Inclusion criteria describe evidence that can establish this activity. Exclusion criteria identify circumstances that do not establish it on that basis alone. The evaluation remains connected to its taxonomy version and supporting evidence.
Included when supported
Evidence may support involvement when it matches one or more of these inclusion criteria.
- 01Criterion
Include entities responsible for complete reusable unmanned aerial platforms specifically designed or materially configured for military reconnaissance, surveillance, electronic warfare, communications, logistics, targeting, combat, or other military missions.
- 02Criterion
Include entities responsible for complete reusable unmanned ground platforms specifically designed or materially configured for military reconnaissance, logistics, engineering, mine clearance, sentry, direct-combat, or other military missions.
- 03Criterion
Include entities responsible for complete reusable unmanned surface or underwater platforms specifically designed or materially configured for naval surveillance, mine countermeasures, anti-submarine, logistics, electronic warfare, combat, or other military missions.
- 04Criterion
Include final integration of a complete military unmanned platform and platform-level weapon integration where the entity is responsible for the armed platform as an operational system.
Excluded on this basis alone
These circumstances do not establish this activity unless separate evidence also meets an inclusion criterion.
- 01Criterion
Historical-Only Military Unmanned Platform Involvement
Defined as: Entities with verified past development, manufacture, assembly, final integration, platform-level weapon integration, sale, export, or supply of complete qualifying military unmanned platforms, where reliable evidence establishes that the qualifying activity has fully ceased, been divested, transferred, dismantled, terminated, or otherwise ended and no current qualifying involvement remains. Historical-only activity does not qualify as current involvement. Preserve the historical record separately with the activity period, effective cessation or transfer date, relevant entity, product, programme, facility, or contract, and supporting evidence. Absence of recent evidence alone is not sufficient to establish cessation.
- 02Criterion
Exclude civil, commercial, recreational, agricultural, scientific, police, or emergency-response unmanned systems without material military configuration.
- 03Criterion
Exclude loitering munitions, one-way attack systems, missiles, guided rockets, torpedoes, and other expendable weapons designed to be consumed in the mission.
- 04Criterion
Exclude counter-unmanned sensors, jammers, interceptors, and defensive systems unless the entity also has a separately evidenced qualifying unmanned-platform role.
- 05Criterion
Exclude standalone ground-control stations, autonomy software, navigation, datalinks, payloads, propulsion, structures, and other components without responsibility for a complete military unmanned platform.
- 06Criterion
Exclude prototypes, demonstrations, targets, and training-only systems that lack a verified operational military-platform role.
Evidence and evaluation methodology
How sources, entity pathways, decisions, qualifiers, and review history are handled.
Map screens to a client policy
How to choose provider screens, document coverage, and decide what happens after an outcome.
Other screens under Military Weapons, Munitions and Combat Platforms
Small Arms and Light Weapons
4 included · 6 excluded
Heavy Weapons and Artillery Systems
4 included · 6 excluded
Missiles, Rockets, Torpedoes and Launch Systems
5 included · 7 excluded
Armoured Combat Vehicles
4 included · 6 excluded
Military Aircraft and Aerial Systems
4 included · 6 excluded
Military Naval Vessels and Underwater Systems
5 included · 5 excluded
Controversial Weapons
9 direct children
Landmines
2 direct children
Conventional Ammunition, Bombs and Explosive Munitions
5 included · 7 excluded
Military Weapons Components and Subsystems
4 included · 7 excluded