Fundamentals of a Mereo-Operandi Theory to Support Transdisciplinary Modeling and Co-Design of Cyber-Physical Systems

Abstract

The main statement of this paper is that synergetic modeling and co-design of the hardware, software and cyberware parts of complex cyber-physical systems (CPSs) are yet not solved, even from the perspective of an underpinning transdisciplinary theory. CPSs contain functionally tightly connected analog and digital hardware, control, and application software, and knowledge, data, and media contents as cyberware. The lack of a unified theoretical framework and an all-inclusive system conceptualization methodology can be traced back to professional, methodological and cultural differences between the abovementioned domains of development. The objective of our research is to make a step towards a theoretical framework that can support transdisciplinary modeling of CPSs. Architectural and operational modeling have been identified as two principal and interrelated dimensions of system modeling, and a mereo-operandi theory (MOT) has been identified as target. Mereotopology has been considered as the basis of architectural modeling. Operational modeling has been based on parameterized representation of the underlying physical principles, the morphological characteristics, the operation elements, and the overall operation flows. A demonstrative case study is presented to evidence the practical feasibility and utility of the proposed MOT. Our follow up research will focus on using this as a conceptual framework and computational basis for specification of system manifestation features and on a computational implementation to support embedded customization.

Towards a methodology of system manifestation features-based pre-embodiment design

“…In this paper, we present the results of the two recently completed phases of the research, which concentrated on the theoretical fundamentals of SMFs and the computational framework (Figure 1). The next subsection gives a concise overview of MOT, whose details can be found in Horváth and Pourtalebi (2015). Our first results indicate that SMFs can be used for both system configuration (Pourtalebi, Horváth, and Opiyo 2014a) and embedded customisation (Eckert, Clarkson, and Zanker 2004).…”

“…Designers may come across some of these challenges already in the pre-embodiment design phase, where offthe-shelf or custom-made heterogeneous constituents should be built together and their interoperability should be achieved (Abdul-Ghafour et al 2014). This is typical for that family of CPSs which is referred to as complicated technical systems (Horváth and Gerritsen 2013). Efficient conceptualisation of this kind of systems needs multi-disciplinary tools and unified approaches (Sztipanovits 2012).…”

“…Our guiding assumptions were: (i) complicated technical systems, such as CPSs, can be modelled by using SMFs, and (ii) an SMFs-based system model can describe both the architecture and the operation of the system (Horváth and Pourtalebi 2015). The assumptions made by Tiihonen, Soininen, and Sulonen (1996) have also been considered, namely that system feature-based configurable systems are pre-designed systems, which: (i) need to be adapted according to the customers' requirements for each order or installation, (ii) have an operation-implied or a pre-designed system architecture, (iii) consist of a large number of off-the-shelf or only pre-designed components, and (iv) are adapted by a systematic configuration process or the producer, or by using the embedded (built-in) customisation options by the end-users (Da Silveira, Borenstein, and Fogliatto 2001).…”

“…It aims to represent not only the architectural relations and composition of these constituents as aggregated ware (AW), but also their operations and interactions as a synergetic whole. The four assumptions of MOT are: (i) a complex system is a heterogeneous composition of HW, SW and CW constituents and their aggregations, (ii) the components of a complex system should be captured on multiple levels, (iii) it is sufficient to consider the architectural and operational characteristics and their interdependencies for a non-exhaustive description (modelling) of systems and components, and (iv) a complex system can be de-aggregated into a finite number of semantic entities (Horváth and Pourtalebi 2015). It differentiates between homogeneous entities (constituents) and heterogeneous entities (components).…”

An initial categorization of foundational research in complex technical systems

“…Paradigmatic system features have been considered as indicators of the manifestation of system paradigms. These conceptual constructs, which describe genotypes, were proposed to describe and investigate CTSs, while 'manifestation system features' were introduced to describe phenotypes (Horváth and Pourtalebi, 2015).…”