中國探索制勝認知作戰的軍事設計

Chinese Military Designs for Exploring Winning Cognitive Operations

國語原版:

編按

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。 認知域作戰中,各方圍繞輿論掌控、資訊引導、認知塑造等展開激烈爭奪,不僅有實體對抗,更有來自虛擬空間的較量,展現出數位時代「技術+」的顯著特徵。 探尋認知域作戰制勝之道,對於掌控認知域作戰主動權、打贏未來戰爭具有重要的現實意義。

奪取控腦權成為認知域作戰終極目標

大腦是一切思考活動的物質基礎,是影響和控制人類作出行為改變的指揮中樞,而感覺、知覺和意識則構成了大腦反映世界的三個面向。 如何贏得控腦權,日益成為交戰各方在認知域作戰領域研究與關注的重點。

積極爭奪感覺控制權。 感覺是客觀事物的特性在人腦中引起的反應,是形成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,人類開始逐步獲得在生理層面對大腦進行幹預和控制的能力。 根據國外實驗結果顯示,吸入催產素會讓人更信任他人,更能產生共感,進而影響一個人的親社會性和道德表現。 未來作戰,交戰各方透過利用聲光電等物理刺激,或化學藥物作用於目標對象的聽覺、視覺、嗅覺等感覺系統,甚至將上述影響直接作用於人的腦部,在目標對像大腦中激發出 特定的情緒反應,可實現對其在生理層面的認知影響和控制。

有效爭奪知覺抑制權。 知覺是在感覺基礎上形成的,反映客觀事物的整體形象和表面連結的心理過程。 其中,個體的態度、動機、興趣,以及過去的經驗和未來的預期,是影響個體對知覺目標知覺的關鍵變項。 戰時,交戰各方透過瞄準目標對象心理上的疑點、弱點、需求點,抓住有利時機,借助特定的訊息,對目標對象的知覺進行情感影響、心智誘導或攻心瓦解,以增加目標對象對 戰爭風險的預期,削弱其抵抗意志和作戰決心,從而實現小戰、少戰甚至不戰而屈人之兵的目的。

全面爭奪意識塑造權。 意識是透過感覺、知覺、思考等心理過程實現的,表現為知、情、意的統一。 戰爭的根本目的是迫使敵人屈服。 從古今中外的戰爭實踐看,為了贏得意識塑造權,交戰各方會盡其所能,調用一切可以調用的軍事力量,綜合運用政治、經濟、文化、外交等手段,對敵人實施政治瓦解、外交 孤立、輿論引導、法理宣示,引發目標對象個體或群體的理性思辨、倫理共鳴或價值認同,進而改變其世界觀、人生觀、價值觀,形成較為穩定長遠的認知影響或控制,從而實現「全勝 」的目的。

掌權控制資訊權成為認知域作戰關鍵

認知域作戰的武器彈藥是訊息,掌握資訊的生成、辨識、取得、傳播、回饋的主動權,是贏得認知域戰場優勢的關鍵。

主動實施強烈心理刺激,助推訊息滲透。 現代戰爭對抗激烈複雜,各種對抗要素在多維多域立體展開,戰機稍縱即逝。 作用於認知域的力量與手段必須緊跟戰場態勢發展變化,廣泛藉助閾下訊息植入、聲光電磁心理滋擾損傷、非接觸式情緒控制等強烈心理刺激手段,主動出擊,以誘導目標 對象的情感、意志、思想、信念等出現混亂、迷惘或激變,進而達成對目標對象認知系統控制與影響的目的。

廣泛運用智慧演算法,實現精準推送。 隨著網路滲入人類生活各個層面,所有人都會在網路上留下大量資料資訊。 戰時,交戰各方會藉助大數據、雲端運算、物聯網、區塊鏈等現代資訊技術,對目標對象的社交數據、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 資訊進行深度挖掘關聯,實現對目標對象的“認知畫像”,系統分析出目標對象的興趣偏好、行為趨勢、人際關係以及價值取向,從而立體掌握相關個體或特定群體的特徵。 而後藉助智慧演算法技術,將個人化客製化認知訊息向目標對象實施精準推送,進而影響目標對象對戰爭的態度、情感以及價值判斷,進而助推己方作戰目的與政治意圖的實現。

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會關係網絡中所能獲得的、來自他人的物質和精神上的幫助和支援,是影響和決定個體獲得情感依賴和認知走向的關鍵因素。 可以說,認知域作戰能否成功,獲得目標對象社會支持系統的支持和協助至關重要。 借助現代資訊技術,可以有效關聯到目標對象的親人、朋友、同學、合作夥伴等特定社會關係人,透過對上述關係人施加針對性影響,取得對方的理解、支持和信任,動員特定關係人對 目標對象施加影響,更能贏得目標對象的信任與接納,更容易使目標對象產生認知改變,進而達成對目標對象的認知影響與控制的目的。

虛擬空間成為認知域作戰主戰場

在人類虛擬空間不斷拓展的趨勢下,虛擬空間正成為現代戰爭尤其是認知域作戰的主戰場,某種程度上決定未來戰爭的勝負。

新興傳播形態成為認知域作戰新手段。 隨著行動互聯技術的不斷發展,以社群媒體等為代表的新興傳播形態逐步成為認知對抗的全新平台和主流陣地。 從近幾場局部戰爭來看,社群媒體的地位作用越來越突出,交戰各方透過借助個人部落格、論壇等平台即時發布戰場圖文、錄影和評論跟帖,不僅成為全球行動網媒終端 的共議話題,也成為全球不同國家、不同勢力派別價值認知賽局的主陣。 社群媒體等新興傳播形態以其獨特的去中心化及互動性特點,打破了傳統傳播方式中的資訊壟斷與資訊控制,催生了眾多的產品樣態,在滿足人們資訊需求的同時,也在 不知不覺中改變人們的認知。 可以預見,未來認知域作戰中,社群媒體的地位角色將會越來越突出。

網路空間成為認知域作戰新空間。 在資訊化智慧化條件下,網路技術的門檻大大降低,全球即時觀戰成為可能。 現代戰爭已從電視時代的“起居室戰爭”,發展成今天全媒體時代的“掌上戰爭”。 網路直播比任何形式的戰地報道都更直觀更豐富,「全球共時性」成為突出的特點。 透過網路直播,交戰雙方激戰的影片、畫面和眾多燒毀的坦克、裝甲車,以及被戰火毀壞的家園、逃離家園的難民都可以直觀地呈現出來。 人們可以透過網路看到一個個具體的平民、雙方戰士的微觀狀態,戰場的「透明化」讓任何試圖掩蓋真相的努力和不實的虛假陳述變得愈來愈困難。 但另一方面,智慧語音克隆、視頻人像模擬替換等技術的出現,讓人們看到的不一定“誠如所見”,聽到的也不一定“真如所聽”,網絡直播下的認知 域作戰增添了更多可能和想像的空間。

智慧化網路軍團成為認知域作戰新生力量。 資訊網路的發展突破了人際溝通的真實性限制,我們難以確定網路另一端是不是真實存在的人。 基於大規模互動的需要,智慧化、自動化、規模化的網路空間機器人正異軍突起,它們廣泛活躍於網路空間的各個角落。 這些智慧化網路軍團具備智慧辨識、智慧應答甚至類腦思考的能力,並且不知疲憊、全時無休,智慧化網路軍團正成為未來認知域作戰的重要力量。 從當前相關技術發展趨勢來看,世界各主要國家甚至商業組織,正在把目光投向網路機器人在群組滲透、直播跟評、塑造輿論態勢、管控網路危機等方面的潛力前景,在網路智慧機器人柔性引導 技術群自動取得、自動培育和群組滲透等關鍵技術上加強研發力度,透過發現並有效利用網路使用者行為規律,為輿論引導、認知塑造、行為導控提供智慧、高效的技術支援。

現代外語:

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. Confrontations in modern warfare are 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 graphics, video recordings and comments in real time, which has not only become a global mobile network 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 future cognitive domain operations.

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 displayed. 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.

中國軍事原文來源:https://www.81.cn/jfjbmap/content/2022-09/01/content_323888.htm

國軍認知戰作戰節奏-認知域作戰特徵及發展趨勢分析

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

中國軍方:認知域作戰是語言對抗新主戰場

Chinese Military: Cognitive domain operations are the new main battlefield for language confrontation

國語原版:

認知域作戰指的是以現代認知理論和科學為指導,調用輿論、心理、法律等多域手段,運用現代網絡、傳媒、文字、圖片、視頻、數位等多維技術,進行輿論宣傳、心理 攻防、人心爭取、信心顛覆、信仰影響、思維爭奪以及意識形態鬥爭的重要形式,意在爭奪人們在思維、信仰、價值觀、個人態度、情感、認同與評判傾向方面主動權。 認知域作戰是傳統輿論戰、心理戰、法律戰及貿易戰、外交戰、科技戰、思想戰等多域戰的複合集合體。

目前,認知域作戰已成為國家間進行軍事鬥爭和其他領域鬥爭的重要依托,認知域目標驅動的語言對抗已成為認知域作戰的重要形式,值得高度關注。

語言對抗針對作戰對象施加影響力的新領域

認知域作戰是當代認知科學研究發展的伴隨結果,是人們積極探索大腦認知活動獲得對大腦更為複雜更為抽象更為透徹的理解後產生的一種新興作戰領域,更是語言對抗 以受眾大腦的高階深層隱性活動為作用對象的高端影響形式。 不管是從資訊作用的對象、資訊的生產者、資訊內容本身或資訊的管道,認知域作戰都無不貫穿了認知的特點,自始至終都突顯從認知層面開展行動。

從訊息的接受對象來說,這個認知針對的是對手受眾大腦深層的認知面,包括其民眾、軍隊、軍事指揮員或者重要領導、政界商界的重要人物,甚至直接包括對方國家領導人或者 軍隊的特定重要將領等,也可以是特定的人群或民眾。 它可以涉及個人或群體的認知偏好、認知短板、認知習慣、認知偏誤、認知迷思;也可以是個人和群體的信念、價值觀念、政治認同、民族認同、社會和文化認同 與情感態度。

從資訊的投放者和內容來說,它應該是注入了資訊生產者的認知設計和安排,這個包括文本的獨特認知性,例如文本的話語模式、文本的敘事模式、事物的觀察視角、 敘事的認知焦點與深度、語句的組織形式、語句的價值觀念等傾向性、語句的概念的對方可接受性等。

從訊息傳達和傳播的管道來說,文字的形式更加貼近多媒體多模態形式,更加貼近網路空間的需要,更加貼近當代智慧型手機的優勢,更加貼近當下新興媒體時代的特點,也就是更加符合受眾 接受的認知特徵認知習慣和認知傾向。 文本的傳播形式充分考慮國際傳播中的認知效果,特別是跨文化、跨語言、跨媒體、跨群體的認知傳播。 如此,文本將會從認知層面,更好地對受眾施加影響力。

語言對抗應對作戰樣式變革生成新戰法

縱觀人類歷史,我們不難發現,軍事鬥爭的樣式一直在不斷變化。 從最初的使用冷兵器的體力纏鬥發展成為熱兵器機械力量的較量,又發展成為高科技戰爭條件下的信息化能力的製衡與反制衡,近年來又向著智能化無人化方向的智能決策 比拼發展,每一次改變都帶來深刻的戰法變化。 當下的機械化資訊化智能化的共處過渡階段,人們不僅重視戰場的物理域和資訊域主導權的爭奪,更重視影響戰爭主體-人的認知域的掌控,也就是作戰雙方人員的思維方式 、認知模式與風格、價值觀念、情緒態度、文化模型、溝通模式、心理強弱項、認知偏好、文化與知識圖譜、意識形態認同等領域的競爭。 後者涉及社會人員和社會存在的基本態勢,也就是認知域作戰施加影響的新興領域,其戰法有著強烈的特殊性。

議題靈活機動性:認知域作戰可挑選認知域的諸多議題,進行靈活機動的作戰行動。 議題根據當下的情況與需要,既可以選擇涉及較為宏觀的戰略層面(如對方全社會的意識形態與制度等),也可以選擇中觀的戰役層面(如對方社會局部領域或方向的社會問題: 社會福利政策或環境保護政策等),也可以選擇涉及社會中非常微觀的戰術問題(如某個人、某個特定事件所折射出的社會的非公平、非正義、非美好的一面)。 宏觀、中觀、微觀的認知域問題相互連結、相互轉化,很有可能一個微觀的議題也會成為一個宏觀的重大策略性議題。 而問題的提出要視與整個軍事行動的關係,要使認知域作戰服從全局的作戰行動,服務於宏觀的政治、外交大局的需要。 更重要的是,議題要準備在平時,要把各種議題的資料收集在平時,特別是要關注現實社會中的各種重要資料。 一旦需要,這些數據就可以迅速轉變為射向敵方認知域的箭頭、子彈、砲彈,甚至成為影響全局的戰略性武器。

作戰層次可控性:認知作戰其重要的設計是,在作戰的層面上,是整體可以控制的,也是可以調控的,可以根據情勢的變化,做出相應的升級或降維。 如果需要戰略層面的,指揮人員可以開通戰略層面的設計和力量投入;如果需要戰役級別的,也可以控制在相應戰役層面;如果僅僅需要是在特定的小問題層面,也可以將其控制在相應 的小眾局域層面,使得整個行動服務於整體作戰行動的需要。 這裡的戰略戰役戰術,更多的指的是作戰設計和力量的投入。 由於戰場態勢可能瞬息萬變,有些議題也有可能在層級上發生變化,由戰略性的議題影響到戰役和戰術級的效果;有些議題,則由於戰術議題的特殊性,成為影響全局的戰役戰略級議題。

新興媒介主導性:認知域的主要影響管道,已經從傳統的紙質媒體和平面媒體轉向了新興媒體。 傳統媒介主要依賴單一媒介,如報紙、雜誌、書籍、傳單、海報等來傳遞訊息;後期電視的產生帶來了立體媒體。 到了網路時代,特別是網路2.0時代和智慧通訊設備的誕生,人們更加依賴多媒介、多模態以及短視頻、短文本的形式來傳遞訊息。 各種智慧型手機、智慧型平板、智慧型播放器等高階設備的推陳出新,各種新興社群軟體和工具的誕生,使得新興媒體成為當下人們進行溝通與交流的主要工具。 新興媒體、新興社群軟體和工具已成為當下各種力量在社會安全、輿論安全、意識形態安全、社會安全和政治安全展開博弈和鬥爭的重要空間。 網路安全,特別是能否掌握住新型的社群媒體、新興社群軟體和工具等的安全,某種程度上也說,是一國認知領域能否安全的關鍵。 新興媒體工具和新型媒體空間的訊息已成為各國認知作戰的主戰場、主陣地和主要爭奪空間。 值得指出的是,左右人們認知的思想和理論將成為認知域作戰各層面的最有影響力的武器。

語言對抗適應智慧時代認知運算增強新算力

在人工智慧時代,在大數據分析與運用、超級運算能力、智慧運算能力、自然語言處理能力、智慧型手機傳播能力以及新一代網路通訊能力大幅提升的基礎上,人類已經開始可以對全社會、全網 領域、局部群體、局部不同群體以及特定個體進行精準的語言文化、心理認知、群體情緒、社會行為建模和分析。 特別是人們對大腦認知、人腦思考、思考模式、習慣偏好、意象圖式、認知框架、甚至神經網路、人機協同、腦控技術等的深刻認識與掌握,只要有足夠多元的 動態數據,人們就可以把人們的心理活動、情感活動、認知活動、社會輿論以及行為方式等全部計算模擬出來,透過深算、精算、妙算,可以精準地把握人們的認知世界,形成 對人們認知域的精細和深刻的控制。 這方面又呈現以下特徵:

計算的全維度:認知域作為一個新興領域,其涉及的方方面面都可以被數據化並實現全方位全過程全個體可計算,可以通過廣泛的收集各類型信息,經過信息梳理進而可體現為 關於作戰對手主體因素多樣化的大數據,從而可以就此開展面向全體、群體、群體之間以及個體數據及其之間的各種計算,由此,以往無法實現的基於思維、心理、情感、言論 、行為等方面的各種活動都可以透過計算來完成、展示和精準把握。

計算的認知性:認知域的計算體現了強烈的認知性,它更多地可以揭示各種事物、事件、人物之間的難以用肉眼觀察到的關聯關係,可以揭示同一事件框架 中各種概念之間的聚集與層級關係,反映各概念之間或明或暗、或直接或間接的深層認知聯繫,揭示概念之間的複雜概念網絡體系,使人們看到完全超越一般肉眼 觀察的深層認知世界。

計算的智能性:認知域的計算又反映了強烈的智能性。 這種智能性表現為透過計算,會得出具有智慧性的結論。 譬如可以透過大量文本收集和資料挖掘,尋找人工力量受限而看不到的各種主題、各種觀點、各種傾向、各種人群、各種立場、各種訴求之間的關係,形成對 某一問題的更為全面、縱深、精確、系統的認識,做出科學優化的決策。 這類決策既可能是與人類智慧相符,也可能是超越甚至遠勝於人類的智慧。 運用好認知運算的力量,特別是綜合本國的數據和對手的數據,可以更好地做到提前預防、提前預警、提前開展佈局,並能夠實現最好最優最快最精準地打擊和反擊 ,也能夠更好地體現高效有力有針對性的防護。 這裡的認知運算,更多的是對某一可能的宏觀中觀或微觀的議題在不同人群、不同時間段、不同背景下,在全域或某一局域網域、某一特定群體內部可能 產生的迴響,特別是對與對手展開賽局時雙方可能呈現的主動、被動的態勢進行分析與檢視,對認知域的攻防等。

發揮話語主體地位釋放話語力量的新運用

認知域作戰有一個非常重要的依托,就是它主要依托語言媒介來發揮作用,主要透過話語層面來施加影響,主要透過話語的敘事性來形成對認知域的隱性作用,主要透過文化模式 來施加潛在作用,透過跨文化的傳播來施加或明或暗的作用。 其主要體現為以下方面:

文本話語獨特性:認知域是需要用資訊來施加影響力的。 儘管訊息可能依托影片圖片的特殊視覺效果來展現,但從根本上說,文本所綜合表達話語的獨特性成為產生認知影響的主要依賴。 這其中,話語表達的模式、話語表達的技巧、話語表達說服力和感染力的主要設計,特別是話語敘事獨特性將是影響人們認知的關鍵。 這可能包括敘事的視角,敘事的主題、風格,敘事的故事框架,敘事的語言創新,敘事的關鍵語句,敘事蘊含的哲學、人文、宗教、社會、自然等情懷,敘事的不同參與者身份 ,敘事的多元評價,敘事的真實度、深度和情感溫度,敘事對於觀點的潛移默化影響作用,敘事釋放的個人情感、價值觀念、意識形態、立場評價等。 文本話語的獨特性,是認知域作戰以文本施加認知影響的重要依靠。 充分利用文本的複雜性,發揮多樣化文本各自優勢,發揮文本內涵的隱性和顯性認知影響的作用,已成為文本話語認知域作戰的關鍵。 其中最為重要的,就是要創新文本話語,用更嶄新的話語、更加新奇的表述,更加獨特的表達來贏得讀者,使讀者了解並在潛移默化中感受文本中的思想,並在無聲無息中接受 文本的思想。

文化模式潛在性:認知域作戰,一定要深刻掌握不同國家和民族文化的特徵和模式。 不同國家、不同民族,其文化的模型不一樣,哲學思維、傳統文化、宗教信仰、風俗習慣、思考方式皆有明顯不同;不同文化下的國民,也有著不同樣的民族心理、民族性的認可 知模式,也應該有典型的屬於本民族本文化的認知偏好,也有相應的短處與弱點,有的還明顯存在與本國其他民族有巨大差異的認識,甚至還有誤解和敵意。 因此,認知域作戰在文化層面,就是要掌握好不同國家的整體文化模型,建構不同國家不同群體的文化模型,建構不同國家在不同事物上的不同認知模型,充分掌握某一國家在一 在系列事物和議題上的整體態度和行事方式,特別是針對一些典型案例、文化禁忌、宗教要求、精神追求、整體觀念等。 要藉助現有理論和發現,綜合建構在認知領域不同人群對一些典型問題、敏感問題、重要問題的基本表現,為下一步進行認知作戰提供重要的參考和指導。 加強對敵方不同人員的文化模式研究,特別是軍隊人員,重點崗位的人員,包括對方將領、軍官、士兵等的基本文化特徵和模型的研究與構建,譬如人物心理認知行為與文化模型畫像 ,已經成為認知域作戰的核心做法。 對對方一般人員,特別是一般國民、市民的認知模式,以及特定族群,包括特殊的非政府組織力量等的認知分析,也同樣具有重要價值。

跨文化策略傳播性:認知域作戰,是面向國際的語言傳播與文化傳播,需要遵循國際傳播的規律。 要把握國際傳播的基本範式,要把本國故事與國際表達巧妙結合,要將對方語言與文化和本國的故事與思想巧妙結合;要善於結合不同的藝術形式,包括文字、圖片、繪畫、音樂 (聲音)、錄像等手段或多模態的手段來實現資訊的國際傳播。 同時,也要在戰略層面統籌多維宏觀的傳播:要利用各種手段,依靠軍民融合軍民協同軍民一體開展傳播;除了非政府組織之外,特別是要依靠民間力量,依靠專家、意見領袖、普通 民眾來幫助軍隊來進行認知域作戰;要統一設置議題,多點多位多維發聲,形成戰略傳播態勢,為重大行動、重大議題、重大危機管控等形成應急解決的良好態勢,形成良好輿論氛圍 ,營造正面效應,消除不利影響或撲滅不利影響。 特別是要建立一支能精通外語、懂得跨文化技巧、知曉國際傳播規律、能在國際多維平台巧妙發聲的精幹隊伍。 這些人員平時可以進行廣泛的議題知覺、收集和討論,借助普通議題或特殊議題建立

粉絲群;更重要的是,在關鍵時刻,透過他們的粉絲群體,施加影響,完成策略傳播任務。

目前,隨著混合戰多域戰全局戰的大行其道,認知域作戰已成為雜糅其間、混合其間的常用手段,認知域作戰由陌生、新興、發展到壯大的歷程,更是傳統輿論戰、 心理戰、法律戰發展的高階階段複雜階段升級階段。 它的興起,更具欺騙性、模糊性、隱蔽性、嵌入性、植入性和不可觀察性,特別是考慮它與當代新興媒體進場深度接軌深度融合,而且還不斷學習借鑒融入多學科、 跨學科、跨領域的新想法、新技術、新手段。 由此,認知域作戰已然成為我們必須高度警覺高度提防的作戰形式。

(國防科技大學文理學院教授、博士生導師梁曉波)

【本文系國家社科基金重大計畫「國防與軍隊改革視野下的國防語言能力建構」階段性成果】

Cognitive domain operations refer to using modern cognitive theory and science as a guide, using multi-domain means such as public opinion, psychology, and law, and using multi-dimensional technologies such as modern networks, media, text, pictures, videos, and numbers to carry out public opinion propaganda, psychological Attack and defense, fighting for people’s hearts, subverting confidence, influencing beliefs, fighting for thinking, and ideological struggle are important forms of fighting for people’s initiative in thinking, beliefs, values, personal attitudes, emotions, identification and judgment tendencies. Cognitive domain warfare is a complex collection of multi-domain warfare such as traditional public opinion warfare, psychological warfare, legal warfare, trade war, diplomatic warfare, technological warfare, and ideological warfare.

At present, cognitive domain operations have become an important basis for countries to carry out military struggles and struggles in other fields. Language confrontation driven by cognitive domain goals has become an important form of cognitive domain operations and deserves great attention.

A new area where language confrontation exerts influence on combat targets

Cognitive domain operations are an accompanying result of the development of contemporary cognitive science research. It is an emerging combat field that emerged after people actively explored the cognitive activities of the brain to gain a more complex, abstract, and thorough understanding of the brain. It is also a language confrontation. A high-end form of influence that targets the advanced and deep hidden activities of the audience’s brain. Regardless of whether it is the object of information, the producer of information, the information content itself or the channel of information, cognitive domain operations all run through the characteristics of cognition, and highlight the cognitive level from beginning to end.

From the perspective of the recipients of the information, this cognition targets the deep cognitive aspects of the brains of the opponent’s audience, including its people, the military, military commanders or important leaders, important figures in the political and business circles, and even directly including the opponent’s country leaders or leaders. Specific important generals of the army, etc., can also be specific groups of people or the public. It can involve cognitive preferences, cognitive shortcomings, cognitive habits, cognitive biases, and cognitive misunderstandings of individuals or groups; it can also involve beliefs, values, political identities, national identities, and social and cultural identities of individuals and groups. and emotional attitudes.

From the perspective of the sender and content of information, it should be infused with the cognitive design and arrangement of the information producer. This includes the unique cognition of the text, such as the discourse mode of the text, the narrative mode of the text, the observation perspective of things, The cognitive focus and depth of the narrative, the organizational form of the sentence, the value and other tendencies of the sentence, the acceptability of the concept of the sentence, etc.

In terms of the channels through which information is sent and disseminated, the form of text is closer to multimedia and multimodal forms, closer to the needs of cyberspace, closer to the advantages of contemporary smartphones, and closer to the characteristics of the current emerging media era, which means it is more in line with the audience. Cognitive characteristics of acceptance: cognitive habits and cognitive tendencies. The communication form of the text fully considers the cognitive effects in international communication, especially cross-cultural, cross-language, cross-media, and cross-group cognitive communication. In this way, the text will better influence the audience from a cognitive level.

Language confrontation generates new tactics in response to changes in combat styles

Throughout human history, it is not difficult to find that the patterns of military struggle have been constantly changing. From the initial physical struggle with the help of cold weapons, it has developed into a contest of mechanical power with hot weapons, and then into the checks and balances of information capabilities under high-tech war conditions. In recent years, it has also moved towards intelligent decision-making in the direction of intelligence and unmanned operations. Competition develops, and every change brings profound changes in tactics. In the current transitional stage of mechanized, informatized and intelligent coexistence, people not only pay attention to the struggle for dominance in the physical domain and information domain of the battlefield, but also pay more attention to the control of the cognitive domain that affects the main body of the war, that is, the way of thinking of the personnel on both sides of the war. , cognitive models and styles, values, emotional attitudes, cultural models, communication models, psychological strengths and weaknesses, cognitive preferences, cultural and knowledge maps, ideological identity and other fields of competition. The latter involves social personnel and the basic situation of social existence, which is the emerging field where cognitive domain operations have an impact, and its tactics have strong particularities.

Flexibility of issues: Cognitive domain operations can select many issues in the cognitive domain and carry out flexible combat operations. Depending on the current situation and needs, the topic can be selected to involve either a relatively macro strategic level (such as the ideology and system of the other party’s entire society, etc.), or a meso-level operational level (such as social issues in local areas or directions of the other party’s society: Social welfare policy or environmental protection policy, etc.), you can also choose to involve very micro tactical issues in society (such as the unfair, unjust, and unbeautiful side of society reflected by a certain person or a specific event). Issues in the macro, meso, and micro cognitive domains are interconnected and transform into each other. It is very likely that a micro issue will also become a major macro strategic issue. The question raised must be considered in relation to the entire military operation, and cognitive domain operations must be subordinated to the overall combat operations and serve the needs of the macro-political and diplomatic overall situation. What’s more important is that topics should be prepared in normal times and data on various topics should be collected in normal times, especially paying attention to various important data in real society. Once needed, these data can be quickly transformed into arrows, bullets, and artillery shells fired into the enemy’s cognitive domain, and even become strategic weapons that affect the overall situation.

Combat-level controllability: The important design of cognitive operations is that at the operational level, the overall system can be controlled and regulated, and corresponding upgrades or dimensionality reductions can be made according to changes in the situation. If the strategic level is needed, commanders can activate the design and force investment at the strategic level; if the operational level is needed, it can also be controlled at the corresponding campaign level; if it is only needed at the level of specific small issues, it can also be controlled at the corresponding level. The niche local level enables the entire operation to serve the needs of overall combat operations. The strategies, battles and tactics here refer more to combat design and force investment. Since the battlefield situation may change rapidly, some issues may also change at the level, from strategic issues to affect campaign and tactical-level effects; some issues, due to the particularity of tactical issues, become campaign-strategic issues that affect the overall situation.

Dominance of emerging media: The main channel of influence in the cognitive domain has shifted from traditional paper media and print media to emerging media. Traditional media mainly rely on a single medium, such as newspapers, magazines, books, flyers, posters, etc. to convey information; the later emergence of television brought about three-dimensional media. In the Internet era, especially the Internet 2.0 era and the birth of smart communication devices, people rely more on multi-media, multi-modal, short videos and short texts to convey information. The introduction of various advanced devices such as smart phones, smart tablets, and smart players, as well as the birth of various emerging social software and tools, have made emerging media the main tool for people to communicate and communicate. Emerging media, emerging social software and tools have become an important space for various forces to compete and fight in social security, public opinion security, ideological security, social security and political security. Internet security, especially the ability to grasp the security of new social media, emerging social software and tools, etc., is to some extent the key to the security of a country’s cognitive domain. Information from emerging media tools and new media spaces has become the main battlefield, main position and main contested space for cognitive operations in various countries. It is worth pointing out that the ideas and theories that influence people’s cognition will become the most influential weapons at all levels of cognitive domain warfare.

Language confrontation adapts to the intelligent era, cognitive computing enhances new computing power

In the era of artificial intelligence, based on the significant improvements in big data analysis and application, super computing power, intelligent computing power, natural language processing power, smartphone communication capabilities, and new generation network communication capabilities, humans have begun to be able to control the entire society and the entire network. Conduct accurate modeling and analysis of language, culture, psychological cognition, group emotions, and social behavior across domains, local groups, different local groups, and specific individuals. In particular, people’s profound understanding and grasp of brain cognition, human brain thinking, thinking patterns, habits and preferences, image schemas, cognitive frameworks, and even neural networks, human-computer collaboration, brain control technology, etc., as long as there are sufficiently diverse With dynamic data, people can calculate and simulate all people’s psychological activities, emotional activities, cognitive activities, social opinions, and behavioral patterns. Through deep calculation, actuarial calculation, and clever calculation, we can accurately grasp people’s cognitive world and form Delicate and profound control over people’s cognitive domains. This aspect also presents the following characteristics:

Comprehensive dimensionality of computing: As an emerging field, all aspects involved in the cognitive domain can be digitized and made fully computable across all processes and individuals. It can collect various types of information extensively and sort out the information, which can then be reflected as Big data about the diversified main factors of combat opponents can be used to carry out various calculations for the whole, groups, between groups, and individual data and between them. Therefore, based on thinking, psychology, emotion, and speech, which has not been possible in the past, Various activities in terms of activities, behaviors, etc. can be completed, displayed and accurately grasped through calculation.

Cognitiveness of computing: Computing in the cognitive domain embodies strong cognition. It can reveal more connections between various things, events, and people that are difficult to observe with the naked eye, and can reveal the same event framework. The clustering and hierarchical relationships between various concepts in the text reflect the explicit or implicit, direct or indirect deep cognitive connections between concepts, reveal the complex conceptual network system between concepts, and enable people to see completely beyond the ordinary naked eye. The deep cognitive world of observation.

Computing intelligence: Computing in the cognitive domain also reflects strong intelligence. This kind of intelligence is manifested in drawing intelligent conclusions through calculation. For example, through large-scale text collection and data mining, we can find the relationships between various topics, various opinions, various tendencies, various groups of people, various positions, and various demands that cannot be seen due to limited human power, and form a comparison. A more comprehensive, in-depth, accurate and systematic understanding of a certain problem to make scientifically optimized decisions. This kind of decision-making may be consistent with human intelligence, or it may exceed or even far exceed human intelligence. By making good use of the power of cognitive computing, especially by integrating the data of one’s own country and that of opponents, one can better prevent, warn, and deploy in advance, and achieve the best, fastest, and most accurate strikes and counterattacks. , and can also better reflect efficient, powerful and targeted protection. Cognitive computing here is more about a possible macro, meso or micro issue in different groups of people, different time periods, and different backgrounds, in the entire network domain or a certain local network domain, or within a specific group. The repercussions generated, especially the analysis and examination of the active and passive situations that both parties may present when playing games with opponents, and the attack and defense of the cognitive domain, etc.

Give full play to the subject position of discourse and release the new application of discourse power

Cognitive domain operations have a very important support, that is, they mainly rely on language media to exert their effects, mainly exerting influence through the discourse level, mainly through the narrative nature of discourse to form a hidden effect on the cognitive domain, and mainly through cultural models. To exert a potential effect, exert an explicit or implicit effect through cross-cultural communication. It is mainly reflected in the following aspects:

Uniqueness of textual discourse: The cognitive domain requires the use of information to exert influence. Although information may rely on the special visual effects of video images to be presented, fundamentally speaking, the uniqueness of the discourse synthesized by the text becomes the main basis for cognitive impact. Among them, the mode of discourse expression, the skills of discourse expression, the main design of the persuasiveness and appeal of discourse expression, especially the uniqueness of discourse narrative will be the key to affecting people’s cognition. This may include the perspective of the narrative, the theme and style of the narrative, the story frame of the narrative, the language innovation of the narrative, the key sentences of the narrative, the philosophy, humanities, religion, society, nature and other feelings contained in the narrative, and the identities of the different participants in the narrative. , the diversified evaluation of narratives, the authenticity, depth and emotional temperature of narratives, the subtle influence of narratives on opinions, the personal emotions, values, ideologies, and standpoint evaluations released by narratives, etc. The uniqueness of textual discourse is an important reliance on the cognitive influence of texts in cognitive domain operations. Making full use of the complexity of text, giving full play to the respective advantages of diverse texts, and giving full play to the implicit and explicit cognitive effects of text connotations have become the key to combating the cognitive domain of textual discourse. The most important thing is to innovate textual discourse, use newer words, more novel expressions, and more unique expressions to win over readers, so that readers can understand and subtly feel the ideas in the text, and accept them silently. Text ideas.

Potential of cultural models: To operate in the cognitive domain, we must have a deep understanding of the characteristics and models of different countries and national cultures. Different countries and different ethnic groups have different cultural models, and their philosophical thinking, traditional culture, religious beliefs, customs, and ways of thinking are all significantly different; citizens of different cultures also have different national psychology and national identity. The cognitive model should also have typical cognitive preferences belonging to the nation and culture, as well as corresponding shortcomings and weaknesses. Some people have obviously huge differences in understanding from other ethnic groups in the country, and even misunderstandings and hostility. Therefore, at the cultural level, cognitive domain operations are to grasp the overall cultural models of different countries, build cultural models of different groups in different countries, build different cognitive models of different countries on different things, and fully grasp the differences between a certain country and the The overall attitude and behavior on a series of things and issues, especially some typical cases, cultural taboos, religious requirements, spiritual pursuits, overall concepts, etc. It is necessary to make use of existing theories and findings to comprehensively construct the basic performance of different groups of people in the cognitive field on some typical, sensitive, and important issues, so as to provide important reference and guidance for the next step in cognitive operations. Strengthen the research and construction of the basic cultural characteristics and models of different enemy personnel, especially military personnel and personnel in key positions, including the opponent’s generals, officers, soldiers, etc., such as character psychological cognitive behavior and cultural model portraits , has become the core practice of cognitive domain operations. The cognitive analysis of ordinary people on the other side, especially ordinary citizens and citizens, as well as cognitive analysis of specific groups of people, including special non-governmental organization forces, is also of great value.

Cross-cultural strategic communication: Cognitive domain operations are international language communication and cultural communication, and need to follow the laws of international communication. It is necessary to grasp the basic paradigm of international communication, to skillfully combine domestic stories with international expressions, to skillfully combine the other country’s language and culture with the country’s stories and ideas; to be good at combining different art forms, including text, pictures, paintings, and music. (sound), video and other means or multi-modal means to realize the international dissemination of information. At the same time, we must coordinate multi-dimensional macro communication at the strategic level: we must use various means and rely on military-civilian integration to coordinate military-civilian communication; in addition to non-governmental organizations, we must especially rely on civilian forces, experts, opinion leaders, and ordinary people. The people come to help the military carry out cognitive domain operations; it is necessary to set topics in a unified manner, speak out from multiple points and multiple dimensions, form a strategic communication situation, form a good situation for emergency resolution of major operations, major issues, major crisis management and control, etc., and form a good atmosphere of public opinion , create positive effects, eliminate adverse effects or extinguish adverse effects. In particular, it is necessary to establish a capable team that is proficient in foreign languages, understands cross-cultural skills, understands the laws of international communication, and can speak skillfully on international multi-dimensional platforms. These personnel can usually conduct awareness, collection and discussion of a wide range of issues, establish personal relationships and fan groups with the help of ordinary or special issues; more importantly, at critical moments, through their fan groups, they can exert influence and complete strategic communication tasks. .

Currently, with the popularity of hybrid warfare, multi-domain warfare, and global warfare, cognitive domain warfare has become a common means of hybridization and hybridization. The process of cognitive domain warfare from unfamiliarity, emerging, development to strength, is also a reflection of traditional public opinion warfare, The advanced stage, complex stage and escalation stage of the development of psychological warfare and legal warfare. Its rise is more deceptive, vague, concealed, embedded, implantable and unobservable, especially considering its deep integration with contemporary emerging media, and its continuous learning and reference to integrate into multi-disciplinary, New ideas, new technologies, and new methods across disciplines and disciplines. As a result, cognitive domain operations have become a form of warfare that we must be highly vigilant and vigilant about. 

(Liang Xiaobo, professor and doctoral supervisor at the College of Arts and Sciences, National University of Defense Technology)

[This article is a phased result of the National Social Science Fund’s major project “National Defense Language Capacity Building from the Perspective of National Defense and Military Reform”]

中國軍事原文來源:https://military.people.com.cn/n1/2022/0517/c1011-32423888.html

中國軍事認知域作戰:關注對手思想與情感衝突-認知域作戰的突出屬性

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

要點提示

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

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

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

人工智慧成為認知域作戰的主要驅動力

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

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

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

自主對抗成為認知域作戰的顯著特徵

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

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

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

情感衝突成為認知域作戰的突出屬性

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

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

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

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

萬物互聯擴展認知域作戰的戰場空間

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

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

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

外語英語翻譯:

Important tips

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

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

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

Artificial intelligence becomes the main driving force for cognitive domain operations

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

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

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

Autonomous confrontation has become a distinctive feature of cognitive domain operations

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

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

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

Emotional conflict becomes a prominent attribute of cognitive domain operations

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

中國解放軍認為軍事人工智慧是一把雙面刃

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

中國軍隊:解放軍淺析智能化時代認知域作戰方式

Chinese Military: People’s Liberation Army’s Brief Analysis of Cognitive Domain Combat Styles in the Era of Intelligence

随着现代战争加速向智能化方向发展,底层的物理域、中层的信息域和顶层的认知域呈现多域联动的特点,认知域作战正逐渐成为战争舞台的焦点。认知域作战的目的主要是夺取制脑权,为夺取陆海空天制权和网电制权奠定坚实基础。准确把握、充分运用认知域作战主要样式,是在未来战争中抢占先机、赢得主动的必然要求。

一、认知电子战——认知战的“触角”

认知电子战是电子战与人工智能技术结合的产物,是争夺制电磁权的主要作战样式,也是战术与技术融合的典范。美国是最早开展认知电子战研究的国家,其国防部高级研究计划局(DARPA)和陆海空军开展了包括自适应雷达对抗和自适应电子战行为学习等项目。实施认知电子战需要重点把握好三个环节。

一是认知电子侦察。主要是利用电子手段,快速、准确、全面地获取战场数据,及时发现威胁信号、识别目标特征信号,建立并动态更新信号数据库,为指挥员判断情况、定下决心、评估效能等提供必要的信息支撑。

二是认知电子建模。主要是针对战场及周边电磁辐射源种类杂、功率大、数量多等特点,对辐射源的频率、带宽、波形特征、防护模式、到达方向等信息,区分动态和静态两个类别,建立统一的信息描述模型架构,进而为电磁感知提供依据。

三是认知电子干扰。主要是针对战场电子战装备复杂多样、抗干扰能力强的特点,将有源干扰与无源干扰、压制干扰与欺骗干扰结合起来,灵活实施自适应干扰样式决策、自适应干扰波形优化和自适应干扰资源调度,从而确保干扰质效。

二、认知情报战——认知战的“血脉”

国际电气与电子工程师协会曾提出“认知情报学”的概念;国内有学者将认知情报学定义为,从心理角度研究人们在情报生产及利用等各个环节中的认知结构、过程与特点的领域或学科。这里提出“认知情报战”概念,符合认知逻辑和情报本质,并且可以借用认知情报学的概念和原理。根据获取和利用情报的动因,实施认知情报战可运用三种策略。

一是基于个体认知获取和利用情报。主要是以作战主体的认知为中介进行情报协调,坚持战场用户驱动而不是作战系统驱动,以“意义构建理论”“知识非常态假说”为基础,改善情报服务主体认知结构,实现主体认知与情报服务的良性互动。

二是基于群体认知获取和利用情报。主要是突出关注用户群体所处的战场环境、社会背景等因素影响而形成的共同认知结构,充分利用情景分析、领域分析以及价值分析等先进分析方法,着力提高群体情报服务的针对性、适用性。

三是基于脑体认知获取和利用情报。主要是把人体大脑的认知结构和认知活动理解为计算逻辑和计算活动,充分利用机器智能认知和智能计算能力,着力改善战场人机融合环境,畅通情报到认知的信息链路,实施程序化、规模化的情报服务。

三、认知算法战——认知战的“大脑”

2017年美国国防部在一份备忘录中首次正式提出“算法战”,明确组建“算法战跨功能小组”。算法战与认知战一样贯穿于战争各领域全过程,体现了智能化战争的核心要求。这里提出“认知算法战”概念,是基于认知战与算法战的共同之处与内在联系。可以说,认知中有算法,算法中有认知。实施认知算法战主要有三种路径。

一是廓清战争迷雾。军事理论家克劳塞维茨指出,“战争是充满不确定性的领域,战争中所依据的情况有四分之三像隐藏在迷雾中一样”。认知算法战就是要在这种不确定性的领域中算出确定性的因素,尽可能廓清战场迷雾,准确识别信息“炸弹”,严防坠入信息“陷阱”。

二是扫清智能盲区。人工智能的灵感之源往往来源于生物智能特别是人类智能,人工智能离不开人类智能。认知算法战就是要充分运用认知心理学和认知神经科学的最新成果,推动人工智能的军事运用,提高认知域的智能化水平。

三是加快人机融合。机器算力虽然可以超越人类脑力,但是机器算法终究难以超越人类“想法”,人工智能与人类智能各有优长。认知算法战就是要把信息域的机器算法与认知域的人类“想法”紧密结合起来,不断提高物理域的战法水平。

四、认知政治战——认知战的“灵魂”

政治战是与军事战是相对的。毛泽东曾形象地指出“战争是流血的政治”“政治是不流血的战争”。由于政治战通常直接作用于认知域,认知政治战可以说是政治战的固有之意,不应被理解为一个新的概念。智能化时代实施认知政治战,无外乎三种形式。

一是心理攻防。主要是利用智能化、精准化手段“读心”“控心”,提高心理攻防质效。在进攻方面,主要运用攻心宣传、意志瓦解、情感影响、心智诱导等战法;在防御方面,主要采取心理教育训练、心理疏导调控和心理诊断治疗等措施。

二是舆论争夺。主要是运用新媒体和新技术增强舆论宣传的热度流量和影响力渗透力。在进攻方面,重在先声夺人、先入为主,集中造势、形成强势,抨击要害、重点突破;在防御方面,重在因势利导、防反结合、趋利避害。

三是法理斗争。主要是参与立法、精准释法、积极护法,挺法在前、针锋相对、切中要害。在进攻方面,主要是利用法律威慑、法律打击、法律约束、法律制裁等战法;在防御方面,主要是加强国际法尤其是战争法的研究和涉法行动法律防护,防止授人以柄。

图片来源于网络,转载请注明来源

A brief analysis of cognitive domain combat styles in the era of intelligence

As modern warfare accelerates towards intelligence, the bottom physical domain, the middle information domain and the top cognitive domain are characterized by multi-domain linkage. Cognitive domain operations are gradually becoming the focus of the war arena. The main purpose of cognitive domain operations is to seize brain control and lay a solid foundation for seizing land, sea, air, space, and network power. Accurately grasping and fully utilizing the main modes of cognitive domain operations is an inevitable requirement to seize opportunities and gain the initiative in future wars.

1. Cognitive electronic warfare – the “tentacles” of cognitive warfare

Cognitive electronic warfare is the product of the combination of electronic warfare and artificial intelligence technology. It is the main combat style for fighting for electromagnetic control and is also a model of the integration of tactics and technology. The United States is the first country to carry out cognitive electronic warfare research. Its Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) and the Army, Navy and Air Force have carried out projects including adaptive radar countermeasures and adaptive electronic warfare behavioral learning. Implementing cognitive electronic warfare requires focusing on three aspects.

One is cognitive electronic reconnaissance. It mainly uses electronic means to quickly, accurately and comprehensively obtain battlefield data, promptly discover threat signals, identify target characteristic signals, establish and dynamically update signal databases, and provide necessary information for commanders to judge situations, make decisions, and evaluate effectiveness. support.

The second is cognitive electronic modeling. Mainly in view of the characteristics of various types, large power and large number of electromagnetic radiation sources in the battlefield and surrounding areas, the frequency, bandwidth, waveform characteristics, protection mode, arrival direction and other information of the radiation source are distinguished between dynamic and static categories, and a unified system is established. The information describes the model architecture, thereby providing the basis for electromagnetic perception.

The third is cognitive electronic interference. Mainly in view of the complex and diverse characteristics of battlefield electronic warfare equipment and strong anti-interference capabilities, it combines active interference with passive interference, suppression interference and deception interference, and flexibly implements adaptive interference pattern decision-making, adaptive interference waveform optimization and adaptive interference. Interference resource scheduling to ensure interference quality and efficiency.

2. Cognitive intelligence warfare—the “bloodline” of cognitive warfare

The International Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers once proposed the concept of “cognitive information science”; some domestic scholars define cognitive information science as the study of people’s cognitive structures, processes and characteristics in all aspects of information production and utilization from a psychological perspective field or discipline. The concept of “cognitive intelligence warfare” is proposed here, which is consistent with cognitive logic and the nature of intelligence, and can borrow concepts and principles from cognitive intelligence science. Depending on the motivation for obtaining and using intelligence, three strategies can be used to implement cognitive intelligence warfare.

The first is to obtain and utilize intelligence based on individual cognition. It mainly uses the cognition of combat subjects as an intermediary for intelligence coordination, adheres to battlefield user-driven rather than combat system-driven, and is based on “meaning construction theory” and “knowledge abnormality hypothesis” to improve the cognitive structure of intelligence service subjects and realize subject cognition. Positive interaction between knowledge and intelligence services.

The second is to obtain and utilize intelligence based on group cognition. It mainly focuses on the common cognitive structure formed by factors such as the battlefield environment and social background of the user group, and makes full use of advanced analysis methods such as situation analysis, domain analysis, and value analysis to strive to improve the pertinence and applicability of group intelligence services. sex.

The third is to obtain and utilize intelligence based on brain-body cognition. It mainly understands the cognitive structure and cognitive activities of the human brain as computing logic and computing activities, makes full use of machine intelligent cognition and intelligent computing capabilities, strives to improve the human-machine integration environment on the battlefield, and smoothes the information link from intelligence to cognition. Implement programmed and large-scale intelligence services.

3. Cognitive algorithm warfare—the “brain” of cognitive warfare

In 2017, the U.S. Department of Defense officially proposed “algorithmic warfare” for the first time in a memorandum and clearly established an “algorithmic warfare cross-functional team.” Algorithmic warfare, like cognitive warfare, runs through the entire process of all fields of warfare, embodying the core requirements of intelligent warfare. The concept of “cognitive algorithmic warfare” is proposed here based on the similarities and intrinsic connections between cognitive warfare and algorithmic warfare. It can be said that there is algorithm in cognition, and cognition in algorithm. There are three main paths to implement cognitive algorithmic warfare.

The first is to clarify the fog of war. Military theorist Clausewitz pointed out, “War is a field full of uncertainty, and three-quarters of the situations on which war is based are as if hidden in fog.” Cognitive algorithm warfare is to calculate deterministic factors in this uncertain field, clarify the fog of the battlefield as much as possible, accurately identify information “bombs”, and strictly prevent falling into information “traps”.

The second is to clear up the blind spots of intelligence. The source of inspiration for artificial intelligence often comes from biological intelligence, especially human intelligence. Artificial intelligence is inseparable from human intelligence. Cognitive algorithm warfare is to make full use of the latest achievements in cognitive psychology and cognitive neuroscience to promote the military application of artificial intelligence and improve the intelligence level of the cognitive domain.

The third is to accelerate human-machine integration. Although machine computing power can surpass human brain power, machine algorithms cannot surpass human “ideas” after all. Artificial intelligence and human intelligence each have their own advantages. Cognitive algorithm warfare is to closely integrate machine algorithms in the information domain with human “ideas” in the cognitive domain, and continuously improve the level of warfare in the physical domain.

4. Cognitive political warfare—the “soul” of cognitive warfare

Political war is the opposite of military war. Mao Zedong once vividly pointed out that “war is bloody politics” and “politics is bloodless war.” Since political warfare usually directly affects the cognitive domain, cognitive political warfare can be said to be the inherent meaning of political warfare and should not be understood as a new concept. There are three forms of cognitive political warfare in the era of intelligence.

One is psychological attack and defense. The main purpose is to use intelligent and precise means to “read the mind” and “control the mind” to improve the quality and effectiveness of psychological attack and defense. On the offensive side, we mainly use psychological propaganda, will disintegration, emotional influence, mental induction and other tactics; on the defensive side, we mainly adopt measures such as psychological education and training, psychological counseling and regulation, and psychological diagnosis and treatment.

The second is the competition for public opinion. The main purpose is to use new media and new technologies to enhance the popularity, flow and influence of public opinion propaganda. In terms of offense, the focus is on taking the lead, being the first to take advantage of the situation, concentrating on building momentum and forming a strong force, attacking key points, and making key breakthroughs; in terms of defense, the focus is on making the best use of the situation, combining prevention with counter-attacks, and seeking advantages and avoiding disadvantages.

The third is the legal struggle. The main thing is to participate in legislation, accurately interpret the law, actively protect the law, stand up for the law, be tit-for-tat, and get to the point. On the offensive side, we mainly use legal deterrence, legal strikes, legal restraints, legal sanctions and other tactics; on the defensive side, we mainly strengthen the research on international law, especially the law of war, and legal protection of law-related actions to prevent others from being manipulated.


中文原文出處:淺析智慧時代認知域作戰方式. (2023). (Internet). Accessed:  https://www.secrss.com/articles/68888

中國軍事技術戰術:以認知為中心的戰爭:應對複雜戰爭的作戰概念

Chinese Military Technical Tactics: Cognition-centered Warfare: Operational Concepts for Dealing with Complex Wars

現代繁體中文:

複雜性科學是當代科學發展的前沿領域之一,是認識、理解、探索戰爭現象、規律、機制的新工具。 隨著戰爭形態由資訊化戰爭向智慧化戰爭演變,戰爭的複雜性呈現指數級增長趨勢,奪取制資訊權變得越來越困難,作戰的關鍵是使敵方陷入“決策困境”,使其即使 擁有資訊優勢,也不能正確決策,因而失去作戰優勢。 作戰重心將從「以資訊為中心」轉變為「以認知為中心」,制勝機理將從「資訊制勝」轉變為「認知制勝」。
「三個之變」揭示戰爭複雜性成長動因
戰爭是充滿蓋然性的領域,變是貫穿其始終的基本特徵。 習主席強調,要緊盯科技之變、戰爭之變、對手之變。 科技之變是基礎,戰爭之變是主體,對手之變是關鍵,科技之變引發戰爭之變,戰爭之變促使對手之變。 「三個之變」促使戰爭形態演變、戰爭領域拓展、戰爭目標轉變、戰爭影響擴大,揭示了戰爭複雜性成長動因。
科技之變顛覆戰爭制勝基礎。 科學技術是核心戰鬥力,是軍事發展中最活躍、最具革命性的因素。 縱觀世界軍事發展史,每一次重大科學技術創新,都開啟了一場新的軍事變革,而每一場軍事變革都把軍事發展推向一個新的時代,科技創新成為提高軍隊戰鬥力的巨大引擎 。 目前,新一輪科技革命和軍事革命加速發展,現代戰爭資訊化程度不斷提高,智慧化特徵日益顯現,對軍事革命驅動作用愈發凸顯,一些前沿技術飛速發展,可能從根本上改變戰爭面貌和 規則,大國軍事博弈更體現為技術上的顛覆和反顛覆、突襲和反突襲、抵銷和反抵銷。 美海軍「復仇女神」項目,包括偵察、誘餌、幹擾等系統,誘餌類系統涵蓋空中、水面和水下,可在分散式人工智慧引擎的調度、指控下,互相補充,協同欺騙,真實營造出 一個“幽靈航母編隊”,徹底顛覆了傳統的電子欺騙手段,將資訊欺騙提升到前所未有的高度。 可以說,科技從來沒有像今天這樣深刻影響國家安全和軍事戰略全局,深刻介入、支持、主導戰爭形態演變和作戰樣式創新,甚至顛覆戰爭制勝機制。

美海軍「復仇女神」計畫基於網路化協同電子戰
概念,將不同系統集成,利用無人分散式
電子戰平台的集群實現大規模協同電子戰

戰爭之變突顯戰爭複雜性特徵。 現代戰爭正在發生深刻變化,呈現前所未有的多樣性和複雜性。 這種超級複雜性源自於多種原因:一是各種先進技術或武器不斷湧現,帶來許多不確定性;二是戰場覆蓋陸、海、空、天、網、電和認知等多個 領域;三是多種作戰對象、作戰樣式、作戰領域、作戰方式交叉關聯與組合,構成複雜的「混合戰爭」;四是人工智慧演算法將大量作戰要素建構到一個複雜的邏輯中,並以人類 思維所不及的機器速度促使各種要素組合、解構、再組合。 2022年烏克蘭危機中,表面上看來是俄羅斯和烏克蘭兩國之間的對抗,實質上是美西方國家和俄羅斯之間進行的「混合戰爭」;俄烏兩軍廣泛使用軍事、民用無人機,拓展 「無人+」運用模式,展現出未來無人智能作戰雛形;烏軍在美北約空天態勢情報的支持下,頻繁使用低成本的無人裝備對俄軍重要武器平台實施突襲,凸顯新質 作戰力量對傳統作戰體系大型武器裝備的不對稱破襲優勢。 科技之變最終將引發戰爭之變,單一要素對戰爭的影響越來越弱,多個要素構成的聯合作戰體系將對戰爭產生複雜影響,戰爭的非線性、不確定性、混亂性、開放性 、適應性、對抗性等複雜性特徵將呈指數級增長趨勢,這將導致人們對戰爭進展和勝負的認知判斷更加困難。
對手之變加速戰爭複雜性成長。 戰爭之變促使對手之變。 目前,我們正經歷百年未有之大變局,主要軍事強國積極進行戰略調整,推進新一輪軍事變革,呈現出以下特點:一是體制編制的聯合化、小型化、自主化趨勢更加明顯;二 是武器裝備呈現數位化、精確化、隱形化、無人化、智能化的發展趨勢;三是作戰形態向“四非”(非接觸、非線形、非對稱和非正規)和“三無” (無形、無聲、無人)作戰方向發展;四是軍隊指揮形態朝向扁平化、自動化、網路化、無縫化方向發展。 美國將我視為最主要的戰略對手,竭力對我打壓遏制,大力加強作戰概念創新,先後提出「混合戰爭」「多域戰」「馬賽克戰」等新型作戰概念,聲稱要打一場讓對手 「技術看不懂、打擊難預測、速度跟不上」的高端戰爭。 美軍「馬賽克戰」的核心是無人、低成本、快速、致命、靈活、可重組,基於分散式態勢感知,借助智慧化輔助決策工具,借鑒搭積木、構拼圖的概念,自適應制定任務規劃 ,動態重組作戰兵力,將作戰平台的功能分解到更多數量、單一功能的節點,大量功能節點建構作戰體系。 以“殺傷網”取代“殺傷鏈”,若干個節點失效或缺失,作戰體係可自適應重組。
戰爭複雜性成長推動戰爭制勝機理轉變
隨著國防科技的快速發展、武器裝備的更新換代和戰爭形態的快速嬗變,現代戰爭呈現指數式、爆炸性的複雜變化。 這些變化看起來眼花撩亂,但背後是有規律可循的,根本的是戰爭的勝利機理變了。 只有搞透現代戰爭制勝機理,才能準確識變、科學應變、善於求變,牢牢掌握未來戰爭主動權。
戰爭形態由冷兵器戰爭轉變為智慧化戰爭。 戰爭形態是關於戰爭的整體性認知。 迄今為止,人類戰爭形態大致經歷了冷兵器戰爭、熱兵器戰爭、機械化戰爭、資訊戰爭四個歷史階段,正朝向智慧化戰爭邁進。 認知戰的歷史幾乎和人類戰爭史一樣久遠。 在冷兵器戰爭、熱兵器戰爭、機械化戰爭時代,認知戰更多是以輿論戰、心理戰形式出現。 隨著人類進入資訊化時代,網路空間科技的發展大大拓展了認知戰的空間,豐富了認知戰的戰技術手段,使認知戰的滲透性、時效性、震懾性大大增強,認 知戰的地位和作用得到空前提高。 未來,戰爭形態將進入智慧化戰爭,大量智慧化的武器系統和平台將裝備軍隊、投入作戰。 認知戰不僅可對敵方人員的認知實施幹擾、欺騙,也能透過「對抗性輸入」「資料中毒」等演算法欺騙手段對智慧裝備的認知實施攻擊,其應用場景和範圍將進一步擴大 ,地位和作用也將進一步提高。

無人機逐漸成為戰爭的主角,
作戰複雜性進一步增加
戰爭目的由武力征服更多向精神征服轉變。 現代戰爭的致勝機制與以往相比發生了很大變化,戰爭的暴力性得到遏制,作戰目的由原來的攻城略地、殲滅敵有生力量,轉變到使對方服從己方意志,作戰手段從武力征服更多地向 著重心理和精神征服轉變,這使得認知戰在現代戰爭中的地位、角色日益凸顯。 近年來,「混合戰爭」成為大國競爭的主要手段,越來越多的國家開始專注於利用新型領域、新型手段來達到傳統作戰難以達到的政治、軍事、經濟目的。 「混合戰爭」是國家、非國家行為體以及個人等戰爭主體的混合,是常規戰爭、非常規戰爭等戰爭樣式的混合,是作戰、維穩、重建等軍事行動的混合,是政治、軍事、經濟 、民生等多領域的混合,是擊敗敵軍、爭取民心等多種作戰目標的混合,這與認知戰高度契合。 「混合戰爭」的作戰領域由軍事領域拓展到了政治、經濟、文化、民生等領域;作戰方式由火力戰、兵力戰向外交戰、經濟戰、網路戰、心理戰、輿論戰等多方向拓展, 這與認知戰高度一致,其核心要義都是“亂中取利”,主要目的都是爭奪人心,作戰指導都是以巧取勝。
戰爭制勝域由物理域資訊域轉變為認知域。 現代戰爭同時發生在物理、資訊和認知三個領域,物理域和資訊域是從物質域中脫離出來的,認知域是從精神域中脫離出來的。 物理域是傳統的戰爭領域,由作戰平台和軍事設施等構成,為資訊化戰爭提供物質基礎。 資訊域是新崛起的戰爭領域,即資訊產生、傳輸和共享空間,是資訊化戰爭較量的重點。 認知域是人類認知活動涉及的範圍和領域,既是人類感覺、知覺、記憶和思考活動的空間,也是知識生成、交換、關聯、儲存和運用的空間,也是作戰活動中感知、判斷、決策 和指揮與控制的空間。 認知域存在於作戰人員的意識領域之中,影響其判斷與決策,是正在崛起的戰爭領域。 隨著網路資訊和人工智慧等技術的發展,認知域的範圍大大拓展,正在從人的意識領域向現代認知工具和人工智慧領域拓展。 軍事技術的發展拓展了認知域的範圍,為認知戰提供了更先進、更快捷、更有效的物質技術手段,使認知戰的滲透性、時效性、震懾性大大增強,從根本上 改變了認知戰,使得認知域成為超越物理域、資訊域的新的致勝領域,成為大國博弈、軍事對抗的終極之域。
戰爭制勝機理由資訊制勝向認知制勝轉變。 戰爭對抗歸根究柢是認知的博弈與對抗,掌握了製認知權很大程度上就掌握了戰爭主動權,喪失了製認知權就會在戰爭中處於被動挨打的境地。 獲得更高、更強的製認知權是製勝強敵的關鍵。 想辦法掌握制認知權進而奪取戰場綜合製權,從而以最小代價獲得最大勝利,是現代戰爭特別是認知戰的重要機理和內在規律。 近年來,美軍先後提出以「決策中心戰」「馬賽克戰」等為代表的未來戰爭新理念,意圖將複雜性作為一種為對手製造多重困境的武器,要求在保障自身戰術「選擇優勢」的 同時,透過給敵方製造高複雜度決策影響,幹擾其決策能力,在認知域實現對敵顛覆性優勢。 在資訊化戰爭的初級和中級階段,作戰的關鍵是奪取制網權和製資訊權,貫穿著「網路優勢→資訊優勢→決策優勢→作戰優勢」的遞進模式。 在資訊化戰爭進入高級階段後,奪取制資訊權變得越來越困難,作戰的關鍵是使敵方陷入“決策困境”,使其即使擁有資訊優勢,也不能正確決策,從而失去作戰優勢,擁有認 知優勢才能擁有作戰優勢。 未來戰爭,認知優勢是最重要的戰略優勢,認知對抗是最主要的對抗形式,可謂「無認知不戰爭」。
因應複雜戰爭催生認知中心戰作戰概念
為因應現代戰爭複雜性特徵指數級增長趨勢,我們必須運用複雜性科學的理論與方法,轉變以住平台中心戰火力至上、殺傷為王的觀念,確立以認知為中心的作戰思想。 認知中心戰,指以認知域為致勝領域,以奪取認知優勢為作戰目標,圍繞幹擾認知手段、壓制認知管道、影響認知產生,對敵人員和智慧裝備的認知進行 幹擾、壓制、欺騙和誘導,透過奪取和維持認知優勢來獲取作戰優勢的一種新型作戰概念。 其主要製勝機理有以下幾點。

《孫子兵法》中提到」故兵無常勢,
水無常形;能因敵變化而取勝者,謂之神「
以網路威懾摧毀敵方作戰意志。 針對敵政治、經濟、軍事、外交、文化中的矛盾弱點,透過網路空間散播威懾性訊息,或透過網路發布閱兵、大規模軍事演習、新式武器裝備研發等訊息,使對手認知與心理產生極 大的恐懼和震撼,遏止敵不利於我的行動舉措執行。 綜合運用網電攻擊手段,對敵重要網電目標和關鍵核心節點實施點穴式打擊和警示攻擊,破壞敵體係作戰能力,影響敵武器裝備效能的正常發揮,對敵實施心理威懾。 美軍「灰色地帶作戰」理論,就是依靠自身技術優勢,主要採取網電反制等行動,應對對手“灰色地帶挑釁”,威懾對手要么放棄“對抗”,要么衝突升級,使之陷入兩難境地。
以資訊欺騙誘導敵方錯誤判斷。 針對敵方的偵察設備、情報機構和指揮系統,透過網路攻擊、電子欺騙等手段隱藏己方軍事企圖、軍事行動和軍事目標,向敵方傳送有關己方的錯誤和虛假的作戰企圖、部隊配置、作戰 能力、作戰方案以及戰場態勢等方面的訊息,或借敵方指揮資訊系統發送虛假命令和訊息,達到誘敵錯誤判斷,擾敵作戰指揮的目的。 針對人工智慧演算法實施「對抗性輸入」「資料中毒」等新型攻擊,使其透過深度學習訓練得到我預設結論,或使其陷入局部最優解中而忽略全局最優。 利用電腦影像、視訊合成、虛擬實境和人工智慧等技術,將聲音、視訊、影像、文字訊息等進行合成,或利用「深度造假」技術,產生以假亂真、真假難辨的虛假訊息,並透過網路 大量傳播,以迷惑欺騙對手,影響其決策和行動。
以資訊壓制阻塞敵方認知手段。 針對敵重要網路目標,以及核心路由器、交換器、網關、重點伺服器等,使用「軟體」「硬」攻擊手段,摧毀其網路節點。 針對敵指揮控制網、通訊傳輸網、武器鉸鍊網和預警探測網等無線鏈路的組網特點,綜合運用電子乾擾、GPS欺騙攻擊、指控鏈路接管、數據劫持控制等技術和手段,壓制其 數據通信,阻斷其通信鏈路,幹擾其作戰指揮。 對敵指揮控制、軍事通訊、預警偵測、空天資訊等軍事網路實施網電致癱攻擊,毀癱影響其作戰的核心網絡,削弱其作戰能力。
以輿論宣傳營造有利輿論環境。 配合國家政治、軍事、外交鬥爭,大力宣傳己方在戰爭中的正義性,激發全體民眾全力支持戰爭的熱情。 借助即時通訊工具、網路論壇、播客、推特、微信等新媒體平台,有計劃地散佈打擊敵方弱點的信息,取得廣泛關注和普遍共鳴後,再適時報料、製造新的熱點,反复造勢 增強影響,形成共振效應擴大效果。 透過巧妙設定議程來進行宣傳“定調”,透過強勢媒體進行輿論造勢,掀起“沉默的螺旋”,控制和引導輿論,改變人們的看法和行為。

以法理鬥爭取得法理道義支持。 運用法律武器,遏止敵可能或將會發生的違法行為,宣告我方行動的合法性,申明我方軍事反擊權力,宣布我方追究戰爭責任的堅定性,給敵以震懾。 透過揭露敵方挑釁行為的違法性,抨擊敵方作戰行動的法律依據,譴責敵方的違法行徑,造成敵方戰略上的失利和己方戰略上的獲利。 運用法律手段,制約敵方的可能行動,限制第三人的可能干涉,阻滯其他方對己方行動的干擾。 制定我方作戰所需的法律、法規,為我方行動提供法律防護,或採取法律補救措施降低我方行動可能附帶的負面影響,保障作戰行動依法展開。

現代英語:

Cognition-centered warfare: operational concepts for dealing with complex wars

Complexity science is one of the frontier fields of contemporary scientific development. It is a new tool for understanding, understanding, and exploring the phenomena, laws, and mechanisms of war. As the form of war evolves from information war to intelligent war, the complexity of war shows an exponential growth trend, and it becomes increasingly difficult to seize control of information. The key to combat is to put the enemy into a “decision-making dilemma” so that it can even Even with information superiority, it cannot make correct decisions, thus losing its combat advantage. The focus of operations will change from “information-centered” to “cognition-centered”, and the winning mechanism will change from “information winning” to “cognitive winning”.

“Three changes” reveal the driving forces behind the increasing complexity of war

War is a field full of possibilities, and change is the basic characteristic that runs through it. President Xi stressed that we must pay close attention to changes in technology, war, and opponents. Changes in science and technology are the foundation, changes in war are the subject, and changes in opponents are the key. Changes in science and technology lead to changes in war, and changes in war prompt changes in opponents. The “three changes” have promoted the evolution of war forms, the expansion of war fields, the transformation of war goals, and the expansion of war influence, revealing the driving forces behind the growth of war complexity.

Technological changes have subverted the basis for winning wars. Science and technology are the core combat effectiveness and the most active and revolutionary factor in military development. Throughout the history of the world’s military development, every major scientific and technological innovation has started a new military revolution, and every military revolution has pushed military development into a new era. Scientific and technological innovation has become a huge engine to improve the military’s combat effectiveness. . At present, a new round of scientific and technological revolution and military revolution are accelerating. The degree of informatization of modern warfare is constantly increasing, and the characteristics of intelligence are becoming increasingly apparent. The role of driving the military revolution is becoming more and more prominent. The rapid development of some cutting-edge technologies may fundamentally change the face of war and war. According to the rules, the military game between great powers is more embodied in technological subversion and counter-subversion, raids and counter-raids, offsets and counter-offsets.

The U.S. Navy’s “Nemesis” project includes reconnaissance, decoy, jamming and other systems. The decoy system covers air, surface and underwater. Under the scheduling and control of the distributed artificial intelligence engine, it can complement each other, coordinate deception, and truly create a A “ghost aircraft carrier formation” completely subverted traditional electronic deception methods and raised information deception to an unprecedented level. It can be said that science and technology has never had such a profound impact on the overall situation of national security and military strategy as it does today. It has profoundly intervened in, supported, and dominated the evolution of war forms and the innovation of combat styles, and has even subverted the mechanism of winning wars.

The U.S. Navy’s “Nemesis” project is based on networked collaborative electronic warfare

Concept, integrating different systems and utilizing unmanned distributed Clusters of electronic warfare platforms enable large-scale collaborative electronic warfare
 

The changes in war highlight the complexity of war. 

Modern warfare is undergoing profound changes, showing unprecedented diversity and complexity. This super complexity stems from many reasons: first, various advanced technologies or weapons are constantly emerging, bringing many uncertainties; second, the battlefield covers land, sea, air, space, network, electricity and cognitive and other multiple third, multiple combat objects, combat styles, combat areas, and combat methods are cross-correlated and combined to form a complex “hybrid war”; fourth, artificial intelligence algorithms build a large number of combat elements into a complex logic, and use human Machine speed beyond the reach of thinking prompts the combination, deconstruction, and recombination of various elements. In the Ukraine crisis in 2022, on the surface it is a confrontation between Russia and Ukraine, but in essence it is a “hybrid war” between the United States and Western countries and Russia; the Russian and Ukrainian armies extensively use military and civilian drones to expand The “unmanned +” application model shows the prototype of future unmanned intelligent operations; with the support of U.S. NATO air and space situational intelligence, the Ukrainian army frequently uses low-cost unmanned equipment to carry out raids on important Russian weapons platforms, highlighting its new qualities Combat forces have asymmetric attack advantages against large weapons and equipment in traditional combat systems. Changes in technology will eventually lead to changes in war. The impact of a single element on war will become weaker and weaker. The joint combat system composed of multiple elements will have a complex impact on war. War is non-linear, uncertain, chaotic and open. Complex characteristics such as adaptability and confrontation will increase exponentially, which will make it more difficult for people to judge the progress and outcome of the war.

Changes in opponents accelerate the growth of war complexity. 

Changes in war prompt changes in opponents. Currently, we are experiencing major changes unseen in a century. Major military powers are actively making strategic adjustments and promoting a new round of military reforms, which exhibit the following characteristics: first, the trend of joint, miniaturized, and autonomous institutional establishments has become more obvious; second, The first is that weapons and equipment are showing a development trend of digitization, precision, stealth, unmanned, and intelligence; the third is that the combat form is moving towards the “four nons” (non-contact, non-linear, asymmetric and irregular) and the “three nos” (Invisible, silent, unmanned) combat; fourth, the military command form is developing in the direction of flattening, automation, networking, and seamlessness. The United States regards China as its main strategic opponent and strives to suppress and contain China. It has vigorously strengthened the innovation of operational concepts and has successively proposed new operational concepts such as “hybrid warfare”, “multi-domain warfare” and “mosaic warfare”, claiming that it will fight to defeat its opponents. A high-end war in which “technology cannot be understood, strikes are difficult to predict, and speed cannot keep up.” The core of the US military’s “mosaic warfare” is unmanned, low-cost, fast, lethal, flexible and reconfigurable. It is based on distributed situational awareness, with the help of intelligent auxiliary decision-making tools and the concept of building blocks and jigsaw puzzles to adaptively formulate mission planning. , dynamically reorganize combat forces, decompose the functions of the combat platform into a larger number of single-function nodes, and build a combat system with a large number of functional nodes. Replace the “kill chain” with a “kill network”. Several nodes will fail or be missing, and the combat system can be adaptively reorganized.

The increasing complexity of war drives the transformation of the winning mechanism of war

With the rapid development of national defense science and technology, the upgrading of weapons and equipment, and the rapid evolution of war forms, modern warfare has shown exponential and explosive complex changes. These changes may seem dazzling, but there are rules to follow behind them. The fundamental thing is that the winning mechanism of war has changed. Only by thoroughly understanding the winning mechanism of modern war can we accurately recognize changes, respond scientifically, be good at seeking change, and firmly grasp the initiative in future wars.

The form of war has changed from cold weapon warfare to intelligent warfare.

The shape of war is a holistic understanding of war. So far, human war has generally gone through four historical stages: cold weapon war, hot weapon war, mechanized war, and information war, and is moving towards intelligent warfare. The history of cognitive warfare is almost as old as the history of human warfare. In the era of cold weapon war, hot weapon war, and mechanized war, cognitive warfare appears more in the form of public opinion warfare and psychological warfare. As mankind enters the information age, the development of cyberspace technology has greatly expanded the space for cognitive warfare, enriched the technical means of cognitive warfare, and greatly enhanced the permeability, timeliness, and deterrence of cognitive warfare. The status and role of Zhizhan have been unprecedentedly improved. In the future, the form of war will enter intelligent warfare, and a large number of intelligent weapon systems and platforms will be equipped with the military and put into combat. Cognitive warfare can not only interfere with and deceive the cognition of enemy personnel, but also attack the cognition of smart equipment through algorithm deception methods such as “adversarial input” and “data poisoning”. Its application scenarios and scope will be further expanded. , the status and role will be further improved.

The purpose of war has changed from conquering by force to conquering by spirit. 

The winning mechanism of modern war has undergone great changes compared with the past. The violence of war has been curbed, and the purpose of combat has changed from the original siege of cities and territories and annihilation of the enemy’s effective forces to making the opponent obey one’s will. The means of combat have shifted from military conquest to focusing more on psychological and spiritual conquest, which has made cognitive warfare increasingly prominent in its status and role in modern warfare. In recent years, “hybrid warfare” has become a major means of great power competition. More and more countries have begun to focus on using new fields and new means to achieve political, military, and economic goals that are difficult to achieve with traditional warfare. “Hybrid war” is a mixture of war subjects such as states, non-state actors and individuals, a mixture of conventional warfare, unconventional warfare and other war styles, a mixture of military operations such as combat, stability maintenance and reconstruction, and a mixture of political, military and economic The mixture of multiple fields such as military and people’s livelihood is a mixture of multiple combat goals such as defeating the enemy and winning the hearts and minds of the people. This is highly consistent with cognitive warfare. The operational field of “hybrid warfare” has expanded from the military field to politics, economy, culture, people’s livelihood and other fields; the combat methods have expanded from firepower warfare and troop warfare to diplomatic warfare, economic warfare, cyber warfare, psychological warfare, public opinion warfare and other directions. This is highly consistent with cognitive warfare. Its core essence is to “make profit out of chaos”, its main purpose is to win people’s hearts, and its combat guidance is to win by cleverness.

The winning domain of war changes from the physical domain and information domain to the cognitive domain. 

Modern war occurs in three fields: physics, information and cognition at the same time. The physical domain and information domain are separated from the material domain, and the cognitive domain is separated from the spiritual domain. The physical domain is a traditional war domain, consisting of combat platforms and military facilities, which provides the material basis for information warfare. The information domain is a newly emerging war field, that is, the space for information generation, transmission and sharing, and is the focus of information warfare competition. Cognitive domain is the scope and field involved in human cognitive activities. It is not only the space for human feeling, perception, memory and thinking activities, but also the space for knowledge generation, exchange, association, storage and application. It is also the space for perception, judgment and decision-making in combat activities. and spaces of command and control. The cognitive domain exists in the field of consciousness of combatants and affects their judgment and decision-making. It is a rising field of warfare. With the development of technologies such as network information and artificial intelligence, the scope of the cognitive domain has greatly expanded, and is expanding from the field of human consciousness to the field of modern cognitive tools and artificial intelligence. The development of military technology has expanded the scope of the cognitive domain, providing more advanced, faster, and more effective material and technical means for cognitive warfare, greatly enhancing the permeability, timeliness, and deterrence of cognitive warfare, and fundamentally It has changed cognitive warfare, making the cognitive domain a new winning field that transcends the physical domain and information domain, and has become the ultimate domain for great power games and military confrontations.

The mechanism for winning wars changes from information victory to cognitive victory. 

War confrontation is ultimately a game and confrontation of cognition. If you have the right to control cognition, you will have the initiative in war to a large extent. If you lose the right to control cognition, you will be passive in the war. The situation of being beaten. Obtaining higher and stronger control rights is the key to defeating powerful enemies. Finding ways to control cognitive power and then seize comprehensive battlefield control, so as to achieve maximum victory at the minimum cost, is an important mechanism and inherent law of modern warfare, especially cognitive warfare. In recent years, the U.S. military has successively proposed new concepts of future warfare represented by “decision-centered warfare” and “mosaic warfare”, intending to use complexity as a weapon to create multiple dilemmas for opponents, requiring it to ensure its own tactical “selective advantage”. At the same time, by creating highly complex decision-making influences on the enemy and interfering with its decision-making capabilities, it can achieve a subversive advantage over the enemy in the cognitive domain. In the primary and intermediate stages of information warfare, the key to combat is to seize network control and information control, which runs through the progressive model of “network advantage → information advantage → decision-making advantage → combat advantage”. After information warfare enters an advanced stage, it becomes more and more difficult to seize control of information. The key to combat is to make the enemy fall into a “decision-making dilemma” so that even if it has information superiority, it cannot make correct decisions, thereby losing its combat advantage and having recognition. Only by knowing the advantages can you have the combat advantage. In future wars, cognitive advantage will be the most important strategic advantage, and cognitive confrontation will be the most important form of confrontation. It can be said that “without cognition, there is no war.”

Coping with complex wars has given rise to the concept of cognitive-centered warfare

In order to cope with the exponential growth trend of the complexity characteristics of modern warfare, we must use the theories and methods of complexity science to change the concept of platform-centered warfare where firepower is supreme and killing is king, and establish a cognitive-centered combat thinking. Cognition-centered warfare refers to taking the cognitive domain as the winning area, taking the cognitive advantage as the operational goal, and focusing on interfering with cognitive means, suppressing cognitive channels, affecting cognitive production, and conducting cognitive operations on enemy personnel and intelligent equipment. Interference, suppression, deception and inducement are a new operational concept that obtains combat advantages by seizing and maintaining cognitive advantages. Its main winning mechanisms are as follows.

Use cyber deterrence to destroy the enemy’s will to fight. 

Targeting at the enemy’s political, economic, military, diplomatic, and cultural contradictions and weaknesses, disseminate deterrent information through cyberspace, or publish military parades, large-scale military exercises, new weapons and equipment research and development and other information through the Internet , causing great fear and shock to the opponent’s cognition and psychology, and deterring the enemy is not conducive to the implementation of my actions. Comprehensive use of network and electricity attack methods to carry out point strikes and warning attacks against the enemy’s important network and electricity targets and key core nodes, destroying the enemy’s system combat capabilities, affecting the normal performance of the enemy’s weapons and equipment, and providing psychological deterrence to the enemy. The US military’s “gray zone operations” theory relies on its own technological advantages and mainly takes actions such as cyber and electronic countermeasures to respond to the opponent’s “gray zone provocation” and deter the opponent from giving up “confrontation” or escalating the conflict, putting it in a dilemma.

Use information deception to induce the enemy to make wrong judgments. 

Aiming at the enemy’s reconnaissance equipment, intelligence agencies and command systems, conceal one’s military intentions, military operations and military objectives through cyber attacks, electronic deception and other means, and transmit to the enemy errors and information about one’s own False information on combat intentions, troop configurations, combat capabilities, combat plans, and battlefield situations, or use the enemy’s command information system to send false orders and information to induce the enemy to make wrong judgments and disrupt the enemy’s combat command. Implement new attacks such as “adversarial input” and “data poisoning” against artificial intelligence algorithms, allowing them to obtain preset conclusions through deep learning training, or causing them to fall into local optimal solutions and ignore the global optimal. Use technologies such as computer imaging, video synthesis, virtual reality, and artificial intelligence to synthesize sounds, videos, images, text information, etc., or use “deep fake” technology to generate false information that is difficult to distinguish between true and false and transmit it through the Internet Spread in large quantities to confuse and deceive opponents and influence their decisions and actions.

Use information suppression to block the enemy’s cognitive means. 

Aim at the enemy’s important network targets, as well as core routers, switches, gateways, key servers, etc., and use “soft” and “hard” attack methods to destroy their network nodes. Based on the networking characteristics of wireless links such as the enemy’s command and control network, communication transmission network, weapon hinge network, and early warning detection network, comprehensively use technologies and means such as electronic jamming, GPS spoofing attacks, command link takeover, and data hijacking control to suppress them. Data communication, blocking its communication links and interfering with its combat command. Implement cyber-paralysis attacks on enemy command and control, military communications, early warning detection, aerospace information and other military networks, destroying core networks that affect their operations and weakening their combat capabilities.

Create a favorable public opinion environment through public opinion propaganda.

Cooperate with the country’s political, military, and diplomatic struggles, vigorously promote one’s own justice in the war, and stimulate the enthusiasm of all people to fully support the war. With the help of new media platforms such as instant messaging tools, online forums, podcasts, Twitter, and WeChat, we can systematically disseminate information that targets the enemy’s weaknesses. After gaining widespread attention and consensus, we can then promptly report information, create new hot spots, and repeatedly build momentum. Enhance the influence and form a resonance effect to expand the effect. Propaganda “sets the tone” by cleverly setting agendas, building public opinion through powerful media, setting off a “spiral of silence”, controlling and guiding public opinion, and changing people’s opinions and behaviors.

Use psychological attacks to undermine the morale of enemy soldiers and civilians. 

Widely disseminate processed and processed information through the Internet, promote one’s own justice, demonstrate one’s strength, will and determination, vilify the enemy politically and morally, and internally Gather the thoughts and will of the military and civilians, strive for the legal and moral commanding heights externally, and spiritually “soften” and “weaken” the enemy. Use a variety of network communication methods and technical means to send various deceptive, disruptive, inductive, and deterrent messages to the enemy’s military and civilians in a targeted manner to attack the enemy’s psychological defense line, promote an ineffective confrontation mentality, and then lose the combat capability. . Through the Internet, we can create, guide, plan, build, and expand momentum to create a “momentum” that is beneficial to ourselves but not beneficial to the enemy, causing a psychological impact on the other party’s people, thereby affecting or changing their psychological state, and implementing effective psychological attacks.

Watch legal and moral support through legal struggle. 

Use legal weapons to curb the enemy’s possible or future illegal acts, declare the legality of our actions, affirm our power of military counterattack, declare our determination to pursue war responsibilities, and give To intimidate the enemy. By exposing the illegality of the enemy’s provocative behavior, criticizing the legal basis for the enemy’s combat operations, and condemning the enemy’s illegal behavior, it causes the enemy’s strategic defeat and our own strategic gain. Use legal means to restrict the enemy’s possible actions, limit the possible interference of third parties, and block other parties from interfering with our own actions. Formulate the laws and regulations necessary for our operations to provide legal protection for our operations or take legal remedial measures to reduce the possible negative impacts of our operations and ensure that combat operations are carried out in accordance with the law.


中國原始軍事參考資料 https//www.81it.com/2023/1109/88888.html

解放軍稱,認知域作戰的致勝武器是智慧演算法

According to the People’s Liberation Army, The Winning Weapon in Cognitive Domain Operations is Intelligent Algorithms

現代繁體中文:

在智慧化時代,智慧演算法作為資訊生成、分發、傳播、接收的底層邏輯和實現手段,決定了資訊的產生形式和呈現方式。 未來戰爭,智慧演算法應用邊界拓展與應用場景開發推動認知域作戰戰法更新迭代,釐清智慧演算法與認知對抗的作用機制與實現路徑,對於藉助智慧演算法創新認知域作戰戰法具有重要意義 。

智慧演算法影響認知對抗的作用機制

智慧演算法透過對使用者個人身分、心理特徵、行為習慣、興趣偏好等進行綜合分析計算,能夠制定出最優資訊推薦策略,進而以特定資訊作用於目標認知,最終影響其現實行為。

繪就目標使用者畫像。 使用者畫像的本質是將使用者進行標籤化處理,以此形成特定身分。 標籤類似數位畫像中的“像素”,資料獲取越全面,標籤刻畫越精細,對使用者行為特徵的反映就越真實。 外軍認為,認知域作戰中,廣泛借助網路爬蟲、日誌挖掘等技術手段,可以取得目標對象的基本資訊資料、金融資料、通訊資料等。 在此基礎上,利用智慧演算法對這些資料進行深度挖掘,可以系統分析出目標物的興趣與愛好、行為習慣、人際關係,進而確定其價值取向。 之後,透過建構多維度標籤向量,再對相似個體進行聚類處理,分析具有相似特徵的群體特徵,可形成群體目標畫像,並以此作為認知塑造的基礎與起點。

實現資訊個性客製。 針對不同個體、不同群體採取「分而治之」是智慧演算法的優長所在,也是認知塑造的應有之義。 依托社群媒體平台和搜尋引擎,針對特定物件進行個人化推送,可以大幅提高目標物件的接受程度,避免訊息在傳播過程中的空轉和內耗。 在此過程中,「資訊繭房」效應將會進一步狹窄目標物件的感知範圍,使其長期處於相對封閉的資訊環境中,從而主動接受片面資訊。 同時,同質化的訊息會進一步強化塑造效果,目標對像在趨同心理和群體壓力的共同作用下,可逐步喪失基本邏輯和價值判斷能力,從而潛移默化中形成發起方為其精細設定的認知 。

彰顯特定現實行為。 認知是行為的前提,而行為又反作用於認知。 智慧演算法透過對特定對象政治、軍事行動和社會等議題的立場和價值傾向進行定向塑造,可以實現對現實行為的約束和誘導。 外軍認為,透過對社會大眾傳播特殊理念,導致社會失序失控。 而對於關鍵個人,透過採取控腦攻心奪誌等策略,使其對於國家戰略方向研判錯誤,對於戰爭決策感到懷疑,對於戰爭走向消極悲觀,從而產生「不戰而屈人之兵」的效果。 實務證明,目標認知定向重塑彰顯現實特定行為,現實行為動態改變引發使用者畫像即時調整,進而帶動推薦策略調整更新,形成了完整的閉合回饋迴路。

智慧演算法影響認知對抗的實現路徑

智慧演算法具有封裝移植、資料共享、快速運算、自主學習等特徵,與認知對抗之間存在天然的契合性。

促進對抗形式平戰耦合。 跨越時間界限的訊息傳播導致認知空間的衝突無時不在,時間尺度可能從數秒到數十年不等。 在平時,認知對抗戰法最主要的特點是隱蔽性和長期性,戰時則表現為壓制性和急迫性。 智慧演算法透過資訊共享、態勢更新和策略繼承,可進一步促進認知對抗形式的平戰耦合。 基於平時資訊與戰時情報,對敵情、我情、戰場環境進行全方位分析研判,可以自動計算得出對抗強點、弱點、重點、難點等方面的結論;基於數學建模和機器學習,結合 平時認知對抗成果和戰場即時態勢,經過綜合評估,可以提出最優戰法和方案。

促進對抗手段顯隱結合。 認知域作戰,海量、繁雜的資訊充斥其中,樣式多樣、優劣不齊,為己方辨識處理帶來挑戰的同時,也為迷惑對手提供了便利條件。 只有透過認知融合才能形成對態勢的全面、及時、準確的判斷,進而將全域感知優勢轉化為決策優勢與行動優勢。 綜合多通路資訊進行智慧分析比較、綜合研判,能辨識錯誤訊息、過濾無用資訊、甄別不實訊息,為指揮決策提供資訊支撐。 如可採取顯性手段進行認知威懾與意志瓦解,採取隱性手段進行認知欺騙及認知誘導,並採取顯隱結合方式進行認知迷惑等。

促進對抗空間全局融合。 認知對抗空間不僅涵蓋了包含陸、海、空、天等物理域空間,也涵蓋電磁、網路等資訊域空間和認知域空間。 認知對抗是全局融合對抗,戰場數據生成速度極快、體量巨大,對於計算的速度和能力提出了極高要求。 依靠傳統的人工運算、電腦輔助運算的模式已無法滿足戰場空間融合的需求,必須藉助智慧演算法的高效率、強算力和高準確性實現半自動化乃至自動化的融合計算。 依托智慧演算法,縱向上可以實現從認知感知到認知分析,再到認知決策的全程融合;橫向上可以實現物理域、資訊域和認知域多維度態勢、力量、決策、調度的跨 域融合。

現代英語:

In the era of intelligence, intelligent algorithms, as the underlying logic and implementation means for information generation, distribution, dissemination, and reception, determine the form and presentation of information. In future wars, the expansion of the application boundaries of intelligent algorithms and the development of application scenarios will promote the update and iteration of cognitive domain combat tactics. Clarifying the mechanism and implementation path of intelligent algorithms and cognitive confrontation is of great significance for innovating cognitive domain combat tactics with the help of intelligent algorithms. .

The mechanism of how intelligent algorithms influence cognitive confrontation

Intelligent algorithms can formulate optimal information recommendation strategies through comprehensive analysis and calculation of users’ personal identity, psychological characteristics, behavioral habits, interests and preferences, etc., and then use specific information to affect target cognition, and ultimately affect their real-life behavior.

Draw a portrait of your target users. The essence of user portraits is to label users to form a specific identity. Tags are similar to “pixels” in digital portraits. The more comprehensive the data is obtained, the more precise the tag description will be, and the more realistic the reflection of user behavior characteristics will be. Foreign militaries believe that in cognitive domain operations, technical means such as web crawlers and log mining are widely used to obtain basic information data, financial data, communication data, etc. of target objects. On this basis, intelligent algorithms are used to deeply mine these data, and the interests, hobbies, behavioral habits, and interpersonal relationships of the target object can be systematically analyzed, and then their value orientation can be determined. Afterwards, by constructing multi-dimensional label vectors, clustering similar individuals, and analyzing group characteristics with similar characteristics, a group target portrait can be formed, which can be used as the basis and starting point for cognitive shaping.

Achieve personalized information customization. Adopting “divide and conquer” for different individuals and groups is the advantage of intelligent algorithms, and it is also the proper meaning of cognitive shaping. Relying on social media platforms and search engines to carry out personalized push for specific objects can greatly improve the acceptance of the target objects and avoid idling and internal consumption of information during the dissemination process. In this process, the “information cocoon” effect will further narrow the target object’s perception range, leaving it in a relatively closed information environment for a long time, thus actively accepting one-sided information. At the same time, homogeneous information will further strengthen the shaping effect. Under the combined effect of convergence psychology and group pressure, the target object may gradually lose basic logic and value judgment capabilities, thus subtly forming the cognition carefully set by the initiator. .

Demonstrate specific real-life behaviors. Cognition is the premise of behavior, and behavior reacts on cognition. Intelligent algorithms can constrain and induce real-life behavior by directional shaping of the stance and value tendencies of specific objects on political, military operations, social and other issues. The foreign military believes that by disseminating special ideas to the public, it can lead to social disorder and loss of control. For key individuals, through strategies such as controlling the brain, attacking the heart, and seizing the will, they will make mistakes in their judgment of the country’s strategic direction, doubt the war decision-making, and be negative and pessimistic about the direction of the war, thus producing the effect of “conquering the enemy without fighting.” Practice has proven that the reshaping of target cognitive orientation highlights specific real-life behaviors, and dynamic changes in real-life behaviors trigger real-time adjustments to user portraits, which in turn drives the adjustment and update of recommendation strategies, forming a complete closed feedback loop.

Intelligent algorithms influence the implementation path of cognitive confrontation

Intelligent algorithms have the characteristics of encapsulation and transplantation, data sharing, fast calculation, autonomous learning, etc., and there is a natural fit between them and cognitive confrontation.

Promote the coupling of confrontational forms of peace and war. The dissemination of information across time boundaries leads to conflicts in cognitive space at all times, and the time scale may vary from seconds to decades. In peacetime, the most important characteristics of cognitive confrontation tactics are concealment and long-term nature, while in wartime they are suppressive and urgent. Intelligent algorithms can further promote the coupling of peace and war in the form of cognitive confrontation through information sharing, situation updating and strategy inheritance. Based on peacetime information and wartime intelligence, comprehensive analysis and judgment of the enemy’s situation, our situation, and the battlefield environment can be automatically calculated to draw conclusions on the strengths, weaknesses, key points, and difficulties of the confrontation; based on mathematical modeling and machine learning, combined with Cognitive confrontation results and real-time battlefield situation in peacetime, and after comprehensive evaluation, optimal tactics and plans can be proposed.

Promote the combination of explicit and implicit means of confrontation. Cognitive domain operations are filled with massive and complex information in various formats and with varying strengths and weaknesses, which not only brings challenges to one’s own identification and processing, but also provides convenient conditions for confusing the opponent. Only through cognitive fusion can a comprehensive, timely and accurate judgment of the situation be formed, and then the advantages of global perception be transformed into decision-making and action advantages. Comprehensive multi-channel information for intelligent analysis and comparison, comprehensive research and judgment, can identify erroneous information, filter useless information, screen false information, and provide information support for commanders’ decision-making. For example, explicit means can be used for cognitive deterrence and will disintegration, implicit means can be used for cognitive deception and cognitive induction, and explicit and implicit means can be used for cognitive confusion.

Promote global integration of confrontation space. The cognitive confrontation space not only covers the physical domain space including land, sea, air, space, etc., but also covers the information domain space and cognitive domain space such as electromagnetic and network. Cognitive confrontation is a global fusion confrontation. Battlefield data is generated extremely quickly and in huge volumes, which places extremely high requirements on computing speed and capabilities. Relying on traditional manual calculations and computer-aided calculations can no longer meet the needs of battlefield space fusion. Semi-automatic or even automated fusion calculations must be achieved with the help of the high efficiency, strong computing power and high accuracy of intelligent algorithms. Relying on intelligent algorithms, vertical integration from cognitive perception to cognitive analysis to cognitive decision-making can be achieved; horizontally, multi-dimensional situation, power, decision-making, and scheduling across the physical domain, information domain, and cognitive domain can be achieved. Domain fusion.

原中國人民解放軍網址:https://www.81.cn/jfjbmap/content/2023-03/21/content_888888.htm

中國人民解放軍認知域作戰的重要方式:價值守攻

An Important Way for China’s People’s Liberation Army to Fight in the Cognitive Domain: Value Defense and Offense

原始國語:

引言

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

價值攻防作用認知域的特點

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

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

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

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

價值攻防作用認知域的機理

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

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

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

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

價值攻防作用認知域的主要手段

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

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

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

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

(作者單位:軍事科學院軍事政治工作研究院)

Introduction

Value offense and defense is an important way to carry out cognitive domain operations from a strategic level. Usually, value offense and defense involves interfering with people’s thinking, beliefs, values, etc., in order to achieve the purpose of disintegrating the enemy’s consensus, destroying the enemy’s will, and then gaining comprehensive control of the battlefield. . Accurately grasping the characteristics, mechanisms, and methods of value attack and defense is crucial to gaining operational advantages in the cognitive domain in the future.

Characteristics of the cognitive domain of value attack and defense

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

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

Full dimensional release. Modern warfare increasingly exhibits overall, multi-domain, and all-time characteristics. Cognitive domain operations aim to affect battlefield effects by intervening in people’s consciousness. The relative stability of consciousness determines that people’s worldview, beliefs and other values ​​are generally relatively stable. Therefore, value attack and defense require long-term, uninterrupted, holographic Proceed in all dimensions. From a time point of view, value offense and defense blurs the boundaries between peacetime and war, and is always in war, at any time, continuously accumulating and gradually releasing combat effectiveness; from a space point of view, value offense and defense blurs the boundaries between front and rear of operations, and creates a full range of physical and intangible space. Directional expansion; from a field perspective, value offense and defense blurs the boundaries between military and non-military. It not only occurs in the military field, but also exists in political, economic, diplomatic, cultural and other fields, showing the characteristics of full coverage.

Technology empowers. Cognitive domain operations are a technology-intensive and complex system engineering. The penetration of emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence, brain science, and quantum computing into the entire process is triggering iterative upgrades and profound changes in cognitive domain operations. Intelligent tools have fundamentally enhanced the ability of combatants in the cognitive domain to manipulate and intervene in the opponent’s thinking. As a new means and new style of combat power, human-machine hybridization will change the subject of future wars. Independent confrontation and cloud-brain victory may become the mainstream offensive and defensive model. . In recent years, NATO has launched cognitive electronic warfare equipment aimed at changing the opponent’s value perception and behavior through information offense and defense. The development of science and technology has also triggered a cognitive revolution. The rapid spread of information has further accelerated the differences in public value cognition. Cognitive islands have intensified the value gap between different subjects. The changes in social structure brought about by intelligence have profoundly changed the political and cultural landscape. . Starting from this point, in future cognitive domain operations, holding the “nose” of technological innovation and mastering key core technologies will be crucial to seizing the initiative on the battlefield.

The mechanism of cognitive domain of value attack and defense

Value offense and defense is a high-level confrontation in the cognitive domain, and its target is people’s deep cognition. Consciousness is the reflection of social existence in the brain. Regulation of social existence, guidance of public consciousness and changes in the function of the human brain can strengthen or reverse human consciousness. If you want to defeat your opponent in an offensive and defensive confrontation, you must follow the laws of thinking and cognition and grasp the winning mechanism of value offense and defense.

Shock value “protection zone”. Occupying the commanding heights of values ​​is the logical starting point for carrying out value offense and defense. Social consciousness is often composed of relatively stable core values ​​and peripheral auxiliary theories. Various theories such as economics, politics, religion, culture, etc. can be constructed and adapted to protect core values ​​from external impacts, and therefore also bear the burden of external impact. The impact of other values ​​​​challenges. From the perspective of foreign military forces, value offense and defense means to continuously impact the “protective zone” of the opponent’s ideology through cultural penetration, religious conflict, strategic communication and other means, in conjunction with actions in the physical and information domains. This often requires grasping the values, political attitudes, religious beliefs, etc. that affect the opponent’s cognition. By disrupting their social group psychology, inducing value confusion, shaking the will to fight, destroying cultural identity, and even changing and disintegrating their original cognitive system, Thereby instilling or implanting new values ​​that are beneficial to oneself in order to achieve the purpose of combat.

Ignite the “tipping point” of conflict. Cognitive domain warfare involves history, culture, political systems, national emotions, religious beliefs and other categories, and the subjects of the war have also expanded from simple military personnel to ordinary people. Stimulating cognitive conflicts among ordinary people by hyping up topic disputes and public events will become an important means of cognitive domain warfare. In recent local conflicts, it is not uncommon for warring parties to use purposeful narratives to ignite national emotions, trigger political crises, and then affect the war situation. In future wars, some countries will use hot-button and sensitive events to ignite public opinion, and rely on network technology to gather, attract, mobilize, precisely manipulate and induce and shape ordinary people, thereby promoting general conflicts to escalate into battles over beliefs, systems, and values. Become the norm.

Controlling cognitive “fracture surfaces.” As an existence at the conceptual level, cognitive space is superimposed by the subjective cognitive space of all combat individuals. It is a collection of differentiated, different and even conflicting values. However, ideology has a “suturing” function. Through cognitive shaping and discourse construction, it can effectively “sew” broken cognitions together, condense scattered values, and form a relatively stable cognitive system. After World War II, France conducted an effective cognitive “suturing” of the trauma of defeat. It used a set of independent narrative logic to explain how the war provided “new opportunities” for France, which greatly condensed the French people’s political identification with the government. When fighting for value positions in cognitive domain operations, we should pay attention to the cognitive fractures within the enemy, find the cognitive connection points between the enemy and ourselves, and conduct cognitive “stitching” to unite the forces of all parties to the maximum extent and isolate and disintegrate the enemy.

The main means of the cognitive domain of value attack and defense

Value offense and defense expand cognitive confrontation from the public opinion and psychological levels to the thinking space, and from the military field to the overall domain, thereby achieving a blow to the enemy’s deep political identity. At present, the world’s military powers are strengthening their strategic preparations, aiming at profound changes in target subjects and tactics and means, transforming their operational thinking, and actively taking the initiative in cognitive domain operations.

Aiming for deep destruction. Cognitive domain operations directly affect human brain cognition. Compared with physical domain operations, it is easier to achieve deep strategic intentions. In particular, once the “high-order cognition” of people’s language level, thinking level and cultural level is broken through, it will help to strategically reverse the battlefield situation and achieve the political purpose of the war. Based on this, cognitive domain operations often start before the war, by intervening in the opponent’s internal affairs and diplomacy, shaking the ideological and value foundations of the opponent; during war, they focus on affecting the enemy’s war decision-making, campaign command, and battle implementation value judgments, attacking or weakening them. The decision-making ability and resistance will of combatants, etc. All hostile parties are trying to “maintain their own world while increasing the destructive pressure on their opponents” to achieve the goal of achieving decision-making advantages through competing for cognitive advantages, and then gaining operational advantages.

Centered on ordinary individuals. In the future, the subjects of cognitive domain operations will no longer be limited to military personnel. Broadly speaking, individuals who can exchange and disseminate information may become combatants. Compared with elites in the social field, ordinary people are more likely to accept and spread multiple values, and their cognitive space is more likely to be manipulated. At present, online media is becoming the main channel for information exchange and dissemination in the social field. Through targeted information guidance and information delivery, the purpose of cognitive shaping is achieved. Foreign military practice has proven that by shaping the cognition of ordinary individuals, it can cause progressive penetration and cognitive interference from bottom to top, causing the ideological concepts between ordinary people and social decision-makers to deviate, making it impossible to achieve key actions. effective consensus.

In the form of protracted warfare. Unlike military struggles in the physical domain that directly attack and destroy “hard” targets, the potential target of cognitive domain operations is human cognition. Value attack and defense are directed at changing the concepts, beliefs, will, emotions, etc. of the combatants, which often requires subtlety and step-by-step operations. Effective cognitive attacks are generally launched during the preparation stage of combat and run throughout the war. By collecting the opponent’s cognitive situation, decision-making habits, thinking patterns, etc., actions such as creating a situation and changing the atmosphere are carried out in a targeted manner. Therefore, cognitive domain operations need to strengthen the overall design, pay special attention to coordinating multi-party forces, and strengthen pre-preparation in multiple positions such as public opinion field creation and diplomacy, so as to form an overall operational synergy.

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

中國軍事原文參考: https://www.81.cn/jfjbmap/content/2022-08/02/content_88888.htm

中國網絡衝突討論,信息與研究 // Chinese Cyber Conflict Discussions, Information & Research