MODIFICATION
A -- Agent-Based Modeling of Irregular Warfare (ABMIW)
- Notice Date
- 8/3/2007
- Notice Type
- Modification
- NAICS
- 541710
— Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences
- Contracting Office
- ACA, ITEC4, Directorate of Contracting , 2461 Eisenhower Avenue, Alexandria, VA 22331-0700
- ZIP Code
- 22331-0700
- Solicitation Number
- RFI-2007-1276
- Response Due
- 3/31/2008
- Archive Date
- 5/30/2008
- Small Business Set-Aside
- N/A
- Description
- RFI #2007-1276 ABMIW, Modification #2. QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS 1. I understand this is only an RFI, but I was wondering if there is a contractor currently fulfilling this service or if this is a new requirement. If there is a contractor, are you able to provide the name, number, award/expiration date, and value? Answer: This is a new requirement. 2. It was difficult to tell from the RFI alone what to expect in terms of length of content. The seven questions indicate brevity, but it's hard to understand whether in this instance you expect many pages or mostly summary information to estimate the dem and for funding, as in our response. Answer: There is no page limit or required format for responses. 3. Reference the General Information Section of the RFI Web Page on FedBizOpps - What are the Original and Current Response Dates of Mar 31, 2008? My understanding is that the written RFI Submittal is due no later than July 30, 2007 at 1:00pm. Answer: The due date for responses to the RFI was extended from July 30, 2007 to August 3, 2007 (1:00 p.m.) with Mod. #1 to the RFI. The date of March 31, 2008 is the Archive date for Fedbizopps posting only. 4. Is this an R&D effort or is the customer expecting a solution that is available off-the-shelf? Answer: The Government is interested in adapting existing software to support various studies. However, the Government is also interested in the ability to join future R&D efforts. 5. Are you requesting a single solution--one product that covers all the requirements--or a number of solutions that address all the requirements? Answer: Either a single solution or several solutions that can be used together to support studies would be considered. 6. What is the anticipated period of performance? Answer: To be determined (TBD). 7. In the RFI is this bit: [(3) Response time is critical as many of the items will be considered critical to the Warfighter and requires short turnaround times.] Do you mean that the system itself must return results quickly, or are you referring to existing technology and that it must be ready for quick deployment? Answer: The system itself must return results quickly and also must be ready for quick deployment. 8. Also, in a few places you mention [AI Modules], as in: [One deliverable will be an integration toolkit in which AI modules may be plugged in...] What do you consider AI modules in this RFI, as distinct from agent-based solutions? Answer: The quote is best read concentrating on the [ors.] The point is that the Government requires the modeler operating the simulation to be able to port in or out data to other simulations/tools/modules. This could be an AI module or other modules/ methods. 9. The RFI implies that the developer of the model would in fact be just that - the [developer] - and not necessarily the actual research facility doing the [analysis] of the problem; the model is presumably to be run by PA&E staff. Is this correct? Answer: The model would be used by PA&E and its analytic partners, including the Joint Staff and the Services. The intent is for Government analysts to run the model at government facilities as they do now for conventional combat models such as Synthetic Theatre Operations Research Model (STORM) and Joint Integrated Campaign Model (JICM). There are various possible mixes of developers vs. government effort possible--The model might be fully operable by the government or might be operable after a specific data build by the contractor prior to each study. There is also the possibility of short-term around time due to a critical need. 10. While the features of the model are spelled out - in great detail - all details regarding the actual [problem] (or scenarios), as well as guidance on the context in which the problem(s)/scenarios are to be explored are missing. While I can understand, in the interests of classification, that certain aspects of this [problem space] must remain undefined, as an operations research analyst who develops models for a living, I can attest to the fact that is nearly impossible to concei ve of a design for a model without knowing something (actually, to considerable depth) of the intended problem space. Answer: This model should be able to help predict trends contributing to the emergence and development of insurgency during peace-keeping operations and post combat stability operations. 11. With regard to the [details] of the model, at least as conceived/defined in the RFI. Many items on this list (ex: [incorporate the influence, based on social theories agreed upon with the government, of infrastructure, economic, and practical constra ints and opportunities on behavior]) arguably can define - *by themselves alone * - viable backbones of an interesting *basic research* effort; yet they are mentioned as but one item of many in a long list of what the project *expects* to be part of the mo del. Frankly, the list - collectively - appears to strongly over constrain the model. Given the enormous multidimensional space of variables involved, if all of these components are truly meant to be part of a model, I'd question the utility of such a model to meaningfully address significant issues. Thus my question: am I to interpret this list of model [features] as a literal snapshot of what the project is attempting to do with the model, or more as a list of [guidelines] that may/will change as the problem b ecomes better defined and the design process starts in earnest? Please guidance on these concerns, or any additional specifics about the kinds of problems/scenarios to be explored, and toward what analytical end, that would help clarify my formal response to the RFI. Answer: This RFI is presenting a version of a tool that would be ideal to the Governments type of analysis. The Government recognizes that it may not be possible to meet all of these criteria or that more advanced criteria may exist that we have no know ledge of. Nothing follows.
- Place of Performance
- Address: ACA, ITEC4 Directorate of Contracting , 2461 Eisenhower Avenue Alexandria VA
- Zip Code: 22331-0700
- Country: US
- Zip Code: 22331-0700
- Record
- SN01361742-W 20070805/070803222143 (fbodaily.com)
- Source
-
FedBizOpps Link to This Notice
(may not be valid after Archive Date)
| FSG Index | This Issue's Index | Today's FBO Daily Index Page |