In Auburngrads/AFIT: Rmarkdown Templates For Academic Documents at Department of Defense Schools

knitr::opts_chunk$set(echo = TRUE)
library(knitcitations)
cite_options(citation_format='numeric')
author <- knitcitations::citep('10.1056/NEJMoa1009638')

Introduction

\IEEEPARstart{T}{his} demo file is intended to serve as a "starter file" for IEEE Computer Society journal papers produced under \LaTeX using IEEEtran.cls version 1.8b and later. I wish you the best of success.

\hfill mds

\hfill August 26, 2015

Subsection Heading Here

Subsection text here.

% needed in second column of first page if using \IEEEpubid %\IEEEpubidadjcol

\subsubsection{Subsubsection Heading Here} Subsubsection text here.

This is an R Markdown document. Markdown is a simple formatting syntax for authoring HTML, PDF, and MS Word documents. For more details on using R r try(author) Markdown see http://rmarkdown.rstudio.com.

\IEEEPARstart{T}{his} demo is intended to serve as a "starter file" for IEEE Computer Society journal papers produced under \LaTeX using IEEEtran.cls version 1.8b and later. I wish you the best of success.

Background

Subsection text here. This is the background.

Problem Statement

Recreate the pi estimation simulation and return the number of trials where you find that the second significant digit of pi is stable. That is, how many trials does it take in the simulation such that you return the value of 3.14 consistently? In MB, what was the size of your file? Recall that the simulation required that you compare the area of a square to the area of a circle and randomly select a point inside of the area.

Answer:

The value of pi can be estimated by comparing the ratio of areas of a circle and square, $\rho$. The area of a circle is $A = \pi*r^2$ and the area of a square is $A = (2r)^2$. The ratio of the area of a circle to the area of a square is:

$\rho = \pir^2/(2r)^2 = \pi1^2/(2*1)^2 = \pi/4$

Multiplying both sides by 4 gives as estimate for pi:

$\pi = 4*\rho$

The ratio, $\rho$, can be calculated by randomly selecting XY coordinates and determining if they fall within a circle of radius = 1.

r <- 1
n <- 100
count <- 0
ref <- matrix(0, nrow = n, ncol = 3)
for (i in 1:n){
  x <- runif(1)
  y <- runif(1)
  ref[i,1] <- x
  ref[i,2] <- y
  if(x^2 + y^2 <= r) {
    count <- count +1
    ref[i,3] <- 1
  }
}
plot(ref, col =  ifelse(ref[,3] == 1,"red", "blue"), asp = 1, xlab = "X", ylab = "Y")

Research Questions

To estimate the value of pi, a Monte Carlo Simulation (MCS) is used to randomly generate XY coordinates between 0 and 1. The Pythagorean theorem is used to determine if the coordinate pair falls within the area of the circle r author.

$x^2 + y^2 <= 1$

The ratio, $\rho$, is then calculated by adding up the number of points which fall within the circle and dividing by the total number of points generated. The code below shows that 1,000,000 trials can consistently estimate the value of pi to 3.14. The plot shows 100 different runs of the simulation and the estimated value of pi for each run. Refer to figure \ref{fig:hist_pi}

r <- 1
m <- 100

estpi <- matrix(0, m, 1)
for (j in 1:m){
  count <- 0
  n <- 100
  for (i in 1:n){
    x <- runif(1)
    y <- runif(1)
    if(x^2 + y^2 <= r) count <- count +1
  }
  estpi[j,1] <- round(count/n*4, 3)

}
plot(estpi[,1], type = "o", xlab = "Simulation Run", ylab = "Pi Estimate", col = "blue")
abline(h = pi, col = "red")

Literature Review

Installations compose the backbone of the United States military, allowing it to project power all over the globe. The Department of Defense (DOD) manages global real property located on more than 5,000 different locations worldwide (GAO, 2015). With such a large number of sites and associated infrastructure for supporting various missions, it is critical that all assets be properly maintained. DOD leaders are faced with the challenge of maintaining mission readiness, but must do so with less funding than what is required to adequately maintain the necessary infrastructure. In the United States Air Force (USAF), the phrase that has been used by many leaders to describe this challenge is “do more with less” or “do less with less”.
The Air Force Strategic Master Plan states as one of its objectives: “provide resilient installations, infrastructure, and combat support capabilities that enable the Air Force to project power rapidly, effectively, and efficiently” (Department of the Air Force, 2015). Infrastructureby its very nature is complex and static and creates a challenge that must be overcome to meet this objective. Leaning on research in the field of crisis management, resiliency can be defined as the ability to absorb shocks while still maintaining function (Chang, Mcdaniels, Fox, Dhariwal, & Longstaff, 2014). For the DOD, the ability to absorb shocks can be thought of as how it adapts to changes in mission or strategy, and not just disasters. A resilient installation for the DOD is one that has the infrastructure needed to meet current mission requirements, is properly maintained, and has the capability to change to meet new challenges and changes in strategy. Executive Order 13327 directs “the efficient and economical use of Federal real property resources in accordance with their value as national assets and in the best interest of the nation.” The 2007 Defense Installations Strategic Plan (DISP) provides guidance on the implementation of Executive Order 13327. The DISP provides six goals: Right Size and Place, Right Quality, Right Risk, Right Resources, Right Management Practices, Right Workflow (Department of Defense, 2007). The first two goals within the DISP are relevant to discussion of resiliency, Right Size and Place, and Right Quality. Right size and place ensures that an installation has the infrastructure needed, and that installations are strategically located. Infrastructure built with the capability to adjust based on strategy and need, as well as being properly maintained is answered by the second goal, right quality. Properly implementing these goals is the first step towards resilient installations and infrastructure. In 2012, the DoD estimated that it had a 20 percent excess in infrastructure despite the use of Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) (GAO, 2013). The problem is worsened by the fact that the DOD has been unable to fund the current facility sustainment, restoration and maintenance (FSRM) requirements (Johnson, 2015). Ultimately, this can place a higher risk on the infrastructure if it is not properly maintained, which can lead to accelerated failures and less resilient installations. These issues demonstrate that the first two goals in the 2007 DISP are not being achieved. Although excess capacity may be seen as a way to achieve resiliency, with limited resources it taxes the DOD ability to achieve proper quality, and conflicts with EO 13327.
Historically, BRAC has been used as a tool to answer the first goal of right size and place. Not only has it been used to close installations, but as a tool to create joint installations which exist geographically close to one another. Joint basing was pursued as a method to reduce infrastructure and to achieve cost-savings but this has yet to be realized (GAO, 2015). BRAC is a tool that can be used to address excesses within the DOD; however, it does not inherently lead to more resilient installations. It fails to address problems where installations are undersized or are unable to provide quality infrastructure. Therefore, a different tool must be used to comply with EO 13327, while at the same time meet the demand for resilient installations. Partnerships are one area that can be further explored to help meet the need for resiliency. This is not a new concept; governments already use this idea to provide infrastructure. Partnerships have widely been used to have private entities provide highway construction and other forms of infrastructure. The same mechanism is currently being used in the city of Long Beach to demolish and build a new city hall, library, park and port headquarters (Merewitz, 2016). Public agencies around the world have recognized that they may not have the resources to provide the desired infrastructure, and they are not always adequately equipped to properly maintain the infrastructure once it is constructed.
In highway construction, these types of partnerships usually take the form of build-operate-transfer (BOT) (Grimsey & Lewis, 2002). Using this arrangement, the private entity is responsible for building and operating the project, but for a period afterwards, will receive the revenue generated by the project, such as tolls from a highway. Proper risk allocation is used to transfer risks to all parties involved and achieve a value for money arrangement (Grimsey & Lewis, 2005). The mechanism used can vary, but a value for money arrangement must be considered if an increase in efficiency is to be achieved, resulting in the compliance of EO 13327. Partnerships may be the tool that is needed to meet the demand for resilient installations because they may be able to meet the first two goals in the 2007 DISP. Using public or private entities to provide infrastructure can allow for the investment capital needed to be shifted to the private entity through risk allocation. This is the case in the city of Long Beach, where the financial risk is allocated from the public agency to the private entities for the design, construction, financing, operation and maintenance of the facilities (Merewitz, 2016). More specialized public or private entities may be better suited to properly maintain current infrastructure and to cope with the changing needs of an installation. Partnerships are tools that can be developed to meet a variety of needs depending on the situation or current condition of an installation and its associated infrastructure. As such, they have the capability of dealing with excess infrastructure, inadequately maintained infrastructure, and the ability to meet changing demands, which ultimately can lead to resilient installations.

Conclusion

The conclusion goes here.

% if have a single appendix: \appendix[Proof of the Zonklar Equations] % or \appendices \section{} Appendix A text goes here. \section{} Appendix B text goes here.

References

write.bibtex(file = 'bibliography/ieee_bib.bib')
#knitcitations::bibliography()

\onecolumn

library(xtable)
xtt <- xtable(mtcars, caption = "Figure 1")
print.xtable(xtt, comment = F, caption.placement = 'top')

\twocolumn

Auburngrads/AFIT documentation built on May 5, 2019, 8:13 a.m.