FORT LEAVENWORTH, Kan. – The process of writing Army doctrine, traditionally measured in years, is getting a 21st-century upgrade. Thanks to digital tools, some enabled by artificial intelligence, authors at the Combined Arms Doctrine Directorate are examining processes and gaining efficiencies without sacrificing their high standards for quality and precision.

“We have had people ask us about using AI and large language models to speed up the doctrine development process for years,” said CADD Director Richard Creed, Jr. “So, when some of these tools became available the first thing we did was figure out their capabilities. That meant that we needed to identify people on our team with some AI experience from using civilian applications who could help us figure out what was possible.”

Two officers, Lt. Col. Scott McMahan, a doctrine writer in the Operational Level Doctrine Division, and Maj. Matthew Martinez, CADD’s Information Management Officer, took leaders’ guidance and developed a four-pronged strategy to equip every doctrine writer with the skills and tools necessary to leverage AI effectively. The strategy began with foundational training for all CADD members, allowing them to apply approved AI tools to their work immediately.

To foster expertise, the plan also calls for training a “master gunner,” someone highly qualified in using AI tools, within each doctrine division. These experts can then help their teams tackle more difficult challenges and find advanced applications for the technology. Furthering the integration, AI best practices are being formally incorporated into the Doctrine Developer’s Course, ensuring future writers are introduced to these techniques from the start.

Finally, CADD leaders are working with the Combined Arms Command and industry partners to build a purpose-made AI tool. This new software will be designed for all Army doctrine writers, but it will be especially helpful to authors at the Centers of Excellence, where personnel and time are often scarce.

According to McMahan, the answer is not in “letting AI write the books” that guide the force. Instead, it is about providing human experts with powerful new assistants. “You treat it like a resourceful and motivated young officer who might not know all the information, but they can certainly assist you in cutting some corners and being a little more efficient,” he said. “The bottom line is that eventually it should, even if you’re just shaving at the margins, it’s going to speed up the time when doctrine will reach Soldiers in the field.”

Creed said his guidance was always to treat technology as a tool, not a panacea. “Because we have such good people, I expected that we would stay abreast of developments and be ready when the tools were ready,” he said. “They came up with an approach that would make one person in each doctrine division an AI subject matter expert while training everyone else in the basic use of AI for tasks related to their job. It was no different than ensuring all Soldiers are combat lifesavers while assigning an actual medic to each platoon.”

So far, changes have been small, but those small changes add up when looking at multiple individual and project tasks. One example is an internally developed tool that gives writers the ability to quickly search in hundreds of texts for historical vignettes that illustrate a complex doctrinal point. This task could once have taken days of research, especially for a new doctrine author.

“The large language model tools under development now have access to the databases we needed access to in the past. Access to the data is the foundational measure of whether the tools are useful to us. We tip our hats to those who figured out how to do that,” said Creed.

Another use of AI is something McMahan calls “breaking the blank page.” The tool can help writers get through creative blocks and generate ideas. “We were looking for some more meat for an idea,” he said. “We were able to feed this tool some initial thoughts, and of the three paragraphs it spit out, one sentence was used, but that was a really powerful and useful sentence.”

Blending technology and in-house experience is reducing administrative burdens for doctrine authors and staff in several ways. For instance, digital tools that assist with grammar and readability free authors to focus on the complex aspects of their work, which in turn saves valuable time for CADD’s high-demand editors. This efficiency extends beyond writing, as leaders have improved the publications tracking process with automated forms and use of Power Business Intelligence, and individuals are creating their own self-study tools to prepare for internal certification.

McMahan recognizes the technology is not perfect, but notes that it is improving over time. He said that AI models can “hallucinate” by inventing facts or confuse source materials when asked a question. These are critical flaws in a field where accuracy is paramount. In one case, an AI-generated question for a doctrine test was based on an outdated manual, an error that was only caught because the user creating the test was an expert on the topic.

Situations like this drive home why subject matter expertise is paramount. “We made it perfectly clear that AI tools were not intended to be a crutch for not doing the work we expect from our people,” Creed said. “Humans will review every line of what an LLM produces for accuracy. To make sure that happens one must make sure your people know their business.”

To learn more about Army doctrine and the Combined Arms Doctrine Directorate visit the Combined Arms Command’s website.

By Randi Stenson, MCCoE Public Affairs

FORT INDIANTOWN GAP, Pa. — Pennsylvania National Guard Soldiers and civilian employees participated in an Artificial Intelligence 201 course Feb. 11–12.

The course, taught by U.S. Army War College faculty, aimed to prepare leaders to responsibly integrate artificial intelligence into military decision-making while reinforcing critical thinking and mission command principles.

“A lot of people find it very scary, and just like with any new technology, we should be cautious,” said Lt. Col. Kelly Ihme, an assistant professor at the U.S. Army War College and one of the course’s instructors. “Trust but verify. But this is a computer program. It’s predictive math.”

AI 101 introduces Soldiers to the basics of AI, including how to use and understand it, while AI 201 focuses on critical thinking and effective AI prompting.

“At the War College, we’re starting to develop that type of course,” Ihme said. “It’s more about, how do we think about problems? And then where does AI get inserted into those problem sets? So that we’re never taking the human out of the loop, but we’re stepping up the critical thinking and really engaging critical skills questions on AI and where it fits.”

The students found the classes useful and knowledgeable, even wanting to attend more in the future.

“If they had another AI class, I would go again,” said Maj. Maria Myers, logistics branch chief at Joint Force Headquarters. “I would even do this exact same level again, just for repetition and to make sure that I’m still using it correctly, because I do plan to try to implement it in a couple of ways already that they had mentioned.”

Ihme said the 201 course pushes students to dig deeper than the nuts and bolts of AI. The class encourages them to approach AI with a leadership mindset.

“It’s a mission command skill. And if you’re not using AI with some of those mission command ideals in mind, you’re going to get icky outputs or less efficient outputs, and then you’re going to put AI aside,” said Ihme. “You’re not going to throw a private aside and tell them they’re an ineffective private because you didn’t provide them the leadership they needed to succeed. It’s the same with AI.”

Myers said that while she believes AI should be used with caution, it remains a helpful tool for saving time. But, she emphasized that users need to understand how to properly use and prompt AI before utilizing it for work.

“I’m sure some people will think it’s a pain, and there will be people that are against it, because it’s different,” Myers said. “But I think that this class and the level it goes into is a good introductory class because you need to have the knowledge and the understanding and the information from the human aspect to get the appropriate answer.”

The Pennsylvania National Guard is hoping to expand these classes in an effort to have Fort Indiantown Gap become an AI center of excellence, Imhe said. Ihme said she is ready for the next step of AI in the Army.

“Let’s keep providing classes like this, both foundational and thinking classes, so that we can figure out, not just that we’re playing with AI, but that we’re taking the next leap of using AI to propel us forward,” Ihme said.

By SGT Kayden Bedwell