The impact of technical complexity on the decision to collaborate and combine

Dwyer, Morgan; Selva, Daniel; Cameron, Bruce; Crawley, Edward F.; Szajnfarber, Zoe

doi:10.1109/aero.2013.6496898

Cited by 11 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A major contributing factor to expensive design iterations is conflicts in requirements. Researchers have emphasized the importance of identifying and resolving conflicts in requirements early in the system lifecycle in order to avoid schedule delays and cost overruns 34–38 . Some SE researchers believe that consistency can be attributed to the absence of conflicting requirements within a requirement set 39–44 .…”

Section: Descriptive Examplesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Formal reasoning of knowledge in systems engineering through epistemic modal logic

Kannan

2020

Systems Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Large‐scale systems engineering projects consist of hundreds to thousands of agents (stakeholders, managers, designers, etc.) spread across the organizational hierarchy. Each of these agents possesses knowledge in some form or the other, be it the knowledge of stakeholder needs, domain‐specific knowledge, knowledge of rules and regulations, knowledge gained from experience on previous projects, etc. It is important to formally represent this knowledge possessed by various agents in the systems engineering lifecycle, as this will enable knowledge reuse, reasoning capabilities, inferring new knowledge, and mitigate misinterpretation of knowledge as prevalent in document‐centric approaches. Such a formal representation will also help alleviate some of the challenges posed by the current document‐centric approaches concerning project delays and cost overruns in the development of large‐scale systems. This paper focuses on formally representing knowledge that exists in various phases of the systems engineering lifecycle by leveraging epistemic modal logic. Descriptive examples are used to demonstrate the practical reasoning capabilities of such a formal representation of knowledge in systems engineering projects.

show abstract

Section: Descriptive Examplesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Formal reasoning of knowledge in systems engineering through epistemic modal logic

Kannan

2020

Systems Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In order to make use of synergies between different components, attempts were done in a project to merge two components within one. The objective was to provide both capabilities simultaneously, while reducing the amount of necessary resources (Dwyer et al, 2013). Eventually, both capabilities consumed all the resources in such a way that the system development suffered severe technical and programmatic negative impacts (Dwyer et al, 2013).…”

Section: Heuristics Observed In Actual Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The objective was to provide both capabilities simultaneously, while reducing the amount of necessary resources (Dwyer et al, 2013). Eventually, both capabilities consumed all the resources in such a way that the system development suffered severe technical and programmatic negative impacts (Dwyer et al, 2013). In a different course of action, allocation of monetary budgets to government agencies in some countries follows a similar process.…”

Section: Heuristics Observed In Actual Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Set of Heuristics to Support Early Identification of Conflicting Requirements

Salado

Nilchiani

2015

INCOSE International Symp

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Conventional approaches to system design use requirements as boundary conditions against which the design activity occurs. Decisions at a given level of the architecture decomposition can result in the flowing down of conflicting requirements, which are easy to fulfill in isolation but extremely difficult when dealt with simultaneously. Designing against such sets of requirements considerably limits system affordability. Identification of such conflicts is usually performed in industry by subject matter experts. Such evaluations are primarily driven by experience. As a result, effectiveness in identifying conflicting requirements is strongly dependent on the person making the assessment. We propose in this paper a set of heuristics that supports identification of conflicting requirements by providing direction and focus in the identification effort. The heuristics have been derived from a combination of literature review and experience from practitioners. In particular, a set of practitioners was interviewed orally and through a questionnaire in order to abstract and generalize their individual experiences.

show abstract

“…The VASSAR framework is essentially an architecture evaluation and optimization framework, which combines a rule-based engine for evaluation with several heuristic optimization strategies. The VASSAR framework has been applied to multiple large aerospace systems [5][6][7]. The performance of several domain-independent and domain-specific heuristics was also compared in some preliminary experiments [8].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development of a test-bed for knowledge-intensive system architecture optimization

Selva

2014

2014 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (SMC)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The impact of technical complexity on the decision to collaborate and combine

Cited by 11 publications

References 11 publications

Formal reasoning of knowledge in systems engineering through epistemic modal logic

Formal reasoning of knowledge in systems engineering through epistemic modal logic

A Set of Heuristics to Support Early Identification of Conflicting Requirements

Development of a test-bed for knowledge-intensive system architecture optimization

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About