Abstract. This paper shows how three systems of types well-known to systems engineers can be understood as complex systems. This is important because research in complex systems sciences is vibrant and provides critical insight, but if systems engineers do not understand the complex aspects of the systems they work with daily, they may not be able to use these research results. To date, systems engineering has been looking only at exploiting the "order" side of the order-to-chaos spectrum, and it is time now to understand and begin to utilize principles from the middle and from the chaos side of the spectrum.The three examples are INCOSE, the systems engineering process (such as a company's standard process), and air traffic control. INCOSE represents most volunteer organizations and social groups. Most systems engineers do not realize that the systems engineering process for a company is a network that can be studied by complex systems methods. Air traffic control may come closest to many systems engineers' definition of a system. This paper provides principles of complex systems based on a variety of sources, and shows the application of complex systems to one of the examples.

No abstract

This paper shows how the literature on complexity is related to complex systems and to systems engineering. A framework for types of complexity is proposed that includes three types of structural complexity (size, connectivity, and architecture), two types of dynamic complexity (short-term and long-term), and one additional type, socio-political complexity. These types cover most of the characteristics of complexity mentioned in the reviewed literature; omissions are noted.It would be advantageous to identify specific measures of complexity so that the complexity of systems or development programs could be compared and tracked, and risks could be identified and mitigated. To this end an overview of systems engineering measurement is provided, followed by a discussion of how complexity types might be able to be measured. At this point, however, a composite measurement of the six types of complexity is not recommended.

For nations that are substantially involved in world trade or have worldwide responsibilities, the existence and control of a strong merchant fleet is almost essential. Ideally, this merchant fleet should have some minimum level of capability and should also be self-supporting (no subsidy needed). For some nations, such us the United States and-_:an, this ideal condition does nor seem to be even roughly satisfied. Moreover, even with a large amount of subsidyk, a reasonable level of capability may not be attained. This raises the question of identifying ways in which a nation can improve its maritime operations. The atnhe-atical model described in this paper is concerned-i-h this rroblen. Procedures are oquantifying and ie inte n"-a f n are involved in a worldwide maritine oneration over a given period of time. in broad terms, the simulation model consists of the inputs to the overall maritime system, a method of determining the operation of the system on the basis of these inputs, and the outputs that result from this operation. Some of the inputs and system interrelations are controlled by the nation whose maritime operation is being considered for improvement.-An evaluation criterion is used for representing the o ec-ai desira:ility of tie system ou-tpuzs from the vie'.rooinz of this nation. Then, on a carametric analysis basis, a study can be aade with respect to the choice of inputs and interrelations (of those controlled) that are most desirable for this nation. Methods are outlined for deciding on inputs that are not controlled and for efficiently perfor-ing the simulations.

No abstract