CIA-RDP96-00789R002100350011-9

Approved For Release 2000/0 8/06 : GRDP96-00789R002100350011-9
SUN STREAK Ops/Tng Objectives
January 1986 - January 1988
Operations
Training
900 sessions (4 sources)
450 sessions (2 trainees)
*
*
*
*
****
*
*
*
Utility Assessment
SI - SIII
80% (720)
66% (300)
*
*
*
Collection
SIV - SVI
20% (180)
33% (150)
Approved For Release 2000/08/68 : SIA-RPP 16-00789R002100350011-9
*

Approved For Release 20 08/08: CIAFRDP96-00789R002100350011-9
TARGET CATEGORIES
RV
Intelligence Utility Assessment
1.
(S/SK/WNINTEL)
Attached hereto are the target categories
selected for examination by RV in support of the planned RV
Intelligence Utility Assessment.
They have been carefully
chosen to represent a broad spectrum of intelligence problems.
The intelligence function and production codes of the DIA
Register of Intelligence Publications (RIP) have been used so
that results from the RV assessment study will be readily
understood by intelligence users.
Intelligence indicators will
be identified for each category as target packages are developed.
2.
(S/SK/WNINTEL)
Plans are to conduct 20 RV examinations (5
each per source) of each of the 36 selected categories from
January 1986 to January 1988 (20 X 36 = 720 sessions) .
Care
will be taken to maintain appropriate compartmentalization of
information relative to actual
sites to be RVed.
These
procedures will guarantee that sources are unburdened by
preconceived notions of the sites as well as insure that the
information reported by the sources is the product of RV and not
more conventional analytic efforts.
3.
(S/SK/WNINTEL)
The RV Intelligence Utility Assessment is
not an attempt to scientifically prove or disprove RV through
the use of statistical methodology.
It is, as stated earlier,
an attempt to identify those categories of intelligence targets
which would best be serviced by RV. Therefore, each of the 720
RV examinations will be rated for accuracy and overall
intelligence value.
The 0 to 3 point accuracy rating scale
developed by SRI International for GRILL FLAME will be used in
conjunction with a 0 to 3 point intelligence value rating:
Accuracy Scale
0 - Little correspondence
1 - Site contact with mixed results
2 - Good
3 - Excellent
HANDLE VIA SKEET CHANNELS ONLY
SPECIAL ACCESS REQUIRED
WARNING NOTICE:
SENSITIVE
CLASSIFIED BY :
DIA/DT
INTELLIGENCE SOURCES AND
DECLASSIFY ON:
OADR
METHODS INVOLVED
Approved For Release 2089/08/08:4-RDP96-00789R002100350011-9
INc/ 2

Approved For Release 2000/08/08: CIA-RDP96-00789R002100350011-9
Value Scale
0
No intelligence value
1
- Minimal intelligence value
2 - Moderate intelligence value
- High intelligence value
3
The reason for this dual rating is based on the experience of
CENTER LANE. Many times a RV session will yield very "accurate"
data, but that data will be of little
"value" to the
intelligence community.
The RV Intelligence Utility Assessment
will identify those categories of intelligence targets for which
both accurate and valuable information can be provided.
.
Approved For Release 2000/08/08 CIA-RDP96-00789R002100350011-9

SG1A
Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002100350011-9
Next 11 Page(s) In Document Exempt
Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002100350011-9

Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002100350011-9
UNCLASSIFIED
OVERVIEW OF SRI-INTERNATIONAL EVALUATION METHODS
Judging on a Blind Basis
In this method, SRI selected an analyst not otherwise associated
with the series of sites to be judged to quantitatively assess
the degree of correspondence of a given transcript of the remote
viewer's data concerning each site and the actual targets.
The
judge was given a transcript including a list of specific
concepts (e.g., "red" or
"shady" )
for each site and was
instructed to compare each transcript to each site (i.e., 6
sites = 6 transcripts/concept lists = 36 assessments per
concept) . Each concept was rated on a scale of 0 to 10 with "0"
implying no correspondence between the concept and the target
site and "10" implying complete correspondence. Upon completion
of the rating, the judge then computed the average rating score
for all concepts in each transcript matched against each target,
displaying his results in a matrix with target displayed as rows
and transcripts displayed as columns. The transcripts were then
ranked 1-6 indicating which transcript most closely matched the
actual site.
This technique, although apparently excellent with
regard to demonstrating the presence or absence of a viable RV
function, did not provide a uniform measure from transcript to
transcript of the quality of RV functioning. It therefore
became necessary to develop an objective method of evaluation.
0-to-7 Point Rating Scale
This system was applied "nonblind", post hoc to the evaluation
of the transcripts by the blind-judging method.
For
no
correspondence between the transcript and target site, 0 was
assigned; for excellent correspondence, 7; and for intermediate
correspondence an intermediate rating. Several methods of
"targeting" the viewer were used, and an average of accuracy was
obtained for each method. A comparison of the rating produced
with this approach against the ratings produced by the
blind-judging approach showed statistically significant positive
correlation between the two techniques. This, combined with the
finding that application of the 0-to-7 point scale to randomly
matched transcripts and targets (blind-judging method) yielded
chance results, established that application of the 0-to-7 point
scale provided a reliable, objective measure of RV quality.
UNApproved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002100350011-9
INc/ 3

Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002100350011-9
UNCLASSIFIED
0-to-3 Point Accuracy Rating Scale
The FY 1984 SRI Evaluation project further refined RV evaluation
procedures by developing the 0-to-3 Point Accuracy Rating
Scale.
This was used to provide a "bottom-line" assessment of
the accuracy/quality of individual elements in a transcript, or
of the transcript as a whole.
O was considered a "miss",
progressing through some correspondence (1), good correspondence
(2), and excellent correspondence (3). While this reduced the
number of factors needed to determine a viewer's accuracy based
on objective measures, it still did not meet the criteria for
scientific standards.
Princeton Evaluation Procedure (PEP)
The
PEP
was
based
on comparing
independently
valid
quantitatively-defined
target
information
with
similarly
quantitatively-defined response information. The definition of
a particular target site was contained in the yes/no answers to
a set of questions (30) called descriptors. The only target
information to be considered for analysis was completely
contained in the yes/no answers. A binary number (30 bits for
PEP) was constructed for the target and the response descriptor
respectively.
YES. = binary "1" and NO = binary "0". The
resulting two
30-bit binary numbers were than compared by a
variety of mathematical techniques to form a score for the
specific RV session.
For a series of RV sessions, a
quantitative assessment was made by comparing a given response
(matched to its corresponding target site) against the scores
computed by matching the response to all other targets used in
the series.
There were four basic problems with the PEP system:
Bit descriptors were not appropriate for the training
environment.
PEP was not interfaced to a standard data base management
system.
Cross-target scoring was not sensitive to intelligence
requirements.
Cross-target scoring was not appropriate for a training
environment.
This led to the the development of the SRI Evaluation Procedure.
UNAppEgyedEFor Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002100350011-9

Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002100350011-9
UNCLASSIFIED
SRI Evaluation Procedure (SEP)
As in the PEP, the SRI Evaluation Procedure quantified the
target material
into binary numbers corresponding to yes/no
answers to a set of descriptors. Descriptor lists and coding
techniques were devised for each RV response for analysis.
However, it modified the PEP by using two different types of
analysis
the target-pool-dependent analysis and the
target-pool-independent analysis.
The target-pool-dependent
analysis measured the uniqueness of the target/response match
compared with the remainder of the target pool.
The
target-pool-independent analysis measured the accuracy and
reliability of a single RV response matched only against the
target material used in the session. Both methods of analysis
met the need for a system scientifically measuring RV ability
and accuracy, but they did not address the real world of
operational intelligence collection.
Intelligence Ratings
This system rates 6 descriptors ranging from major gestalt to
particular site relevant information on a scale of 0 to 3, 0
representing
little correspondence to the site and
3
representing excellent correspondence to the site. Unknown and
non-applicable factors are also considered, but not scored.
Information perceived by the viewer is then rated for overall
intelligence utility, ranging from no utility to very useful, or
in some instances, indeterminable at the time of analysis. This
procedure has not been extensively applied because there have
been relatively few operational taskings since it's development.
The next milestone will be the development of a data base
management system that will provide the following:
Storage of operational RV session evaluations.
Analytic information concerning RV effectiveness
when
targeted against a variety of intelligence collection tasks.
Identification of reliable RV sources for each collection
requirement.
UNCHApprovedFor Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002100350011-9

4
Approved For Release. 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002100350011-9
DATABASE MANAGEMENT
RV Intelligence Utility Assessment
1.
(S/SK/WNINTEL)
The RV Intelligence Utility Assessment
will be expected to provide us with data which can then be
manipulated to provide information on:
a.
Which categories of targets lend themselves best to
remote viewing intelligence collection.
b.
The accuracy of each RV source.
c. The accuracy, dependability, and saleability of the
RV process in the intelligence collection arena.
2.
(S/SK/WNINTEL)
In order to properly assess the results
of the RV Intelligence Utility Package, we must first establish
a
database
which
will
track specific items of crucial
interest.
(See Fig. 1) These include, but are not limited to:
a.
Intelligence Utility
Function and Production
codes :
Target categories which have
been selected
for
examination by remote viewing.
b.
Specific sub category of tasking:
Specific
category of interest to the RV process:
target
location,
specific details, presence/absence of person/thing at site, etc.
c. Job number and job numbers of related tasking:
For
filing, reporting, and data management purposes.
d.
Source ID (number or code) : Tracking the results of
each source will not only indicate the personal abilities of
each source, but will allow a diagnosis of that source's
tendencies towards greater accuracy with differing target types.
e.
Date and Time of session:
Recent ELF studies
indicate that there is a positive correlation between sunspot
HANDLE VIA SKEET CHANNELS ONLY
SPECIAL ACCESS REQUIRED
WARNING NOTICE:
SENSITIVE
CLASSIFIED BY :
DIA/DT
INTELLIGENCE SOURCES AND
DECLASSIFY ON:
OADR
METHODS INVOLVED
SECRE.
Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002100350011-9
Incl 4

Approved For Release 2000/08/08': CIA,RDP96-00789R002100350011-9
activity and dependability of RV collected information.
Positive prediction of best RV session times will allow for the
most efficient planning of work schedules.
f.
Session number within a tasked series:
Since RV
results are statistical in nature, more than one Source and more
than one session is run against each task.
This field will
allow for more refined accuracy in analysis.
g.
General and specific tasking:
A short explanation
of tasked activity.
h.
£
List of information known at beginning of RV work:
In order to allow an assessment of the necessary information
requirements to be made of future tasking agencies.
i.
List of information generated during RV session:
A
list of the main information items returned to the tasking
agency.
e.
Accuracy of results:
An assessment of the accuracy
of generated information, as made by the tasking agency.
1
Rense
g .
Value of results: An assessment of the intelligence
value of the generated information, as made by the tasking
agency.
Analysis of this factor will provide the only reliable
means of predicting the efficiency and usefulness to future
tasking agencies.
It will be the only accurate vehicle for
generating credibility in and saleability of our product.
OPS.
1
3.
(S/SK/WNINTEL)
Once the data base has grown
to
sufficient proportion to have statistically analytic value,
questions which are statistical in nature and data-oriented can
be tasked and answered.
£
An example of these questions is
presented in Fig. 2, below.
Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002100350011-9

Approved For Release 2000/08/08 , FIAIRDP96-00789R002100350011-9
FIELD
COMMENTS
Tasking data:
Function code :
PGT
(Targeting information)
Prod. code
2630
Specific cat. :
Location
Job number
:
86-062
Related jobs
:
86-078
86-112
Session data:
Source ID
:
132
Date
860312
Time
1302 hrs
Sess. number
:
003
Tasking/site data:
General task :
RV hostage situation
Specific task :
Hostage location EEI
State of health
Given
:
Hostage name
by tasker
:
Hostage DOB
:
Hostage photo
Last known location
Results
:
Alive as of 860312
from RV
:
Well-fed
Desert town
Radio station antenna to west
.
Airport to east
Evaluation of session:
Accuracy
:
:
3
Value
2
(Assessment made by
tasking agency)
FIGURE 1.
EXAMPLE OF DATABASE RECORD
SECRET
Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002100350011-9
(Internat'l terrorism)
(Search problem)
(Encoded for security)
(Information provided
by tasking agency)
( Information provided
to tasking agency)

SG1A
Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002100350011-9
Next 3 Page(s) In Document Exempt
Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002100350011-9

Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002100350011-9
SUN STREAK OPS/TNG OBJECTIVES
JANUARY 1986 - JANUARY 1988
OPERATIONS
TRAINING
900 SESSIONS (4 SOURCES)
*
*
*
#
*
$
UTILITY ASSESSMENT
SI - SIII
66% (300)
*
*
*
COLLECTION
SIV - SVI
.
20% (180)
33% (150)
Approved For Release 2000/08/08 \ CIA-RDP96-00789R002100350011-9
450 SESSIONS (2 TRAINEES)
*
*
80% (720)
*

SECALL
Approved For Release 2000/08108 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002100350011-9
+
SUN STREAK OPERATION PLANNING
JANUARY 1986 - JANUARY 1988
GIVEN:
1,
FOUR TRAINED SOURCES.
2,
EACH SOURCE CAPABLE OF DOING FOUR SESSIONS PER
WEEK WORKING A TWO WEEK ON/ONE WEEK OFF PATTERN.
CAPABILITY:
530
SESSIONS PER YEAR.
-15% FOR LEAVES, SICKNESS, AND PERSONAL APPOINTMENTS.
450
SESSIONS PER YEAR.
TWO YEAR PLAN:
900
SESSIONS
80%
OF CAPABILITY DEVOTED TO UTILITY ASSESSMENT.
20%
OF
CAPABILITY FOR
QRT
AND
RESPONSE
TO
COLLECTION REQUIREMENTS.
Approved For Release 2009 08/08 |<14 RDP96-00789R002100350011-9