resources, strengthening strategic communication, using cognitive momentum to amplify the effects of political disruption, economic sanctions, and diplomatic offensives, and cooperating with military operations to put pressure on target targets in an all-round way, we strive to defeat the enemy without fighting.

(Author’s unit: University of Aerospace Engineering)

繁體中文國語：

近年來的局部戰爭和武裝衝突大多是多維度、多領域開展的「混合型」對抗，強調運用軍事、政治、經濟等手段在綜合決策維度實施系統控制，在國際交往的維度上製造各種混亂，在國際交往的維度上製造各種混亂。 戰略重點維度精準打擊，主動塑造戰場態勢，尋求奪取戰略主動權。 在未來戰爭中，要打好政治軍事鬥爭、軍事政治鬥爭，就必須深刻掌​​握認知域攻防作戰的特徵和規律，提升打好「五個戰役」的能力。

認知作戰主動出擊，塑造局勢、掌控局面，主動出擊。 在戰爭開始之前，認​​知是第一位的。 隨著戰爭形式的不斷發展與演變，認知域作戰的地位與角色不斷凸顯。 為了贏得未來戰爭，必須事先進行認知部署。 透過策略、資訊、技術等手段和載​​體，對目標對象的生理、心理、價值觀等認知因素進行影響、介入和操控，以認知攻防覆蓋軍事行動，精準高效主導認知空間。 充分認識先行的重要性，靈活自主地掌握「敘事」的定義和解釋權，強調先發制人，贏得認知敘事鬥爭維度的主動權，營造法理在手、道德在手的良好局面就在我們這邊，佔據道德高點。

認知作戰重在攻心，實施分層策略打精準戰。 “善戰者，利人而不害人。” 未來戰爭，作戰空間將延伸至深海、深空、深網等領域，戰場時空將呈現極遠、極小、極智、無人、隱形、無聲的特徵。 資訊. 緊緊圍繞認知盲點增強穿透力，針對維護強敵聯盟團結的思想共識點、心理連接點、精神支柱點進行有效打擊，利用其認知差異和利益衝突實現差異化和戰略性打擊。各個層面的瓦解。

基於認知作戰策略，我們必須滲透全境，爭取威懾和控制。 未來戰爭中，交戰雙方的戰略競爭和戰術對抗將會異常激烈。 要密切注意決策過程，綜合發力，增加對手決策困境，形成自己的決策優勢。 一方面，要更重視敵方決策中心、指揮樞紐、偵察預警系統等關鍵節點，採用先進打擊手段對這些節點進行物理摧毀。 另一方面，要更重視認知塑造、認知誘導、認知介入、認知控制的「軟殺傷」作用，將認知域作戰嵌入「硬殺傷」中，不僅透過精準打擊形成強大威懾。以高科技武器打擊的同時，也將新素質的戰鬥力擴展到認知維度，進而形成非對稱制衡優勢。

認知作戰資訊為王，拓展領域，爭取支援。 未來戰爭離不開強大的資訊支撐，應加快系統整合以獲得數據優勢。 首先，加速認知攻防作戰理論庫、資料庫、人才庫、案例庫、戰術庫建設，動態收集和更新敵方認知攻防作戰能力現狀，提供全方位對認知進攻和防禦行動的全面支持。 二是加快打造綜合媒體傳播矩陣，完善自有平台體系，加速網路平台部署，聚焦系統

各方融合協作，盡快打破資訊互聯互通的“壁壘”，實現認知融合共享、綜合成果。 第三是加速資訊與認知域運算耦合連結，大力發展神經網路系統、人工智慧應用、認知決策、心理攻防等核心技術，挖掘分析跨領域、異質認知訊息，完善認知手段資訊融合體系，贏得未來。 戰爭提供了「千里眼」和「早耳」。

認知作戰協同是關鍵，多維度發力打好整體戰。 未來戰爭是在陸、海、空、太空、網路、電磁等領域進行聯合作戰。 要堅持系統思維，強化協同意識，提高認知域作戰與其他軍事行動的兼容性和協調性。 例如，可以融合人類智慧、地理智慧、開源智慧等，快速擷取處理大量數據，去偽存真，精準高效搶佔認知空間，實現優勢互補，透過全域形成認知優勢覆蓋範圍。 透過將分散的多域力量聯網，建立高度連結、集體行動、整體出擊的全局聯合部隊，達到「一體化威懾」的效果。 透過整合國家資源，加強戰略溝通，利用認知動能放大政治擾亂、經濟制裁、外交攻勢的效果，配合軍事行動，全方位對目標對象施壓，力爭戰勝敵人不戰而屈人之兵。

（作者單位：航太工程大學）

來源：解放軍報 作者：楊龍喜 編輯：王峰 2022-10-08

China's Informatization - 中國信息化, Chinese Military Cognitive Domain Operations, Chinese military cognitive warfare, Chinese Military Future Wars, Chinese Military Informatization, Dissipative Warfare, 中國解放軍敘事戰爭, 認知戰, 軍隊「三化」融合聚焦探索戰力生成

軍隊「三化」融合聚焦探索戰力生成

Leave a comment

Integration of “Three Modernizations” within the Chinese Military Focusing on Exploring Combat Effectiveness Generation

【資訊×（火力+機動性）】情報

——「三化」融合中的戰鬥力生成模型分析

●戰鬥力生成模式的轉變不是“你唱我就出現”，而是新戰鬥力因素與原有戰鬥力因素相互作用的過程。 這種交互過程會因新戰力因素的不同特性而改變。

●隨著智慧無人武器平台不斷進入戰爭舞台，人工智慧決策和演算法對抗為戰鬥力的生成增添了新的智慧因素。 作戰體系的對抗方式也從資訊主導的火力平台轉向以人、網路和機器的群體智慧引發認知對抗，推動「資訊×（火力+機動性）」的戰鬥力生成模式和進化到更高級的「【資訊×（火力+機動性）】」智能。

目前，現代戰爭正處於機械化、資訊化、智能化（以下簡稱「三化」）融合發展的十字路口。 探索「三化」融合條件下戰鬥力生成模式的內在規律，對於洞察新的戰爭制勝機制、掌握未來戰場主動權至關重要。 權利具有重要意義。

「火力+」的演變：融合

戰鬥力生成模式的轉變不是“你唱我上台”，而是新戰鬥力因素與原有戰鬥力因素相互作用的過程。 這種交互過程因新的戰鬥力要素的不同特性而改變。

機械化時代之前的疊加模式。 縱觀人類歷史，戰力的生成模式一直以「+」的方式演變。 從石器時代人的體力和技能的疊加，到冷兵器時代刀劍穿透力的加成，再到火藥時代火力的注入，再到機械化時代機動性的產生，軍事戰鬥力生成模型遵循疊加法。 形成了「體力+穿透力+火力+機動性」的發揮方式。 這種以疊加為特徵的戰鬥力生成模式，使人多勢眾的軍隊在戰場上具有壓倒性的優勢。 同時，雖然資訊的力量在戰場上一直起著決定性的作用，諸如「知己知彼，百戰不殆」就體現了資訊在古代戰場上的重要性。 但由於種種條件，“知己知彼”並不能完全保證“知己知彼”，“知己知彼”則更難。 資訊力量成為戰鬥力因素中最不可控的環節，從而在戰鬥力的生成中發揮從屬作用。

資訊時代的資訊乘數模型。 網路資訊時代，泛在網路提供了無所不包的訊息，促進了資訊的無所不在。 也將人們在資訊互動過程中引入「網路-資訊」空間； 而資訊單元的嵌入、智慧微塵的分散、微納感測器的部署，將坦克、戰鬥機、火砲、船等機械系統轉變為「資訊物理」系統。 在此過程中，資訊力、火力、機動性跨界鏈接，在戰鬥力的生成方式上產生疊加之外的乘法關係，呈現出「資訊×（火力+機動性）」的新方式。 這種以資訊力量為乘數因素的戰鬥力模型，首先是由資訊力量滲透火力和機動性的特徵決定的； 其次，資訊力量的地位高於火力和機動性； 第三，資訊力的強弱，可能由戰鬥力倍增或負荷銳減決定。 這遵循資訊力量的不確定性，取決於資訊與戰場情勢的匹配程度。

智慧時代的智慧指數模型。 人類從未停止對戰鬥力生成規律的探索。 近年來，隨著智慧無人武器平台不斷進入戰爭舞台，人工智慧決策和演算法對抗為戰鬥效果的生成增添了新的智慧化因素。

文尼斯。 作戰系統的對抗方式也從資訊主導的火力平台轉變為基於人、網路和機器的群體智慧所能獲勝的認知對抗，推動「資訊×資訊」的戰鬥力生成模式。（火力+機動性）」並進化到更高級的「【資訊×（火力+機動性）】智能」階段。 這種以「智力」為指數因子的戰鬥力生成模式的核心，是從最初的火力、機動性、資訊的對抗走向人類最高層次的對抗——認知對抗。 雖然現階段這種戰鬥發電模式尚未大規模應用於實戰，但未來它將成為高強度對抗的主角。 其對戰鬥力的影響源自於人工智慧，表現在三個方面：一是把人類從越來越礦山的「資訊困境」中解放出來； 其次，賦予無人系統武器自主攻擊和防禦能力； 第三，機器學習和演算法最佳化提供了不同於人類指揮和決策的全新解決方案。

「資訊×」的本質：賦能

當機械化時代的火力和機動性遇到物理極限時，資訊就成為戰鬥力產生的穿透性因素。 它以訊號、知識和指令的形式穿越物理域、認知域和社會域，產生資訊互動、資訊傳播、資訊力量賦能其他戰鬥力因素等效果。

資訊賦能指揮與控制，將其提升到「藝術+科學」的新高度。 傳統戰場上的資訊受到感知、傳輸和處理手段的限制，處於不完整、不準確、非即時狀態。 在這種資訊狀態下指揮控制活動的對抗，只能依靠指揮官的策略賦予「藝術」生命力。「三化」一體化條件下，戰場資訊極為豐富，資訊的準確性、完整性、及時性得到大幅提升，從而推動指揮決策從單純的人腦規劃向機器計算、模型優化、規則適應邁上新台階；指揮員減少了因主觀推測或假設信息匱乏，從原來的“現狀”到預測“未來形勢”進入新的預測層面；作戰平台的對抗注入了數學模型計算的計算成分，大大提高了「科學」成分的作戰指揮。

資訊賦能火力，使其走向「精準釋放」新形態。 傳統資訊賦能火力，主要為火力單位提供目標的總結資訊。 這就是為什麼傳統戰場上需要火力覆蓋、火力延伸和火力壓制的原因。 「三化」融合條件下，戰場資訊賦能火力。 在追蹤定位目標時，為火力平台提供公分級目標位置資訊和目標運動軌跡等數學資訊； 在規劃作戰任務時，指揮官利用泛在網路上資訊的流動和流動，在系統中關聯出最適合執行任務的兵力和武器，形成基於資訊利益相關者的動態“作戰力量圈”，大大減少了系統中的冗餘負荷。作戰系統的運作並實現作戰系統的精確度。 匹配; 在火力打擊行動中，火力平台內嵌的信息單元將對比分析目標來襲軌蹟的實時變化信息，以及目標可能採取的躲避策略信息，並結合火力打擊方法，消防平台的時機和策略。 ，實現目標發現、姿態調整、攻擊時機等全過程「資訊-火力」互動。

資訊賦能移動，引領移動進入「即時存取」的新境界。 傳統作戰體系中的機動性主要指陸上平台、海上平台、空中平台的機動速度。 受指揮關係、部署區域和反應延遲的影響，平台的機動性往往受到限制。 「三化」融合條件下的武器裝備處於即時網路線上狀態，所有武器平台的機動性匯聚成類似「資源池」的東西。 當戰鬥系統感知到

外部威脅訊息，距離威脅發生的地方最近。 任務規劃系統提取最適合應對威脅、最快感知威脅的武器來執行即時作戰行動。 這大大提高了作戰系統的瞬時響應能力。 在「匯集」效應下，不同作戰平台的機動性超越了時間、空間和指揮關係的分離，成為「即時可達」機動性的新狀態。

「智慧指數」注入：跨越式變革

戰鬥發電模式中智慧指標的注入「[資訊]戰鬥系統三個面向包括戰鬥結構、計算資源和戰鬥模型。

戰鬥結構的適應性調整會產生情報。 「三化」融合條件下的作戰體係是一個基於網路的複雜系統。 在這個複雜的系統中，有大量的網路存取節點，用戶連線的特徵是分散。 這些特點使得戰鬥系統在運作過程中始終從混亂狀態走向穩定狀態。 然後由於外界的刺激，系統的運作狀態出現不平衡，進入新的混沌狀態。 系統各要素相互作用、相互連結、相互協調，系統逐漸進入新的穩定狀態。 當然，戰鬥系統並不是一個可以自由成長的複雜系統。 這種自我一致性或自適應調整不僅來自於指揮官對系統內部隊和武器的決策、任務規劃、行動控制和作戰協調，也來自於每個成員根據自身行動採取的行動。 預先商定的規則自主做出相關反應，以及每個成員在依照規則運作的過程中自己學習或演化出的相關規則。 戰鬥系統在自洽的過程中，化解相關要素之間的衝突，清除系統中的痛點、斷點、阻塞點，使系統進入融合共生的狀態，激發要素結合產生新的戰鬥力。結構。 力量。

計算資源的自適應分配產生智慧。 贏的越多，贏的就越少。 傳統戰場上的「算計」依賴指揮官的規劃、計畫、預測和策略。 它面臨三個問題：一是計算主體是一個或極少數個別指揮官； 二、計算過程首先是戰鬥相關資訊的線性疊加； 三是計算結果是靜態的、滯後於實際情況的結論。 「三化」融合下的戰場作戰系統的運算能力，除了指揮官的心算外，還得益於「雲+邊緣+終端」的運算資源部署模式，即大型雲端運算中心提供強大的高階算力支持，作戰系統邊緣配置的「作戰雲」提供客製化算力支持，內嵌資訊單元的智慧端對感測平台的目標訊號進行初級處理。 這種運算資源分配模型很好地適應了戰場資訊豐富、網路傳輸資源有限、不同作戰單位資訊處理需求差異很大的特徵。 計算資源和計算任務很好地融合在一起。 配對後，指揮官、作戰人員、情報中心、作戰平台等都能得到有效的算力支持，大大增加了戰場上「多重機率勝利」的機率。

戰鬥模型的自適應最佳化會產生情報。 人腦對抗中的策略往往會受到人類生理特徵的影響，例如緊張、慣性思考、危險迴避等，這些人性中的「智力缺陷」可以被機器決策有效克服。 2020年8月20日，一名參加美國空軍「阿爾法空戰競賽」的人類飛行員表示，「AI戰鬥機之所以優越，是因為它極具攻擊性。 它使用人類飛行員不常用的攻擊方法來進行操作，這讓人類飛行員非常不舒服。” 這足以證明「三化」融合條件下戰場上機器植入的作戰模式與人類指揮官在決策過程中使用的策略有很大不同。機器作戰的另一個特點模型就是它的自學習能力，累積戰鬥經驗的過程可能需要數年時間

人類要完成的事情，智慧機器只需幾十天甚至幾十個小時就能完成。 當機器的學習能力超越人類時，演算法的勝利將成為戰場對抗的另一個焦點。 然而，戰爭始終是由人類主導的，無論機器進化得多麼先進，這一點都不會改變。 因此，設計人為幹預條件下的作戰模型，制定合理的規則，促進機器作戰模型的自適應優化，是未來戰場戰力情報指標競爭的關鍵。

人類以同樣的方式生產，以同樣的方式戰鬥。 軍隊的戰鬥力生成模式是時代的產物，必然會深深打上時代的烙印。 戰爭形態已進入資訊化、智能化時代。 智力因素從過去的加數變成了指數。 地位、作用、結構發生了翻天覆地的變化。 戰爭勝利機制徹底刷新，「昨天的舊船票」不再登上未來的「客船」。

面對時代巨變，軍隊戰鬥力生成模式的轉變是取得勝利的前提。 一流部隊主動掉頭，二流部隊跟隨，三流部隊被迫掉頭。 作為一名軍人，要想贏得未來，就必須學會做“桅杆上的瞭望員”，敢於走出思維的“舒適區”和“熟悉區”，主動求變，積極探索，用思想的風暴掃除舊的、僵化的思維。 掌控勝利的命脈。

外文音譯：

[Information × (Firepower + Mobility)] Intelligence

——Analysis of the combat effectiveness generation model in the integration of “three modernizations”

●The transformation of the combat power generation model is not “you sing and I will appear”, but a process of interaction between the new combat power factors and the original combat power factors. This interaction process changes due to the different characteristics of the new combat power factors.

●As intelligent unmanned weapons platforms continue to enter the war arena, artificial intelligence decision-making and algorithmic confrontation have added new intelligent factors to the generation of combat effectiveness. The confrontation method of the combat system has also shifted from information-led firepower platforms to human-based and The swarm intelligence of networks and machines leads to a cognitive confrontation that promotes the “information × (firepower + mobility)” combat power generation model and evolves to a more advanced stage of “[information × (firepower + mobility)]” intelligence.

Currently, modern warfare is at the juncture of the integration of mechanization, information, and intelligence (hereinafter referred to as the “three modernizations”). Exploring the inherent laws of the combat power generation model under the conditions of the integration of the “three modernizations” is essential for gaining insight into new war winning mechanisms and mastering the initiative on future battlefields. Rights are of great significance.

The evolution of “Firepower+”: Fusion

The transformation of the combat effectiveness generation model is not “you sing and I come on stage”, but a process of interaction between the new combat effectiveness factors and the original combat effectiveness factors. This interaction process changes due to the different characteristics of the new combat effectiveness factors.

Superposition patterns before the age of mechanization. Throughout the history of mankind, the generation model of combat power has been evolving in a “+” manner. From the superposition of physical strength and skills of people in the Stone Age, to the addition of the penetrating power of swords in the cold weapon age, to the injection of firepower in the gunpowder age, and the generation of mobility in the mechanization age, the generation model of military combat effectiveness follows the superposition method. A display method of “physical strength + penetration power + firepower + mobility” has been formed. This combat power generation mode characterized by superposition gives an army of large numbers an overwhelming advantage on the battlefield. In the meantime, although the power of information has always played a decisive role on the battlefield, such as “know yourself and the enemy, you can fight a hundred battles without danger” reflects the importance of information on the ancient battlefield. However, due to various conditions, “knowing yourself” cannot fully guarantee “knowing yourself” and “knowing the enemy” It is even more difficult. Information power has become the most uncontrollable link in the combat effectiveness factor, thus playing a subordinate role in the generation of combat effectiveness.

Information multiplier model in the information age. In the era of network information, the ubiquitous network provides all-encompassing information and promotes the ubiquity of information. It also draws people into the “network-information” space in the process of information interaction; and the information unit Embedding, the dispersion of smart dust, and the deployment of micro-nano sensors transform mechanical systems such as tanks, fighter planes, artillery, and ships into “information-physical” systems. In this process, information power, firepower, and mobility are linked across boundaries, and a multiplicative relationship in addition to superposition is created in the generation mode of combat power, showing a new method of “information × (firepower + mobility)”. This combat power model in which information power acts as a multiplier factor is determined by, first, the characteristics of information power permeating firepower and mobility; secondly, by the fact that information power has a higher status than firepower and mobility; thirdly, by the fact that information power has It may be determined by the multiplication factor of combat effectiveness or the sharp reduction in load. This follows the uncertainty of information power and depends on the degree of matching between the information and the battlefield situation.

Intelligence index model in the era of intelligence. Humanity has never stopped exploring the laws of combat effectiveness generation. In recent years, as intelligent unmanned weapons platforms continue to enter the war arena, artificial intelligence decision-making and algorithmic confrontation have added new intelligent factors to the generation of combat effectiveness. The confrontation method of the combat system has also changed from information-led firepower platforms to one based on In the cognitive confrontation that can be won by the swarm intelligence of people, networks and machines, it promotes the combat power generation model of “information × (firepower + mobility)” and evolves to a more advanced stage of “[information × (firepower + mobility)] intelligence” . The core of this combat power generation model that uses “intelligence” as an exponential factor is to move from the original confrontation of firepower, mobility, and information to the highest level of human confrontation – cognitive confrontation. Although this combat power generation model has not yet been used in actual combat on a large scale at this stage, it will become the protagonist in high-intensity confrontations in the future. Its impact on combat power originates from artificial intelligence and appears in three aspects: First, it transforms human beings into To be freed from the “information dilemma” that becomes more and more mined; secondly, to give unmanned system weapons autonomous attack and defense capabilities; thirdly, machine learning and algorithm optimization provide brand-new solutions that are different from humans in command and decision-making.

The essence of “information ×”: empowerment

When the firepower and mobility of the mechanization era encounter physical limits, information becomes a penetrating factor in the generation of combat effectiveness. It travels through the physical domain, cognitive domain and social domain in the form of signals, knowledge and instructions, resulting in information interaction, information dissemination, Effects such as information power empower other combat effectiveness factors.

Information empowers command and control, taking it to a new level of “art + science”. The information on the traditional battlefield is limited by the means of perception, transmission and processing, and is in an incomplete, inaccurate and non-real-time state. The confrontation of command and control activities in this information state can only rely on the commander’s strategy to give “art” “Vitality on. Under the conditions of the integration of “three modernizations”, the information on the battlefield is extremely rich, and the accuracy, completeness, and timeliness of the information have been greatly improved, thus promoting command decision-making from pure human brain planning to machine calculation and model optimization. , a new level of rule adaptation; the commander reduces the subjective speculation or assumption due to lack of information, and enters a new level of prediction from the original “current situation” to the prediction of “future situation”; the confrontation of the combat platform is injected with The computational component of mathematical model calculations greatly improves the “scientific” component of combat command.

Information empowers firepower, leading it to a new form of “precise release.” Traditional information empowers firepower, mainly providing firepower units with summary information about targets. This is why fire coverage, fire extension and fire suppression are required on traditional battlefields. Under the conditions of “three modernizations” integration, information on the battlefield empowers firepower. When tracking and positioning targets, it provides the firepower platform with centimeter-level target position information and target movement trajectories and other mathematical information; when planning combat missions, commanders use The flow and flow of information on the ubiquitous network associate the most suitable forces and weapons for the mission in the system, forming a dynamic “combat power circle” based on information stakeholders, greatly reducing the redundant load on the operation of the combat system and achieving the accuracy of the combat system. Matching; during a fire strike operation, the information unit embedded in the fire platform will compare and analyze the real-time change information of the target’s incoming trajectory, as well as information about the evasion strategies that the target may adopt, with the fire strike method, timing and strategy of the fire platform. , to achieve “information-firepower” interaction in the entire process of target finding, attitude adjustment, attack timing, etc.

Information empowers mobility, leading it to a new state of “instant access”. The mobility in the traditional combat system mainly refers to the maneuvering speed of land platforms, sea platforms, and air platforms. Affected by command relationships, deployment areas, and response delays, the mobility of platforms is often limited. Weapons and equipment under the conditions of “three modernizations” integration are in a real-time network online state, and the mobility of all weapon platforms converges into something similar to a “resource pool.” When the combat system senses external threat information, it is closest to the place where the threat occurs. The weapons that are most suitable for responding to threats and the fastest to perceive threats are extracted by the mission planning system to perform real-time combat operations. This greatly improves the instantaneous response capability of the combat system. Under the “pooling” effect, the mobility of different combat platforms transcends the separation of time, space and command relationships, and becomes a new state of “instantly accessible” mobility.

Infusion of “Intelligence Index”: Leap Change

The injection of intelligence index in the combat power generation mode “[Information The three aspects of the combat system include combat structure, computing resources and combat models.

Adaptive adjustment of combat structures generates intelligence. The combat system under the conditions of the integration of “three modernizations” is a complex system based on the network. In this complex system, there are a large number of network access nodes, and the characteristic of user connection is decentralization. These characteristics make the combat system always go from a chaotic state to a stable state during operation. Then due to external stimulation, the operating state of the system is unbalanced and enters a new chaotic state. The interaction of various elements of the system , mutual relations, and mutual coordination, the system gradually enters a new stable state again. Of course, a combat system is not a complex system that can grow freely. This self-consistency or adaptive adjustment comes not only from the commander’s decision-making, mission planning, action control, and combat coordination of the forces and weapons in the system, but also from the actions of each member based on their actions. The pre-agreed rules make relevant responses autonomously, as well as the relevant rules that each member learns or evolves by themselves in the process of operating according to the rules. In the process of self-consistency, the combat system resolves the conflicts between related elements, clears the pain points, breakpoints and blocking points in the system, brings it into a state of integration and symbiosis, and stimulates the combination of elements to produce new structures. force.

Adaptive allocation of computing resources produces intelligence. The more you win, the less you win. “Calculation” on the traditional battlefield relies on the commander’s planning, planning, prediction and strategy. It faces three problems: first, the subject of calculation is one or a very small number of individual commanders; second, the calculation process The first is the linear superposition of combat-related information; the third is the conclusion that the calculation result is static and lags behind the situation. The computing power of the combat system on the battlefield under the integration of “three modernizations”, in addition to the commander’s mental calculations, also benefits from the “cloud + edge + terminal” computing resource deployment model, that is, large cloud computing centers provide powerful high-end Computing power support, the “combat cloud” configured at the edge of the combat system provides customized computing power support, and the intelligent end with embedded information units performs primary processing of the target signals of the sensing platform. This computing resource allocation model is well adapted to the characteristics of the battlefield where information is abundant, network transmission resources are limited, and different combat units have very different information processing needs. Computing resources and computing tasks are well integrated. When matched, commanders, combat personnel, intelligence centers, combat platforms, etc. can all receive effective computing power support, which greatly increases the probability of “multi-probability victory” on the battlefield.

Adaptive optimization of combat models generates intelligence. Strategies in human brain confrontation are often affected by human physiological characteristics, such as nervousness, inertial thinking, danger avoidance, etc. These “intelligent flaws” in human nature can be effectively overcome by machine decision-making. On August 20, 2020, a human pilot who participated in the U.S. Air Force’s “Alpha Air Combat Competition” said, “The AI ​​fighter plane is superior because it is extremely aggressive. It uses attack methods that are not commonly used by human pilots to carry out operations, which makes human pilots very uncomfortable.” “. This is enough to prove that the combat model implanted in the machines on the battlefield under the conditions of “three modernizations” integration is very different from the strategies used by human commanders in the decision-making process. Another feature of the machine combat model is its self-learning ability. The process of accumulating combat experience that may take years for humans to complete can be completed by intelligent machines in only dozens of days or even dozens of hours. When the learning ability of machines surpasses that of humans, algorithmic victory will become another focus in battlefield confrontations. However, wars are always led by humans, and this will not change no matter how advanced the machines evolve. Therefore, designing a combat model under human intervention conditions and formulating reasonable rules to promote the adaptive optimization of machine combat models are the key to the competition of combat effectiveness intelligence index on the future battlefield.

Only by proactively seeking change can we win the times

In the same way that humans produce, they fight in the same way. The military’s combat effectiveness generation model is a product of the times and will inevitably be deeply marked by the times. The form of war has entered the era of informationization and intelligence. The intelligence factor has changed from an addend in the past to an exponential. The status, role and structure have undergone earth-shaking changes. The mechanism for winning wars has been completely refreshed, and “yesterday’s old tickets” can no longer board the “passenger ships” of the future.

Facing the great changes of the times, the military’s transformation of its combat effectiveness generation model is a prerequisite for victory. The first-rate troops took the initiative to turn around, the second-rate troops followed suit, and the third-rate troops were forced to turn around. As a soldier, to win in the future, you must learn to be a “lookout on the mast”, dare to step out of the “comfort zone” and “familiar zone” of thinking, take the initiative to seek change, actively explore, and use the storm of ideas to sweep away the old and rigid thinking. Take control of the lifeblood of victory.

中國軍事資料來源：http://www.mod.gov.cn/gfbw/jmsd/4888828.html

Chinese Military Future Wars, Chinese Military Informatization, Chinese Military Views - 中國軍事觀, Dissipative Warfare, 中國解放軍敘事戰爭, 認知戰, 軍事認知戰

中國人民解放軍洞察認知戰的演變趨勢

Leave a comment

Chinese People’s Liberation Army Insights into the Evolving Trends of Cognitive Warfare

原始中國軍事繁體普通話：

認知是人們獲取、處理和應用資訊和知識的過程。 目前，認知領域逐漸成為競爭新戰場，認知戰逐漸引起各國關注。 隨著科技革命的發展和戰爭實踐的擴大，認知戰爭正呈現加速演變的趨勢。

認知技術正成為戰爭演變的基本驅動力。 科技改變戰爭形式，也改變認知戰爭方式。 如果資訊網路的大規模普及推動了資訊領域成為作戰領域，而數據和網路規模的指數級增長是資訊領域成熟的標誌，那麼認知技術和資訊科技的大規模應用則推動了資訊領域的發展。認知技術的不斷迭代發展將成為驅動認知戰成熟的標誌。 未來認知環境、認知感知、認知控制、人工智慧等技術將反映認知技術對社會認知對抗和軍事認知對抗可能產生的變革性影響。 人類正進入全民通訊時代，全球網路空間高度互聯。 網路已成為國家行為體與非國家行為體全面競爭的戰場。 通訊糾紛和通訊戰已成為高強度軍事行動的一部分。 目前，世界主要國家紛紛佈局認知技術前沿，展開認知技術競賽。 透過建模和分析，尋求滲透和控制人腦網路、資訊網路和社交網路； 他們透過深度運算、精算、巧妙運算等方式，最大限度地獲得人們認知世界和認知領域的控制。

認知領域正成為混合戰爭的重要戰場。 在智慧時代，人類的溝通方式正在發生複雜而深刻的變化。 線下傳播讓位於更多的線上傳播，各類新媒體平台成為大眾了解戰場的主要管道，大型社群平台成為認知博弈鬥爭的主戰場。 因此，未來戰爭的作戰領域將持續擴大。 空間域將從陸、海、空、天網路擴展到深空、深海、深地，邏輯域將從物理域擴展到資訊域和認知域。 戰爭不再局限於傳統戰爭的物理威脅，而是轉向大眾傳播媒體和技術進步所帶來的社會意識威脅。 圍繞通訊平台的封鎖與反封鎖、主導與反主導將成為認知戰的焦點。 以資訊為彈藥爭奪國際話語權已成為當今認知對抗的主要手段。 從混合戰爭的角度來看，思想宣傳灌輸、價值觀文化滲透、傳統輿論心理和法律攻防、資訊網路戰等都成為認知戰的重要面向。 混合戰爭可以透過認知戰等綜合賽局手段，達到以小戰甚至不戰而勝的目的。 認知領域的攻防將是一場不間斷的常態化鬥爭，戰鬥力將不斷累積並逐步釋放。 。

認知優勢正成為高端戰爭的致勝優勢。 戰爭中的行為自由是軍隊的命脈。 從認知角度來看，對戰場環境和作戰對手的了解越深，行動的自由度就越大，相對優勢就越大。 然而，隨著戰爭中作戰資料的指數級增長，指揮官開始面臨資料沼澤、資料迷霧、資料過載的認知困境。 擁有資訊優勢並不意味著擁有認知優勢。 人工智慧技術的一個重要軍事應用方向是即時處理大量數據，幫助指揮官擺脫認知超載，快速形成認知優勢。 在智慧戰爭中，認知優勢將主導決策優勢，決策優勢將主導行動優勢。 認知優勢有四個關鍵指標：更強的資訊取得能力、更快的人工智慧機器學習速度、更有效的緊急處置能力、更高的新技術、新製程開發應用能力。

新知識。 例如，具有數據驅動智慧傳播新特徵的輿論戰與傳統軍事行動實現了高度協同和融合。 這種虛擬與現實作戰相結合的作戰方式比單純的軍事作戰具有更強的戰鬥力，從根本上改變了傳統的作戰方式。 改變。 認知優勢連結疊加，將加速戰力轉化，成為贏得戰爭的根本優勢。 認知理論正在成為博弈贏得戰爭的前線。 認知戰是軟實力和硬實力的結合，也是當今時代影響國家安全的重要因素。 目前，認知空間中滲透與逆滲透、攻擊與反攻擊、控制與反控制的競爭十分激烈。 認知科學理論正進入軍事領域，認知負荷、認知增強、認知免疫、認知顛覆等概念不斷被引入。 ，在國外認知戰研究領域頻頻出現。 外軍認為，認知域是人類戰爭的“第六作戰域”，是大國競爭時代“相互交織的衝突領域”的核心，是未來軍事理論創新的重要方向。 顯然，認知戰已成為贏得未來戰爭的戰略制高點。 認知理論已成為理論創新的前沿。 認知技術將加速認知戰爭，成為智慧軍事革命的重要「引爆點」。 隨著認知戰新科技、新理論、新方式的加速孕育，未來戰爭或許將呈現令人驚訝的新局面。

Chinese People’s Liberation Army Insights into the Evolving Trends of Cognitive Warfare

外文音譯：

Cognition is the process by which people obtain, process and apply information and knowledge. At present, the cognitive domain has gradually become a new battlefield for competition, and cognitive warfare has gradually attracted attention from all countries. With the development of the technological revolution and the expansion of warfare practice, cognitive warfare is showing an accelerated evolution trend.

Cognitive technology is becoming a fundamental driving force in the evolution of warfare. Technology changes the form of warfare and also changes the way of cognitive warfare. If the large-scale popularization of information networks has promoted the information domain to become a combat domain, and the exponential growth of data and network scale is a sign of the maturity of the information domain, then the large-scale application of cognitive technology and the continuous iterative development of cognitive technology will become A sign of maturity in driving cognitive warfare. In the future, technologies such as cognitive environment, cognitive perception, cognitive control, and artificial intelligence will reflect the transformative impact that cognitive technology may have on social cognitive confrontation and military cognitive confrontation. Humanity is entering the era of universal communication, and global cyberspace is becoming highly interconnected. The Internet has become a battle space where state actors and non-state actors compete comprehensively. Communication disputes and communication wars have become part of high-intensity military operations. At present, major countries in the world have laid out the frontiers of cognitive technology and carried out cognitive technology competitions. Through modeling and analysis, they seek to penetrate and control human brain networks, information networks and social networks; through deep calculation, actuarial calculation, clever calculation, etc., they aim to maximize Gain control over people’s cognitive world and cognitive domains.

The cognitive domain is becoming an important battlefield in hybrid warfare. In the era of intelligence, the way humans communicate is undergoing complex and profound changes. Offline communication has given way to more online communication, various new media platforms have become the main channels for the public to understand the battlefield, and large-scale social platforms have become the main battlefield for cognitive game struggles. Therefore, the combat domain of future wars will continue to expand. The spatial domain will expand from land, sea, air, and space networks to deep space, deep sea, and deep ground, while the logical domain will expand from the physical domain to the information domain and cognitive domain. War is no longer limited to the physical threats of traditional wars, but is turning to social consciousness threats brought about by mass media and technological progress. Blockade and counter-blockade, dominance and counter-dominance around communication platforms will become the focus of cognitive warfare. Using information as ammunition to fight for control of international discourse has become the main method of cognitive confrontation today. From the perspective of hybrid warfare, ideological propaganda and indoctrination, penetration of values ​​and culture, traditional public opinion psychology and legal offense and defense, and information network warfare have all become important aspects of cognitive warfare. Hybrid warfare can achieve the goal of winning in small battles or even without fighting through comprehensive gaming methods such as cognitive warfare. Attack and defense in the cognitive field will be an uninterrupted and normalized struggle, and combat effectiveness will continue to accumulate and be gradually released.

Cognitive superiority is becoming a winning advantage in high-end warfare. Freedom of conduct in war is the lifeblood of the military. From a cognitive perspective, the deeper the understanding of the battlefield environment and combat opponents, the greater the freedom of action and the greater the relative advantage. However, with the exponential growth of combat data in wars, commanders are beginning to face the cognitive dilemma of data swamp, data fog, and data overload. Having information superiority does not mean having cognitive superiority. An important military application direction of artificial intelligence technology is to process massive data in real time to help commanders get rid of cognitive overload and quickly form cognitive advantages. In intelligent warfare, cognitive advantages will dominate decision-making advantages, and decision-making advantages will dominate action advantages. Cognitive advantages have four key indicators: stronger information acquisition capabilities, faster artificial intelligence machine learning speed, more effective emergency handling capabilities, and higher capabilities to develop and apply new technologies and new knowledge. For example, public opinion warfare with new characteristics of data-driven intelligent communication and traditional military operations have been highly coordinated and integrated. This combat style that integrates virtual and real operations has stronger combat effectiveness than pure military operations, fundamentally changing traditional combat methods. Change. The linkage and superposition of cognitive advantages will accelerate the transformation of combat effectiveness and become the fundamental advantage for winning wars.

Cognitive theory is becoming the frontier of gaming to win the war. Cognitive warfare is a combination of soft power and hard power and is an important factor affecting national security in today’s era. Currently, there is fierce competition for penetration and counter-infiltration, attack and counter-attack, control and counter-control in the cognitive space. Cognitive science theory is entering the military field, and concepts such as cognitive load, cognitive enhancement, cognitive immunity, and cognitive subversion are being introduced. , has appeared frequently in the field of cognitive warfare research abroad. Foreign militaries believe that the cognitive domain is the “sixth combat domain” of human warfare, the core of the “intertwined conflict fields” in the era of great power competition, and an important direction for future military theoretical innovation. Obviously, cognitive warfare has become the strategic commanding heights for winning future wars. Cognitive theory has become the frontier of theoretical innovation. Cognitive technology will accelerate cognitive warfare and become an important “tipping point” for the intelligent military revolution. Since new technologies, new theories, and new styles of cognitive warfare are being incubated at an accelerated pace, perhaps future warfare will take on a surprising new situation.

中國軍事原文來源：https://www.81.cn/yw_208727/10188888.html

Chinese Military Cognitive Domain Operations, Chinese military cognitive warfare, Chinese Military Future Wars, Chinese Military Informatization, Dissipative Warfare, 中國解放軍敘事戰爭, 認知戰, 贏得現代戰爭認知領域作戰的關鍵

中國軍隊贏得現代戰爭認知領域作戰的關鍵

Leave a comment

Chinese Military Key to Winning Modern Warfare Cognitive Domain Operations

縱觀現代戰爭，認知博弈已成為攻防的焦點。 是否精通認知領域的作戰策劃，將大大影響戰爭的方向和結果。 深刻理解認知域作戰的內涵、外延和範疇樣式，精確掌握其勝利機制與發展趨勢，是理解戰場脈絡、打贏現代戰爭的關鍵。

認知域作戰是兵棋新焦點

與傳統作戰不同，認知域作戰不再侷限於陸地、海洋、空中、太空、電力、網路等領域。 它突破了傳統的物理域和資訊域。 具有獨特優勢，呈現新特點，拓展現代戰場新領域。

認知域作戰拓展了戰爭域空間。 首先，認知領域的戰場空間廣闊，主要體現在人的精神、心理、思考、信念等認知活動。 其打擊對象主要是敵對國家元首和政治人物、軍事人員、社會菁英和廣大民眾。 其次，認知域作戰的形式多種多樣，包括但不限於政治外交壓力、經濟封鎖和製裁、文化滲透和侵蝕等。第三，認知域作戰的目標廣泛，主要是為了動搖破壞敵人的信仰，瓦解敵人的意志，影響改變敵人的決策，進而造成社會混亂、決策錯誤、敵軍士氣低落，甚至顛覆國家政權。

認知域作戰模糊了戰爭域的界線。 認知域運作的主體是人。 人是戰爭中最活躍的因素，尤其是高層決策者的認知，體現了戰爭的整體意志，直接影響戰爭的全局，決定了戰爭的勝負。 國家領導人和軍隊將領的認知是認知域作戰的重點目標。 民意、社會基礎、國際輿論通常是認知域作戰的基礎，是推動戰爭進程與方向的關鍵力量。 認知域作戰混合了常規和非常規作戰，模糊了戰場的界線。 它旨在對訊息接收者進行認知誘導和攻擊，繞過傳統戰場，直達最薄弱的環節——人。 戰術行動可以實現戰略目標，從根本上改變戰場環境，改變戰爭結果。

認知域作戰達到最終戰略目標。 中國古代兵法有云：“用兵之道，先攻心，下攻城；先戰心，下戰兵。” 認知域作戰的目的在於佔領認知優勢，影響敵方決策和行為。 以最小的成本取得最大的戰鬥力。 正如克勞塞維茨在《論戰爭》中提到的，「戰爭是迫使敵人服從我們意志的暴力行為」。 由於認知域作戰不是針對有生命力量的硬殺傷，而是針對隱形目標的軟殺傷，因此不僅可以“迫使敵人服從我的意志”，而且客觀上可以使敵人從內部摧毀自己，使其無力反抗。 、瓦解，最終不戰而屈人之兵，實現「全面勝利」的戰略目標。

認知域作戰是軍事改革的新產物

目前，世界百年未有之大變局正在加速發生。 國際情勢日益複雜，局部戰爭和區域衝突持續。 認知域作戰作為一種新的作戰方式，在新一輪軍事改革浪潮的推動下變得越來越重要。

戰爭法則是認知領域戰鬥的基本規則。 認知域作戰仍遵循戰爭的基本法則。 首先，正義必須伸張。 正義戰爭推動歷史發展並最終戰勝非正義戰爭，佔據道德高地的認知域作戰具備先勝條件。 二是強者勝，弱者敗。 科學與技術的進步催生了先進的軍事理論，推動了高科技裝備的發展。 奪取控制權和控制權可以實現降維打擊，瓦解敵軍。 第三是主觀引導符合客觀實際。 認知域的運作必須建立在一定的客觀物質基礎上。 必須綜合考慮戰場環境、狀況

必須權衡各方利益，做出有利的決定。 四是重點操作牽動全局。 在以網路為中心的系統作戰中，認知域往往成為最關鍵的環節，其成敗可以決定戰局。

理論創新是認知領域運作的基礎支撐。 近年來，美軍先後提出「混合戰」、「馬賽克戰」、「灰色地帶衝突」等新作戰理論。 它以認知域作戰為主要作戰手段，已形成較成熟的理論。 俄軍在長期的軍事實踐中也形成了自己的一套混合戰方法，特別是在敘利亞戰場，巧妙地運用「格拉西莫夫」戰術來應對「混合戰」。 日本近年來也大力發展軍事實力。 在其新版《國防白皮書》中，首次提及「跨域」作戰概念，旨在突破傳統領域，將認知域等新領域作為其軍事力量發展的重點方向，使它更加主動。 和外向性。

軍事實踐是認知域作戰的重要基礎。 從近期局部戰爭來看，認知域戰已成為現代戰爭的主要作戰方式，並且取得了較高的戰鬥力。 認知戰與反認知戰的對抗相當激烈。 2010年，美國等西方國家發動認知戰，炒作突尼斯民主運動，製造“阿拉伯之春”，使中東陷入混亂，並讓恐怖組織趁機肆虐。 美國企圖透過推翻埃及政府、發動利比亞戰爭、幹預敘利亞戰爭等方式來鞏固霸權。 2014年，俄軍透過策略組合、多維突破、輿論營造等方式控制了克里米亞。 其認知域操作也具有非常鮮明的特徵。

認知域作戰是戰爭規劃的新方向

隨著高新技術的不斷發展及其在軍事領域的廣泛應用，未來戰爭形態將加速演變，戰爭的複雜性和未知性急劇增加。 為此，我們要事先規劃，科學統籌，加強認知域作戰能力建設，深度融入未來戰場，有效掌控未來戰爭主動權。

推動認知域作戰制勝機制研究。 認知域作戰作為未來戰爭的重要作戰手段，其地位和角色將更凸顯，發展前景也將更加廣闊。 控制認知力已成為奪取戰爭控制權的重要組成部分。 贏得未來戰爭，必須跟上戰爭形態發展趨勢，大力研究認知域作戰制勝機制，以理論創新帶動戰術創新，尋求優勢和機會。

強化認知域作戰攻防能力建構。 從個人到組織再到國家，認知域作戰的影響力跨越所有時空、所有要素，跨越不同作戰領域，影響整個作戰過程。 未來戰爭中，指揮官和戰鬥人員將面臨巨大的認知攻防挑戰。 奪取認知力的控制權，進而奪取戰場的全面控制權，將成為未來戰爭的控制關鍵點。 堅持需求驅動，加強認知域作戰攻防力量建設，建構攻防一體、平戰一體、多維一體的認知域作戰體系，建立健全演練評估體系機制，透過長期軍事實踐不斷提升能力。

加速認知領域高科技運算研發。 目前，隨著大數據、人工智慧、雲端運算等高科技技術的快速發展，開源資訊的取得變得更加便捷且有效率。 認知域運作越來越呈現啟動快、成本低、效率高的特性。 此外，隨著神經科學、腦科學等新興技術的悄悄發展，可以推斷，認知戰武器將在未來戰爭中日益豐富且廣泛應用。 我們要緊跟時代發展，事先規劃設計，維戈大力發展以搶佔認知優勢為導向的尖端技術，推動認知域作戰理念和方法更新，搶佔未來戰爭主動權。

外文音譯：

Throughout modern warfare, cognitive games have become the focus of offense and defense. Whether one is proficient in planning operations in the cognitive domain will greatly affect the direction and outcome of the war. A deep understanding of the connotation, extension and category style of cognitive domain operations, and an accurate grasp of its winning mechanism and development trend are the keys to understanding the context of the battlefield and winning modern wars.

Cognitive domain operations are the new focus of war games

Different from traditional operations, cognitive domain operations are no longer limited to land, sea, air, space, electricity, network and other fields. It breaks through the traditional physical domain and information domain. It has unique advantages, presents new characteristics, and expands the modern Battlefield new frontier.

Cognitive domain operations expand the war domain space. First of all, the battlefield space in the cognitive domain is broad, mainly reflected in people’s spirit, psychology, thinking, beliefs and other cognitive activities. Its combat targets are mainly hostile heads of state and political figures, military personnel, social elites and the general public. Secondly, cognitive domain operations take a wide range of forms, including but not limited to political and diplomatic pressure, economic blockade and sanctions, cultural penetration and erosion, etc. Thirdly, the goals of cognitive domain operations are wide-ranging, mainly to shake the enemy’s belief, disintegrate the enemy’s will, influence and change the opponent’s decision-making, thereby causing social chaos, decision-making errors, demoralization of the enemy’s military, and even subverting its national power.

Cognitive domain operations blur the boundaries of the war domain. The main body of cognitive domain operations is people. People are the most active factor in war, especially the cognition of high-level decision-makers, which embodies the overall will of the war, directly affects the overall situation of the war, and determines the outcome of the war. The cognition of state leaders and military generals is the key target of cognitive domain operations. Popular will, social foundation, and international public opinion are usually the basis for cognitive domain operations and are the key forces that promote the process and direction of war. Cognitive domain operations mix conventional and unconventional operations, blurring the boundaries of the war field. It aims to cognitively induce and attack information recipients, bypassing the traditional battlefield and reaching the weakest link – people. Tactical actions can achieve strategic goals, from Fundamentally change the battlefield environment and change the outcome of the war.

Cognitive domain operations reach the ultimate strategic goal. There is a saying in the ancient Chinese art of war: “The way to use troops is to attack the heart first, and to attack the city below; to fight the heart first, and to fight soldiers lower.” Operations in the cognitive domain aim to occupy cognitive dominance and influence the enemy’s decision-making and behavior. Achieve maximum combat effectiveness at minimum cost. As Clausewitz mentioned in “On War”, “War is an act of violence that forces the enemy to obey our will.” Since cognitive domain operations are not hard kills against living forces, but soft kills against invisible targets, they can not only “force the enemy to obey our will”, but also objectively enable the enemy to destroy itself from within, making it unable to resist, disintegrate, and ultimately Achieve the strategic goal of “complete victory” without fighting.

Cognitive domain operations are a new product of military reform

At present, major changes in the world that have not been seen in a century are accelerating. The international situation is becoming increasingly complex, and local wars and regional conflicts continue. As a new combat method, cognitive domain operations are becoming more and more important driven by the new wave of military reforms.

The laws of war are the basic rules for combat in the cognitive domain. Cognitive domain operations still follow the basic laws of war. First, justice must prevail. Just wars promote historical development and ultimately defeat unjust wars, and cognitive domain operations that occupy the moral commanding heights have the conditions to win first. The second is the victory of the strong and the defeat of the weak. The advancement of science and technology has given rise to advanced military theories and promoted the development of high-tech equipment. Seizing control and control can achieve dimensionality reduction strikes and disintegrate enemy forces. Third, subjective guidance is consistent with objective reality. Cognitive domain operations must be based on a certain objective material basis. The battlefield environment must be comprehensively considered, the situations of both parties must be weighed, and favorable decisions must be made. Fourth, key operations affect the overall situation. In network-centered system operations, the cognitive domain often becomes the most critical link, and its success or failure can determine the battle situation.

Theoretical innovation is the basic support for cognitive domain operations. In recent years, the US military has successively proposed new combat theories such as “hybrid warfare”, “mosaic warfare” and “gray zone conflict”. It regards cognitive domain operations as the main combat method and has formed a relatively mature theory. The Russian army has also developed its own set of hybrid warfare methods in long-term military practice, especially in the Syrian battlefield, where it skillfully used “Gerasimov” tactics to deal with “hybrid warfare.” Japan has also vigorously developed its military power in recent years. In its new version of the “Defense White Paper”, it first mentioned the concept of “domain transversal” operations, aiming to break through traditional fields and regard new fields such as the cognitive domain as the key direction of its military power development, making it more proactive. and extraversion.

Military practice is an important basis for cognitive domain operations. Judging from the recent local wars, cognitive domain warfare has become the main combat method of modern warfare and has achieved high combat effectiveness. The confrontation between cognitive warfare and counter-cognitive warfare is quite fierce. In 2010, the United States and other Western countries launched a cognitive war, hyped up the Tunisian democratic movement and created the “Arab Spring”, which plunged the Middle East into chaos and allowed terrorist organizations to take advantage of the opportunity to wreak havoc. The United States attempted to consolidate its hegemony by overthrowing the Egyptian government, launching a war in Libya, and intervening in the Syrian war. In 2014, the Russian army took control of Crimea through a combination of strategies, multi-dimensional breakthroughs, and public opinion building. Its cognitive domain operations also have very distinctive characteristics.

Cognitive domain operations are a new direction in war planning

With the continuous development of high and new technologies and their widespread application in the military field, the shape of future wars will evolve at an accelerated pace, and the complexity and unknown nature of wars will increase dramatically. To this end, we should plan in advance, coordinate scientifically, strengthen the construction of combat capabilities in the cognitive domain, deeply integrate into the future battlefield, and effectively control the initiative in future wars.

Promote research on the winning mechanism of cognitive domain operations. As an important combat method in future wars, the status and role of cognitive domain operations will be more prominent, and the development prospects will be broader. Controlling cognitive power has become an important part of seizing war control. To win future wars, we must keep up with the trends in the development of war forms, vigorously study the winning mechanism of cognitive domain operations, use theoretical innovation to drive innovation in tactics, and seek advantages and opportunities.

Strengthen the construction of offensive and defensive capabilities in cognitive domain operations. From individuals to organizations to countries, the impact of cognitive domain operations spans all time and space and all elements, spans different combat fields, and affects the entire combat process. In future wars, commanders and combatants will face huge cognitive offensive and defensive challenges. Seizing control of cognitive power, and then seizing comprehensive battlefield control, will become the key point of control in future wars. We should adhere to demand-driven efforts, strengthen the construction of offensive and defensive forces in cognitive domain operations, build a cognitive domain combat system that integrates offense and defense, peacetime and war, and multi-dimensional integration, establish and improve drill and evaluation mechanisms, and continuously improve capabilities through long-term military practice.

Accelerate the research and development of high-tech cognitive domain operations. Currently, with the rapid development of high-tech technologies such as big data, artificial intelligence, and cloud computing, the acquisition of open source information has become more convenient and efficient. Cognitive domain operations are increasingly characterized by fast start-up, low cost, and high efficiency. In addition, with the quiet development of emerging technologies such as neuroscience and brain science, it can be inferred that cognitive warfare weapons will become increasingly abundant and widely used in future wars. We should keep up with the development of the times, plan and design in advance, vigorously develop cutting-edge technologies oriented to seizing cognitive advantages, and promote the update of cognitive domain combat concepts and methods, so as to seize the initiative in future wars.

中國軍事 資料來源： 資料來源：中國軍事網-解放軍報 作者：趙全紅

https://www.81.cn/ll_208543/10170888.html

Chinese Military Cognitive Domain Operations, Chinese Military Informatization, Dissipative Warfare, 中國解放軍敘事戰爭, 認知域操作, 認知戰

國軍認知戰作戰節奏－認知域作戰特徵及發展趨勢分析

Leave a comment

The Chinese Military Cognitive Warfare Operational Battle Rhythm with an Analysis of the Characteristics and Development Trends of Cognitive Domain Operations

原始中文國語:

認知域作戰是以人的意志、信念、思維、心理等為直接作戰對象，通過改變對手認知，進而影響其決策和行動。進入信息化智能化戰爭時代，認知域作戰已經成為大國博弈的重要樣式，各方都力圖以相對可控的方式達成政治目的。洞察把握認知域作戰特點及發展趨勢，對於打贏未來戰爭，具有緊迫而重要的現實意義。

當前，認知域已經作為獨立一域登上戰爭舞台，日益成為大國博弈的常斗之域、必爭之地、勝戰砝碼。分析認知域作戰特點及發展趨勢，至少體現為以下八個方面。

認知域是軍事優勢轉化為政治勝勢的關鍵域

軍事對抗，表面上看是雙方硬實力的對抗，深層次看不管戰爭是什麼性質、出於何種目的，終歸是人的意志的較量。勝利的關鍵是將己方意志強加給受眾的能力。只要剝奪、擊潰了敵人的戰爭意志，就意味著贏得了戰爭。認知域作戰，以人的意志、精神、心理等為對抗目標，增強己方意志的同時削弱敵方的意志，進而達成攻心奪志的政治目的。從這個意義上講，認知域是軍事優勢轉化為政治勝勢的關鍵域。隨著戰爭形態加速向智能化演進，認知質量優勢帶來決策行動優勢，不僅可在道義、法理上佔據制高點，塑造正義合法的有利態勢，還可通過混合戰爭、綜合博弈手段，實現小戰甚至不戰而勝的目的。尤其是大國競爭背景下戰爭成本高昂，各方都希望通過加大認知域爭奪力度，以“人道”且“經濟”的形式，迫使對手知難而退。

通過改變對手認知，可改變其決策和行動

實施認知攻擊的目的，就是用一只“看不見的手”操控對手意志，讓對手感到“我不能”“我不敢”，繼而達到“我不想”的效果。外軍實踐表明，對人的意志、信念、思維、心理實施認知攻擊，可以是長期的文化植入，可以是“信息海洋+捂嘴封聲”式的信息壓制，可以是先入為主、搶先發聲的主動塑造，也可以利用歷史積怨挑動矛盾爆發。當前，信息技術、人工智能技術、媒體技術強化了對認知域的直接作用，利用智能生成軟件，可制造大量認知“彈藥”，精准作用於作戰目標的認知層，直接將“意志強加於對手”，快速改變戰略態勢。展望信息化智能化戰場，態勢感知力量和平台廣泛分布於陸海空天網等作戰域，籌劃、決策、控制等認知行為主導各作戰域行動，尤其是未來智能化戰爭中人機混合的認知優勢將主導戰場，可以通過認知干擾、認知混淆、認知阻斷等手段，制造戰爭認知“迷霧”，誘使對手誤判態勢，做出錯誤決策和行動。

認知域作戰是全時攻防、全員覆蓋、全程使用、全域塑造、全政府行動

認知域作戰呈現出全方位、多層次、超時空、跨領域等特點，模糊了戰時和平時、前方和後方的界限，跨越了戰場和國界，超出了單純的軍事領域，廣泛滲透於政治、經濟、外交等各個社會領域，表現為“五全”特征。全時攻防，沒有平時戰時之分，沒有前方後方之別，表現為全時在線、全時在戰。全員覆蓋，任何人甚至包括智能機器人，都可能成為認知域作戰的目標對象。全程使用，貫穿聯合作戰的戰前戰中戰後，聯合軍事行動未展開，認知塑勢行動已開始，並且伴隨軍事行動而行，不隨軍事行動停而停。全域塑造，認知塑造貫穿戰略、戰役、戰術各層，作用范圍覆蓋陸海空天網各域，跨域賦能，對全域行動都有影響。全政府行動，認知塑造天然具有戰略性，需要跨部門、跨領域、跨軍地、跨層級一致協調行動，以求達到最佳傳播效果。

關鍵是奪控行動或活動的性質定義權、過程主導權、結局評判權

認知博弈斗爭，涉及多個對抗方，看似紛繁復雜，關鍵是圍繞認知域的“三權”展開爭奪。其一，爭奪事件性質定義權。即這個事件該怎麼看，是正義的還是非正義的，是合法的還是非法的。通常采取先發制人搶先定義、建群結盟強行定義、信息壓制單方定義、設置議題套用定義等，引導塑造民眾形成定性認知。其二，爭奪事件過程主導權。即這事該怎麼干、不該怎麼干，誰做的是對的、誰做的是錯的，通常采取設局布阱等方式，試圖按照己方所期望出現的狀態，主導目標事件發展方向、快慢、暫停、繼續與終結。其三，爭奪事件結局評判權。即對這事該怎麼評，誰是獲利方、誰是受損方，誰是眼前的失利者、誰是長遠的受損者，等等。各方都力圖通過掌控事件結局的評判權，放大於己有利之處、放大於敵不利之處，目的是利用事件延伸效應，持續傷敵利己。

道義和法理是各方爭奪的焦點

軍事行動歷來講究“師出有名”。雖然戰爭形態加速演變，但是戰爭從屬於政治的本質屬性不會改變；戰爭性質和人心向背，仍是影響戰爭勝負的關鍵因素。認知域戰場上，佔據了政治、道義、法理的制高點，就能夠贏得民心、道義支持，營造得道多助的輿論氛圍，進而掌握制敵先機。每次戰爭或者沖突，無論是強者還是弱者，無論是進攻方防守方還是第三方，各方都會全力搶佔認知主導權、輿論主動權，千方百計用道義包裝自己、注重宣示正義立場，設法為戰爭定性、為行動正名，以消除阻力、增加助力，塑造以“有道”伐“無道”的有利態勢。戰爭雙方實力對比不同，瞄准佔據道義法理制高點進行的認知對抗方式也會不同。近幾場戰爭表明，當一方軟硬實力均很強大時，即軍事實力強、盟友伙伴眾多、國際話語權佔有率大，常常高調宣戰；當軍事行動有可能引發連鎖反應時，則常常模糊處理“戰”的提法。

信息是認知攻防的基本“彈藥”

網絡信息時代，人類交流方式持續發生復雜深刻變化。現場交互交往逐漸讓位於網絡在線連線，一些大型社交平台成為認知博弈斗爭的主陣地、影響民眾認知的主渠道，以信息為彈藥進行國際網絡封鎖權、話語控制權爭奪成為當今認知對抗的主要行動之一。在這些平台上，各種短視頻成為公眾了解戰況的“第一現場”，信息比炮彈跑得快。圍繞平台的使用與封鎖、主導與規制成為認知域作戰爭奪的焦點，各方努力通過操控社交平台來傳播、放大己方宣傳，聲討、壓制對方宣傳，形成“我說的多、你說的少”“我說的對、你說的錯”“只能我說、不讓你說”的局面。民眾作為大型社交平台的使用者，在“聽”與“說”甚至“做”的過程中，受別人影響，也影響別人，不知不覺地成為幕後推手的代理人和攻擊道具。

軍事行動對認知塑造具有關鍵支撐作用

人類戰爭史表明，兵戰永遠是政治較量的基礎支撐，心戰則是兵戰的效能倍增器。戰場上拿不回來的東西，不能指望在談判桌上拿回來，更不能指望在輿論場上拿回來。現代戰爭中，認知傳播行動總是與聯合軍事行動如影隨形，心戰與兵戰互相影響、互為支撐，兵戰心戰化和心戰兵戰化趨勢更為明顯。從戰爭實踐看，沒有軍事實力是萬萬不能的，但僅有軍事行動又不是萬能的。戰場上的多次勝利，並不是奪取戰爭勝利的充分條件。越南戰爭中，美雖“贏得了每次戰斗，卻輸掉了整個戰爭”。21世紀初，美國連續打的伊拉克戰爭、阿富汗戰爭，贏得了戰場勝利，也沒有贏得政治勝勢。同樣的道理，軍事上的勝勢不等於贏得輿論上的強勢，贏得戰場勝利也不意味著贏得戰略的勝利。現代戰爭中，兩類人員的作用越來越大，一類人員通過編寫成千上萬行代碼謀勝，一類人員通過編寫成千上萬條信息謀勝。這兩類人員數質量都佔優的一方，取勝的概率往往就大。

認知對抗技術越來越直接運用於戰爭

以往戰爭中，對認知域的影響和作用，主要是通過物理域的大量毀傷行動，逐級逐層傳遞到認知域。隨著信息通信、人工智能、生物交叉、腦科學等技術的發展和突破，新的認知戰工具和技術直接瞄准軍事人員。認知對抗不僅使用傳統的信息戰武器，而且還使用以大腦為作戰目標的神經武器庫。屆時，機器將可以讀懂人腦，人腦也將能夠直接控制機器，智能指控系統可以直接提供戰場態勢和決策輔助，逼真的認知彈藥和精准的受眾投放將極大增強社會影響效果。認知對抗技術越來越直接運用於戰爭，原來信息化所隱含的間接認知，正逐步轉變為直接對人的認知進行影響和控制。可以說，先進科技的支撐，使認知域作戰通過構建現代網絡架構、開發數據可視化平台，快速了解信息環境並有效影響目標人群，可以更加直接高效地達成政治目的。

外國人英文原版：

Cognitive domain operations take people’s will, beliefs, thinking, psychology, etc. as direct combat objects, and then affect their decisions and actions by changing the opponent’s cognition. Entering the era of information-based and intelligent warfare, cognitive domain warfare has become an important form of great power game, with all parties striving to achieve political goals in a relatively controllable manner. Gaining insight into the characteristics and development trends of cognitive domain operations is of urgent and important practical significance for winning future wars.

At present, the cognitive domain has entered the war stage as an independent domain, and has increasingly become a common domain, a battleground, and a weight for victory in the game between great powers. Analyze the characteristics and development trends of cognitive domain operations, which are reflected in at least the following eight aspects.

The cognitive domain is the key domain for transforming military advantage into political victory.

On the surface, military confrontation is a confrontation between the hard power of both sides.

On a deeper level, no matter what the nature of the war is and for what purpose, it is ultimately a contest of human wills. The key to victory is the ability to impose your will on your audience. As long as the enemy’s will to fight is deprived and defeated, the war is won. Cognitive domain warfare uses human will, spirit, psychology, etc. as the target of confrontation, strengthening one’s own will while weakening the enemy’s will, thereby achieving the political goal of conquering the heart and mind. In this sense, the cognitive domain is the key domain for transforming military advantage into political victory. As war accelerates its evolution toward intelligence, cognitive quality advantages bring decision-making and action advantages, which can not only occupy the moral and legal high ground and create a favorable situation of justice and legality, but also realize small wars through hybrid warfare and comprehensive game means. Even the purpose of winning without fighting. Especially in the context of great power competition, the cost of war is high. All parties hope to intensify the competition for cognitive domains and force their opponents to retreat in a “humane” and “economic” manner.

By changing the opponent’s perception, it can change its decisions and actions.

The purpose of implementing cognitive attacks is to use an “invisible hand” to control the opponent’s will, making the opponent feel “I can’t” and “I dare not”, and then achieve the effect of “I don’t want to”. Foreign military practice has shown that cognitive attacks on people’s will, beliefs, thinking, and psychology can be long-term cultural implantation, information suppression in the form of “information ocean + covering one’s mouth to silence”, or preemptive speech. Active shaping of political power can also use historical grievances to provoke the outbreak of conflicts. At present, information technology, artificial intelligence technology, and media technology have strengthened their direct effects on the cognitive domain. Using intelligent generation software, a large amount of cognitive “munitions” can be produced to accurately act on the cognitive layer of combat targets, directly imposing “will” to rivals” and quickly change the strategic situation. Looking forward to the informationized and intelligent battlefield, situational awareness forces and platforms are widely distributed in combat domains such as land, sea, air, and space networks. Cognitive behaviors such as planning, decision-making, and control dominate operations in various combat domains, especially the cognition of human-machine hybrids in future intelligent warfare. Advantages will dominate the battlefield. Cognitive interference, cognitive confusion, cognitive blocking and other means can be used to create a “fog” of war cognition, inducing opponents to misjudge the situation and make wrong decisions and actions.

Cognitive domain operations are full-time offense and defense, full personnel coverage, full use, full domain shaping, and full government action.

Cognitive domain operations are all-round, multi-level, hyper-temporal, and cross-domain. They blur the boundaries between wartime and peacetime, front and rear, cross battlefields and national boundaries, go beyond the pure military field, and widely penetrate into politics. , economy, diplomacy and other social fields, showing the characteristics of “five completes”. Full-time offense and defense, there is no distinction between peacetime and wartime, and there is no difference between the front and the rear. It is expressed as being online all the time and in war all the time. Covering all personnel, anyone, including intelligent robots, may become the target of cognitive domain operations. It is used throughout the whole process of joint operations before and during the war. Before the joint military operation is launched, the cognitive shaping operation has begun and will accompany the military operation and will not stop with the military operation. Global shaping, cognitive shaping runs through all levels of strategy, operations, and tactics, and its scope covers all domains of land, sea, air, and space networks. Cross-domain empowerment has an impact on all-domain operations. As a whole-of-government action, cognitive shaping is naturally strategic and requires consistent and coordinated actions across departments, fields, military and localities, and levels to achieve the best communication effect.

The key is to seize control over the right to define the nature of an action or activity, the right to dominate the process, and the right to judge the outcome.

The cognitive game struggle involves multiple opposing parties and seems complicated. The key is to compete for the “three powers” in the cognitive domain. First, fight for the right to define the nature of the event. That is, how to view this incident, whether it is just or unjust, legal or illegal. Usually, pre-emptive definitions, group alliances and forced definitions, information suppression and unilateral definitions, setting issues and applying definitions are usually adopted to guide and shape the public to form qualitative perceptions. Second, compete for dominance over the event process. That is, how to do something, how not to do it, who did it right and who did it wrong, usually by setting up a trap and other methods, trying to dominate the development direction of the target event according to the state that one’s own side expects. Fast and slow, pause, continue and end. Third, compete for the right to judge the outcome of the incident. That is, how to evaluate this matter, who is the gainer and who is the loser, who is the immediate loser, who is the long-term loser, etc. All parties are trying to control the outcome of the incident by amplifying the advantages to themselves and the disadvantages to the enemy. The purpose is to use the extended effect of the incident to continue to harm the enemy and benefit themselves.

Morality and legal principles are the focus of contention between all parties.

Military operations have always paid attention to the principle of “discipline and reputation”. Although the shape of war is evolving at an accelerated pace, the essential nature of war as subordinate to politics will not change; the nature of war and the support of people’s hearts are still the key factors that affect the outcome of a war. On the battlefield in the cognitive domain, by occupying the commanding heights of politics, morality, and law, we can win the hearts and minds of the people and moral support, create a public opinion atmosphere in which moral support is abundant, and then seize the opportunity to defeat the enemy. In every war or conflict, whether it is the strong or the weak, whether the attacker, the defender, or a third party, all parties will try their best to seize cognitive dominance and the initiative of public opinion. They will do everything possible to package themselves with morality, focus on declaring a just position, and try to find ways to defend themselves. Qualify the war, justify the action, eliminate resistance, increase support, and create a favorable situation in which “righteousness” defeats “unrighteousness”. The strength balance between the two sides in the war is different, and the cognitive confrontation methods aimed at occupying the moral and legal high ground will also be different. Recent wars have shown that when a party has strong soft and hard power, that is, it has strong military strength, many allies and partners, and a large share of international voice, it often declares war in a high-profile manner; when military actions may trigger chain reactions, it is often handled in a vague manner. The word “war”.

Information is the basic “ammunition” for cognitive attack and defense.

In the network information age, the way humans communicate continues to undergo complex and profound changes. On-site interactive interactions have gradually given way to online connections. Some large-scale social platforms have become the main battleground for cognitive games and the main channels for influencing public cognition. Using information as ammunition to fight for the right to block international networks and control discourse has become today’s norm. One of the main actions of confrontation. On these platforms, various short videos have become the “first scene” for the public to understand the war situation, and information travels faster than cannonballs. The use and blocking, dominance and regulation of platforms have become the focus of battles in the cognitive domain. All parties strive to spread and amplify their own propaganda, denounce and suppress the other party’s propaganda by manipulating social platforms, forming a “I say more, you say less” “A situation where “I’m right and you’re wrong” and “I can only say it and you’re not allowed to say it”. As users of large-scale social platforms, the public is influenced by and affects others in the process of “listening”, “speaking” and even “doing”, and unknowingly becomes the agents and attack props of those behind the scenes.

Military operations play a key supporting role in shaping cognition.

The history of human war shows that military warfare is always the basic support of political contests, while psychological warfare is the effectiveness multiplier of military warfare. What cannot be retrieved on the battlefield cannot be expected to be retrieved at the negotiation table, let alone in the field of public opinion. In modern warfare, cognitive-communication operations always go hand in hand with joint military operations. Mental warfare and military warfare influence and support each other. The trend of military warfare becoming mental warfare and mental warfare becoming military warfare is more obvious. From the perspective of war practice, it is impossible without military strength, but military actions alone are not omnipotent. Multiple victories on the battlefield are not a sufficient condition for victory in war. In the Vietnam War, although the United States “won every battle, it lost the entire war.” At the beginning of the 21st century, the United States fought successive wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, winning battlefield victories but not political victory. By the same token, military victory does not mean winning public opinion, and winning the battlefield does not mean winning strategic victory. In modern warfare, two types of people play an increasingly important role: those who win by writing thousands of lines of code, and those who win by writing thousands of messages. The side with superior quantity and quality of these two types of personnel will often have a higher probability of winning.

Cognitive countermeasures technology is increasingly used directly in warfare. In past wars, the influence and effect on the cognitive domain were mainly transmitted to the cognitive domain level by level through a large number of damaging actions in the physical domain. With the development and breakthroughs of information communications, artificial intelligence, biocrossing, brain science and other technologies, new cognitive warfare tools and technologies are directly targeting military personnel. Cognitive countermeasures use not only traditional information warfare weapons, but also an arsenal of neural weapons that target the brain. By then, machines will be able to read human brains, and human brains will also be able to directly control machines. Intelligent command and control systems can directly provide battlefield situation and decision-making assistance. Realistic cognitive ammunition and precise audience placement will greatly enhance the social impact. Cognitive countermeasures technology is increasingly being used directly in warfare. The indirect cognition implicit in informatization is gradually transforming into a direct influence and control of people’s cognition. It can be said that with the support of advanced technology, cognitive domain operations can achieve political goals more directly and efficiently by building a modern network architecture and developing a data visualization platform to quickly understand the information environment and effectively influence target groups.

中國軍事參考：https://www.81.cn/ll_208543/10178888.html

China's Informatization - 中國信息化, Chinese Military Views - 中國軍事觀, Dissipative Warfare, 中國解放軍敘事戰爭, 以認知為中心的戰爭：應對複雜戰爭的作戰概念, 認知戰, 資料來源：中國外交部

中國軍事認知戰—「以決策為中心的戰爭」思想與認知複雜性：武器化的複雜性

Leave a comment

Chinese Military Cognitive Warfare – Thoughts of “decision-centered warfare” and cognitive complexity: Weaponized Complexity

繁體中文

——由「決策中心戰」與認知複雜性所想到的

中国军网-解放军报

編按 複雜性科學是當代科學發展的前沿領域之一。 英國物理學家霍金稱「21世紀將是複雜性科學的世紀」。 作為人類社會的社會現象，戰爭從來就是一個充滿蓋然性的複雜巨系統。 近年來，隨著戰爭形態的演變，傳統科學體系下的知識論越來越難以滿足戰爭實踐發展的需要。 關注複雜性科學原理和思維方法，或將成為開啟現代戰爭大門的鑰匙。 這篇文章從複雜性科學角度對「決策中心戰」作一研究探討。

「決策中心戰」是近年來出現的新概念。 緣何提出「決策中心戰」？ 按美軍的說法，要「打一場讓對手看不懂的戰爭」。 進入21世紀以來，隨著戰爭形態的演變和作戰方式的不斷變革，美軍發現傳統意義上的網路中心戰越來越難以適應戰場實際，「決策中心戰」在此背景下應運而生。

一、創造複雜

所謂“決策中心戰”，就是在人工智慧等先進技術的加持下，透過對作戰平台的升級改造、分散式部署實現多樣化戰術，在保障自身戰術選擇優勢的同時，向敵方施加高複雜度 ，以乾擾其指揮決策能力，在新維度上實現對敵的壓倒性優勢。

為什麼「對手看不懂」？ 其實就是要透過分散式部署、彈性組合、智慧化指控，讓對手在認知上就對戰場態勢和作戰機制不理解，無所適從。 這是將戰爭對抗從機械化戰爭中比誰“力量大”，到信息化戰爭中比誰“速度快”，再到在未來戰爭中比誰“決策對”的又一次轉變。 用中國古代軍事家孫子的話說就是，“不戰而屈人之兵，善之善者也”，通過巧妙地指揮控制和決策，使得戰場情況變得更加複雜，讓對手沒辦法打仗。

如何做到這一點呢？ 簡單地說，就是利用複雜系統的性質，找到對手的「命門」加以利用和控制。 一個基本方法就是，透過增加複雜性重塑對手的決策流程，逼迫對手引入新的決策參量，導致其決策變得複雜，從而改變因果關係和決策流程，最終使其走向混亂。 過去對抗局面之所以能夠發揮平衡作用，是因為所有參與者都清楚博弈的結果，因而容易做出權衡，但複雜性往往會破壞這種平衡。 這也是為什麼複雜性能夠作為武器的原因。

需要注意的是，戰場對任何一方都是公平的。 在未來戰場上，要讓敵人單向感到決策複雜，而己方不被複雜所困擾，首先要在指揮控制能力上優於對手。 戰場決策的複雜度主要體現在「OODA」循環的判斷和決策環節。 在正常環境下，「OODA」循環可以走完從觀察、判斷、決策到行動的完整週期。 但如果有辦法讓戰場變得更複雜，使得對手始終無法及時作出有效判斷，進而無法進入決策和行動環節，就可以把對手的「OODA」循環始終限制在觀察和判斷環節上，無法形成閉環， 這或許就是「決策中心戰」試圖創造複雜性想要達到的結果。 因此，如何快速作出判斷，就成為首要關注的問題。 如果這個認知過程能夠在人工智慧等先進技術支援下快速完成的話，也就是實現所謂的智慧認知，就可以大幅加快「OODA」循環速度，奪取單邊優勢。

在觀察的基礎上得出正確的判斷，是做出正確決策的前提。 但這是建立在「具有認知能力」這個條件下才能做到的。 目前，在指揮資訊系統、兵棋推演系統等系統中，這些認知工作基本上都是由人來完成的。 由人工智慧系統自主地完成判斷及決策，過去的嘗試幾乎都不成功，因為智慧認知建模的問題始終沒有解決好。 各種模型表現出來的行為都或多或少帶有“機械味”，並不能真正顯示出智能的特徵。 外軍這些年也一直將「人的行為建模」作為研究重點，但目前來看仍然進展緩慢。 智能認知為什麼這麼難，又難在哪裡？ 筆者認為，其實核心困難就在如何理解和處置複雜性上面。

二、理解複雜

本世紀之初，美國蘭德公司針對2005年前後某熱點地區可能發生的軍事衝突，曾利用模擬系統對美國空軍作戰需求進行了1700餘次推演，然後進行統計分析，最後得出了美空軍如何 在戰場上保持優勢的結論。 這種統計分析方法有一個基本的假設：每個試驗都是獨立且無序的，規則之間也不會相互影響。 這就像丟硬幣一樣，丟一次正面，丟第二次有可能也是正面。 但如果丟1萬次，結果某一面的機率就會越來越趨近50%。 這種方法用於物理研究時是科學準確的，但移植到人類社會問題例如戰爭問題研究時，情況就變得不同了。

人是有認知的，不會像物理實體那樣只遵從物理定律，指揮官在對作戰問題進行分析時也不會只是簡單地機械重複。 通常情況下，人在決策時，一定會考慮先前的結果，導致對下一步行動有所調整。 這樣就會出現人類行為固有的冪律特徵，也就是常說的「二八律」。 所以，我們不能簡單地複製物理思維去思考人類社會的事情。

之所以會這樣，主要還是因為我們常常習慣用還原論的簡單思考方法來思考問題。 簡單系統結構不變，結果具有確定性，因果對應清楚，可重複、可預測、可分解還原等，已成為我們預設的科學思考方法。 但世界上還存在著許多複雜系統，這些系統存在著整體性質，像是人體、社會、經濟、戰爭等，都屬於這一類。 什麼叫整體性質？ 就是觀察局部得不到，但在整體上看卻又存在的，就是整體性質。 舉例來說，一個活人和一個死人從成分上來看都一樣，但一死一活，差別就在於是否有生命，生命就是一種整體性質。 複雜系統結構可變，具有適應性、不確定性、湧現性、非線性等特點，且結果不重複，也不可預測。 社會、經濟、戰爭、城市包括智慧系統，這些與人有關的系統都有這些特點，其實它們都是典型的複雜系統。 所以，戰爭具有「勝戰不復」的特點，其實反映的就是戰爭複雜系統的「不可重複」性質。

正是因為複雜系統存在複雜性，原因和結果不能一一對應，會導致相似性原理失效，所以也就無法用傳統方法進行建模和研究。 為解決複雜性問題，過去採取的主要是一些傳統物理學方法，例如統計方法，以及基於Agent的簡單生命體建模方法。 前面提到的蘭德公司研究就是如此，雖然能解決部分問題，但將其用於解決與人有關尤其是與認知相關的問題時，得到的結果卻與實際偏離很大，不盡如人意 。

為什麼會這樣呢？ 這是因為戰爭複雜度與物理複雜性所產生的源點不一樣。 物理複雜性的來源往往在於其物理運動規律是複雜的；而戰爭複雜性卻來自人的認知。 因為人不是雜亂無章、沒有思想的粒子，也不是只有簡單生命邏輯的低等生物，而是具有判斷和決策認知能力的智慧生物。 人會透過因果關係對結果進行反思、總結經驗再調整，然後決定後面如何行動。 而且，人的認知還會不斷發展，這又會進一步影響後續的認知，但由於認知具有很大的不確定性，所以未來的行動也就難以預測。

可以這樣說，在目前的技術條件下，可預測的基本上都是物理世界的簡單系統規律，而人的認知對社會或戰爭的影響往往是難以預測的。 所以說，拿物理思維去思考人類社會的事情是我們常犯的錯誤。 基於認知的複雜性，與那些一成不變的物理規律截然不同，我們應對戰爭中的複雜性，就必須針對「認知」這個核心特點，在指揮控制方面下功夫。

三、應對複雜

「決策中心戰」的核心在於認知的加快。 因為戰爭中幾乎所有的變化，都可以看成是認知的升級和複雜化。 在筆者看來，應對“決策中心戰”，需要“以複雜對抗複雜”，從基礎工作做起。

一是要理解「決策中心戰」的核心理念。 即透過主動創造複雜性來掌握戰場主動權。 對己方來說，需要管理好自身的複雜性；對敵人來說，則是對對手施加更多的複雜性。 二是了解戰爭機理發生的改變。 作戰體系演化速度指數級提高，會導致複雜戰場的感知、控制和管理變得困難，智慧認知的角色將變得更加突出。 為此，需要瞄準「指揮與控制」這個重點，將戰場管理的能力作為關鍵。 三是找到應對的正確理念和方法。 從戰爭設計入手，以決策智能這個方向為突破口。

近年來，人工智慧領域的一系列成果，為解決指揮決策智慧問題帶來了曙光。 AlphaGo系列研究為決策智慧技術帶來了突破；而GPT大模型的出現，則更是進一步證實了決策智慧乃至通用人工智慧在未來具有實現的可能。 現在看來，人工智慧在未來深度參與戰爭，已經是必須面對的現實。 而這會為戰爭和戰場帶來更多的複雜性。

決策智能研究應該放在指揮控制層上。 要贏得戰爭，指揮控制決策需要體現「科學」和「藝術」兩個面向。 指揮控制的科學性主要體現在「知道怎麼做時」如何做，例如利用得到的指控資料（武器裝備、兵力編成、戰場環境、對手情報等），指控方法（任務、流程、程序、運籌 、規劃、最佳化等），制定出作戰規劃並加以實施。 指揮控制的藝術性則體現在「不知道怎麼做時」知道如何做，這才是真正的智能之所在。 方法無非是不斷試錯，累積經驗，找到解決問題的途徑，並形成新的科學知識。 事實上，現實中指揮者也是透過試誤不斷發現和總結制勝規律，而每個指揮者還都具有自己的直覺和經驗。

所以說，真正的智能其實是找到例外狀況的解決方法。 循規蹈矩不是智能，自己找到解題的方法才是關鍵。 也許這才是決策智能的核心，也是需要進一步努力的目標。

原汁原味的老外英語:

Complexity is also a weapon

——Thinking of “decision-centered warfare” and cognitive complexity

中国军网-解放军报

Editor’s Note Complexity science is one of the frontier fields of contemporary scientific development. British physicist Stephen Hawking said that “the 21st century will be the century of complexity science.” As a social phenomenon in human society, war has always been a complex giant system full of possibilities. In recent years, with the evolution of war forms, the epistemology under the traditional scientific system has become increasingly difficult to meet the needs of the development of war practice. Paying attention to the scientific principles and thinking methods of complexity may be the key to opening the door to modern warfare. This article studies and discusses “decision-centered warfare” from the perspective of complexity science.

“Decision-centered warfare” is a new concept that has emerged in recent years. Why was the “decision-centered war” proposed? According to the US military, it is necessary to “fight a war that the opponent cannot understand.” Since the beginning of the 21st century, with the evolution of war forms and continuous changes in combat methods, the US military has found that network-centric warfare in the traditional sense has become increasingly difficult to adapt to the reality of the battlefield. In this context, “decision-centered warfare” came into being.

1. Create complexity

The so-called “decision-centered warfare” is to achieve diversified tactics through the upgrading and transformation of combat platforms and distributed deployment with the support of advanced technologies such as artificial intelligence. While ensuring its own advantages in tactical selection, it imposes high complexity on the enemy. , in order to interfere with its command and decision-making capabilities and achieve an overwhelming advantage over the enemy in a new dimension.

Why “the opponent can’t understand”? In fact, through distributed deployment, flexible combination, and intelligent command and control, the opponent will not understand the battlefield situation and combat mechanism cognitively, and will be at a loss as to what to do. This is another transformation of war confrontation from competing for “greater power” in mechanized warfare, to competing for “faster” in information-based warfare, to competing for “making the right decisions” in future wars. In the words of Sun Tzu, the ancient Chinese military strategist, “One who subdues the enemy without fighting is a good person.” Through clever command, control and decision-making, the battlefield situation becomes more complicated, making it impossible for the opponent to fight.

How to do this? Simply put, it is to use the nature of complex systems to find the opponent’s “vital gate” to exploit and control. A basic method is to reshape the opponent’s decision-making process by increasing complexity, forcing the opponent to introduce new decision-making parameters, causing its decision-making to become complicated, thereby changing the causal relationship and decision-making process, and ultimately leading to chaos. Adversarial situations have been able to balance in the past because all participants knew the outcome of the game, making it easy to make trade-offs, but complexity often destroys this balance. This is why complexity can be used as a weapon.

It should be noted that the battlefield is fair to any party. In the future battlefield, in order for the enemy to feel the complexity of decision-making in one direction and not to be troubled by the complexity, we must first be superior to the opponent in command and control capabilities. The complexity of battlefield decision-making is mainly reflected in the judgment and decision-making links of the “OODA” loop. Under normal circumstances, the “OODA” cycle can complete the complete cycle from observation, judgment, decision-making to action. However, if there is a way to make the battlefield more complex so that the opponent cannot make effective judgments in a timely manner, and thus cannot enter the decision-making and action links, the opponent’s “OODA” loop can always be limited to the observation and judgment links, and a closed loop cannot be formed. This may be the result of “decision-centered warfare” trying to create complexity. Therefore, how to make quick judgments has become a primary concern. If this cognitive process can be completed quickly with the support of advanced technologies such as artificial intelligence, that is, so-called intelligent cognition can be achieved, the speed of the “OODA” cycle can be greatly accelerated and unilateral advantages can be achieved.

Drawing correct judgments based on observation is the prerequisite for making correct decisions. But this can only be done under the condition of “having cognitive ability”. Currently, in systems such as command information systems and war game deduction systems, these cognitive tasks are basically completed by humans. Past attempts to autonomously complete judgments and decisions by artificial intelligence systems have been almost unsuccessful because the problem of intelligent cognitive modeling has never been solved. The behaviors displayed by various models are more or less “mechanical” and cannot truly show the characteristics of intelligence. Foreign militaries have also been focusing on “human behavior modeling” in recent years, but progress is still slow at present. Why is intelligent cognition so difficult, and what is the difficulty? The author believes that the core difficulty lies in how to understand and deal with complexity.

2. Understand complexity

At the beginning of this century, the Rand Corporation of the United States used a simulation system to conduct more than 1,700 deductions on the combat needs of the U.S. Air Force in response to possible military conflicts in a certain hotspot area around 2005. It then conducted statistical analysis and finally concluded how the U.S. Air Force Conclusion to maintain superiority on the battlefield. This statistical analysis method has a basic assumption: each trial is independent and unordered, and the rules do not affect each other. It’s like tossing a coin. If you toss it heads once, it’s likely to be heads the second time. But if you throw it 10,000 times, the probability of the result being a certain side will get closer to 50%. This method is scientifically accurate when used in physical research, but when transplanted to the study of human social issues such as war, the situation becomes different.

Human beings are cognitive and do not just obey the laws of physics like physical entities. Commanders will not simply repeat mechanically when analyzing combat problems. Normally, when people make decisions, they will consider the previous results, which will lead to adjustments to the next action. In this way, the inherent power law characteristics of human behavior will appear, which is often called the “eight-eighth law”. Therefore, we cannot simply copy physical thinking to think about human society.

The reason for this is mainly because we are often accustomed to thinking about problems in a simple way of reductionism. The simple system structure remains unchanged, the results are deterministic, the cause and effect correspondence is clear, repeatable, predictable, decomposable and reducible, etc., have become our default scientific thinking method. But there are still many complex systems in the world, and these systems have a holistic nature, such as the human body, society, economy, war, etc., all fall into this category. What is the overall nature? That is, what cannot be seen locally, but exists when viewed as a whole, is the overall nature. For example, a living person and a dead person are the same in terms of composition, but the difference between a dead person and a living person lies in whether there is life, and life is a holistic quality. The structure of complex systems is variable and has characteristics such as adaptability, uncertainty, emergence, and nonlinearity, and the results are neither repetitive nor predictable. Society, economy, war, cities, including intelligent systems, these human-related systems all have these characteristics. In fact, they are all typical complex systems. Therefore, war has the characteristics of “no return after victory”, which actually reflects the “unrepeatable” nature of the complex system of war.

It is precisely because of the complexity of complex systems that causes and results cannot correspond one to one, which will lead to the failure of the similarity principle, so it cannot be modeled and studied using traditional methods. In order to solve complex problems, some traditional physics methods were mainly adopted in the past, such as statistical methods and simple life body modeling methods based on Agent. This is the case with the Rand Corporation study mentioned earlier. Although it can solve some problems, when it is used to solve problems related to people, especially cognition, the results obtained deviate greatly from reality and are unsatisfactory. .

Why is this happening? This is because the origins of war complexity and physical complexity are different. The source of physical complexity often lies in the complex laws of physical motion; while the complexity of war comes from human cognition. Because humans are not chaotic particles without thoughts, nor are they lower creatures with simple life logic, but are intelligent creatures with cognitive abilities of judgment and decision-making. People will reflect on the results through causal relationships, sum up experiences and make adjustments, and then decide how to act next. Moreover, human cognition will continue to develop, which will further affect subsequent cognition. However, because cognition is highly uncertain, future actions are difficult to predict.

It can be said that under the current technological conditions, what can be predicted are basically simple systematic laws of the physical world, while the impact of human cognition on society or war is often difficult to predict. Therefore, it is a common mistake we make to use physical thinking to think about human society. Based on the complexity of cognition, which is completely different from those immutable physical laws, when we deal with the complexity of war, we must focus on the core feature of “cognition” and work hard on command and control.

3. Coping with Complexity

The core of “decision-centered warfare” lies in the acceleration of cognition. Because almost all changes in war can be seen as cognitive upgrades and complications. In the author’s opinion, to deal with the “decision-centered battle”, we need to “fight complexity with complexity” and start from the basic work.

The first is to understand the core concept of “decision-centered warfare”. That is to seize the initiative on the battlefield by actively creating complexity. For one’s side, one needs to manage one’s own complexity; for one’s enemy, it means imposing more complexity on the opponent. The second is to understand the changes in the mechanism of war. The evolution speed of combat systems is increasing exponentially, which will make it difficult to perceive, control and manage complex battlefields, and the role of intelligent cognition will become more prominent. To this end, it is necessary to focus on the focus of “command and control” and regard battlefield management capabilities as the key. The third is to find the correct concepts and methods of coping. Starting from war design, we take the direction of decision-making intelligence as a breakthrough.

In recent years, a series of achievements in the field of artificial intelligence have brought hope to solving the problem of intelligent command and decision-making. The AlphaGo series of research has brought breakthroughs to decision-making intelligence technology; and the emergence of the GPT large model has further confirmed that decision-making intelligence and even general artificial intelligence are possible in the future. It now seems that artificial intelligence will be deeply involved in wars in the future, which is a reality that must be faced. And this will bring more complexity to war and battlefields.

Decision intelligence research should be placed at the command and control level. To win a war, command and control decisions need to embody both “science” and “art.” The scientific nature of command and control is mainly reflected in how to do it “when you know how to do it”, such as using the obtained command data (weapons and equipment, force formation, battlefield environment, opponent intelligence, etc.), command methods (tasks, processes, procedures, operations planning, etc.) , planning, optimization, etc.), formulate a combat plan and implement it. The artistry of command and control is reflected in knowing how to do it “when you don’t know how to do it.” This is where true intelligence lies. The method is nothing more than continuous trial and error, accumulating experience, finding ways to solve problems, and forming new scientific knowledge. In fact, in reality, commanders continue to discover and summarize winning rules through trial and error, and each commander also has his own intuition and experience.

Therefore, true intelligence is actually finding solutions to exceptions. Following rules is not intelligence, finding your own way to solve problems is the key. Perhaps this is the core of decision-making intelligence and a goal that requires further efforts.

中國軍事原文來源：https://www.81.cn/yw_208727/162348888.html

China's Informatization - 中國信息化, Dissipative Warfare, 中國解放軍敘事戰爭, 以認知為中心的戰爭：應對複雜戰爭的作戰概念, 認知戰

中國解放軍認為軍事人工智慧是一把雙面刃

Leave a comment

China’s PLA Considers Military Artificial Intelligence a Double-Edged Sword

原軍國語：

隨著智慧時代的到來，人工智慧正以超乎人們想像的速度走近，不僅影響著各行各業，也正在改變我們的認知和觀念。 作為對技術變革天生敏感的領域，人工智慧的軍事發展和應用正在蓬勃發展。

目前，隨著資訊科技、感測器、大數據、物聯網的快速發展，人工智慧軍事應用正迎來新一輪機會。 滲透到軍事應用各個領域，具有高效指揮、精準打擊、自動化操作、智慧行為的人工智慧武器裝備將為未來戰場貢獻獨特的「機器智慧和力量」。

恩格斯曾說過，尖端科技的應用首先始於軍事領域。 當新科技顯著增強軍事作戰能力時，就會帶來新的軍事變革。 美國、俄羅斯等傳統軍事強國預見了人工智慧技術在軍事領域的廣泛應用前景。 他們都將人工智慧視為「改變戰爭遊戲規則」的顛覆性技術，並認為未來的戰爭將是智慧化戰爭和未來軍備。 這場比賽將是一場智慧軍備競賽，並已提前規劃，希望抓住人工智慧軍事應用的機遇，力爭與潛在對手產生「代溝」。 幾個月前，美國國防部副部長沙納漢正式發布了關於建立「聯合人工智慧中心」的備忘錄，將進一步加大人工智慧在美軍軍事計畫中的應用。 俄羅斯也將人工智慧視為未來軍事競爭的製高點，正在加緊研發能夠駕駛車輛的人形機器人以及組成能夠與人類士兵並肩作戰的機器人部隊。

需要看到的是，人工智慧的軍事應用是一把「雙面刃」。 “這可能成為人類發生過的最好的事情，也可能成為最糟糕的事情。” 霍金對人工智慧的評價啟示我們面對人工智慧「來勢洶洶」的軍事應用要保持足夠的謹慎。 小心。 未來，隨著智慧無人系統大量應用於戰場，戰爭成本將大幅降低，戰鬥人員「零傷亡」有望成為現實。 這很容易導致軍事大國更隨意地使用武力。 在複雜的戰場環境下，高智慧無人作戰系統極有可能遇到辨識錯誤、通訊劣化，甚至在敵方電磁、網路攻擊後「叛逃反擊」等問題。 濫殺無辜、系統失控的情況更是有可能發生。 為智慧武器的軍事應用帶來了無盡的隱憂。

可見，與戰爭有關的重大問題絕不能輕易交給機器來決定。 即使人工智慧的軍事應用日益成熟，我們也不能允許智慧武器的「野蠻生長」。 我們需要警惕人工智慧可能帶來的安全隱憂。 法律、道德和許多其他問題。 加強社會保障監管，形成適應人工智慧時代的社會治理模式； 積極參與人工智慧國際軍控討論和談判，為人工智慧帶來的安全、法律和倫理問題貢獻中國智慧和中國方案； 牢固地建立人類是人機關係的主導思想，才能安全有效地掌控人工智慧，讓其為人類和平發展服務，而不是讓人工智慧成為「魔鬼的幫兇」。

對於這種有望深刻改變未來戰爭形態的技術形態，我們不僅要保持清醒的頭腦，還要充分激發其活力。 從軍事變革的歷史來看，科學技術在歷次變革中都扮演了拉動動作用和基礎支撐作用。 誰對技術變革有敏感度，誰先實現技術突破，誰就能掌握戰爭新規則，掌控戰爭。 贏得未來戰爭的製高點。 對軍隊來說，無法正確預判軍事技術突破方向、掌握戰爭格局變化，不僅會導致「技術氾濫」。

差異”，但也導致核心能力、國家安全等危機。

今天，面對科技發展的“大變革”和“大突破”，我們應該從設計戰爭、掌握規則的角度，深刻把握人工智能對戰爭形態演變的內在驅動影響的勝利，真正掌握贏得未來戰爭的主動權。 我們要牢牢掌握人工智慧發展重大歷史機遇，做好戰略規劃，突顯人工智慧的目標牽引和規劃引領，密切追蹤前沿技術，積極主動行動，切實維護國家安全。

現代外國人英語：

With the dawn of the intelligent era, artificial intelligence is approaching at a speed beyond people’s imagination, not only impacting all walks of life, but also changing our understanding and concepts. As a field that is inherently sensitive to technological changes, the military development and application of artificial intelligence is booming.

Currently, with the rapid development of information technology, sensors, big data and the Internet of Things, the military application of artificial intelligence is ushering in a new round of opportunities. Penetrating into all fields of military applications, artificial intelligence weapons and equipment with efficient command, precise strike, automated operation and intelligent behavior will contribute unique “machine intelligence and power” to the future battlefield.

Engels once said that the application of cutting-edge technology first began in the military field. When new technologies significantly enhance military combat capabilities, they will lead to new military changes. Traditional military powers such as the United States and Russia foresee the broad application prospects of artificial intelligence technology in the military field. They all regard artificial intelligence as a disruptive technology that “changes the rules of the war game” and believe that future wars will be intelligent wars and future armaments. The competition will be an intelligent arms race, and has been planned in advance, hoping to seize the opportunity of artificial intelligence military applications and strive to create a “generation gap” with potential opponents. A few months ago, U.S. Deputy Secretary of Defense Shanahan officially issued a memorandum on the establishment of a “Joint Artificial Intelligence Center”, which will further increase the application of artificial intelligence in U.S. military military projects. Russia also regards artificial intelligence as the commanding heights of future military competition, and is stepping up the development of humanoid robots that can drive vehicles and the formation of robot troops that can fight side by side with human soldiers.

It should be noted that the military application of artificial intelligence is a “double-edged sword.” “It may become the best thing that has ever happened to mankind, or it may become the worst thing.” Hawking’s evaluation of artificial intelligence enlightens us to maintain sufficient caution in the face of the “menacing” military applications of artificial intelligence. careful. In the future, as a large number of intelligent unmanned systems are used on the battlefield, the cost of war will be greatly reduced, and “zero casualties” of combatants are expected to become a reality. This can easily lead to more casual use of force by military powers. In a complex battlefield environment, highly intelligent unmanned combat systems are very likely to encounter problems such as recognition errors, communication degradation, and even “defection and counterattack” after enemy electromagnetic and network attacks. Indiscriminate killing of innocent people and loss of control of the system are even more likely to occur. It brings endless worries to the military application of smart weapons.

It can be seen that major issues related to war must not be easily left to machines to make decisions. Even if the military application of artificial intelligence becomes increasingly mature, we cannot allow the “barbaric growth” of smart weapons. We need to be alert to the security and safety risks that artificial intelligence may bring. Legal, ethical and many other issues. Social security supervision and control should be strengthened to form a social governance model adapted to the era of artificial intelligence; actively participate in discussions and negotiations on international arms control of artificial intelligence, and contribute Chinese wisdom and Chinese solutions to the security, legal and ethical issues brought by artificial intelligence; firmly establish The idea that humans are the leaders in the human-machine relationship enables safe and effective control of artificial intelligence and allows it to serve the peaceful development of mankind, rather than letting artificial intelligence become an “accomplice of the devil.”

Regarding this technological form that is expected to profoundly change the form of future warfare, we must not only keep a clear mind, but also fully stimulate its vitality. Judging from the history of military changes, science and technology have played a stimulating and basic supporting role in previous changes. Whoever has the sensitivity to technological changes and achieves technological breakthroughs first can master the new rules of war and control the war. The commanding heights to win future wars. For an army, the inability to correctly predict the direction of military technological breakthroughs and grasp changes in war patterns will not only lead to “technological generational differences”, but also lead to crises such as core capabilities and national security.

Today, in the face of “big changes” and “big breakthroughs” in the development of science and technology, we should deeply grasp the intrinsic driving influence of artificial intelligence on the evolution of war forms from the perspective of designing wars and mastering the rules of victory, and truly seize the initiative to win future wars. We need to firmly grasp the major historical opportunities for the development of artificial intelligence, do a good job in strategic planning, highlight the goal traction and planning leadership of intelligence, closely track cutting-edge technologies, and take proactive actions to effectively safeguard national security.

人民解放軍 來源：https://www.81.cn/jfjbmap/content/2018-11/08/content_88888.htm