. "6 Efforts Toward a Taxonomic Structure of DoD Systems for Operational Testing." Statistical Methods for Testing and Evaluating Defense Systems: Interim Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 1995.
The following HTML text is provided to enhance online
readability. Many aspects of typography translate only awkwardly to HTML.
Please use the page image
as the authoritative form to ensure accuracy.
Statistical Methods for Testing and Evaluating Defense Systems: Interim Report
Reflect the prevalence of various types of systems.
Highlight attributes that might call for different statistical approaches, affect decision tradeoffs, or involve qualitatively different consequences.
Facilitate the integration of commercial approaches by helping to align military and commercial contexts.
With these general purposes in mind, one is led to think of taxonomy dimensions such as the following:
Cost of system and of testing
What is the cost of a test item?
What is the number of items to be procured?
Is the testing destructive?
Role of software
Is the system a software product?
Does the system have significant software content?
Does the system use a dedicated computer or require the development of new computer hardware?
Environment of use. How stressful is the environment within which computer hardware, sensors, motors, electronics, etc. must operate?
Environment of test and evaluation
How close are test environments to actual-use (combat) environments?
What is the relevance of simulation?
To what extent are performance evaluations dependent upon indirect measurements and inference?
To what extent is relevant prior knowledge available and able to be used (1) in the design of evaluation studies or (2) in drawing conclusions from test and evaluation?
New versus evolutionary system
Is the system a de novo development?
Is it an upgrade?
Is it a modification?
Is it a derived design?
Is it a replacement for another system?
What are the consequences of not achieving a successful replacement?
What are the consequences of achieving a replacement at a much higher cost than anticipated?
What are the consequences of receiving it at a much later date than planned?
What are the consequences of receiving it at a much lower level of performance than promised?
A useful taxonomic structure might be developed simply by expanding on this list, adding, deleting, or elaborating as deemed useful. But addressing questions of what to put in and what to leave out raises other questions about the various uses and purposes of the taxonomic structure. Does one wish to recognize all distinctions that may be significant for characterizing: