Strategy for a whole system modeling capability
-
Upload
jack-ring -
Category
Technology
-
view
121 -
download
0
description
Transcript of Strategy for a whole system modeling capability
A Strategy for Evolving a Whole System Modeling Capability
Jack RingInnovation Management
Prepared forIEEE Systems Conference 2009
Vancouver, BC, CanadaMarch 24, 2009
Agenda
1. Memes (terminology)
2. Process flow
3. Findings
4. Conclusions
1. Memes
A. Problematic Situation
B. Capability
C. Whole System
D. Modeling
E. Strategy
1A: Problematic Situation
Extent
Variety
Ambiguity
Low Med High
Extent: # of cognatesVariety: # of unique cognates, both temporal and semioticAmbiguity: fog, conflicting data, cognitive overload
‘Wicked’ Problems
1950 1980 2010
Whole SystemRealization
SoSE
Traditional SE
Situ
atio
n
1B: Capability
LanguageLevel
# Statements Normal-ized
Machine 320 80
Assembler 213 53
C 128 32
Fortran 77 105 28
COBOL 91 26
ADA 71 18
APL 32 8
O-O 29 7
Icon O-O 4 1
2005 2015
# WSE Practitioners < 100 > 100,000
Level of Modeling Language X 10X
Basis1 million practitioners• Expect net loss because
Baby Boom retirees > education replacement.
• Requires 10-fold increase in Productivity of practitioners and in ‘Learnativity’ of developers.
1.C: Whole System
* Lab, integration, acceptance, production, readiness, confidence
ProblemSuppression
System
Operational Availability System
Production Sys
OperatorPreparation
System
Test System(s)*
ProblemSystem
Problematic
Situation
Should be interpreted as “informs”Note:
1D: Model-based
Minimal Implicate Order
Relevant Emergence
The truth, the whole truth,
and nothing but the truth.
InformaticsThermodynamics
TeleonomicsSocial Dynamics
EconomicsEcologics
As contrasted to Requirements-driven models!
1E: Strategy
Objective(Result)
ImpedimentImpediment
Impediment
Scenario of Resource Allocation intended to overcome Impediments to achieving an Objective
Resource Resource Resource
Resource Overcoming Impediment
2. Process Flow
Panelists11+Moderator
Nominate Impediments141
Each Pick Top 511 29
“IA aggravates IB”Y/N
ImpedimentsCategoryScores
10
Influence Map13 stages
Nominate Resources
9+2 91
Each Pick Top 58 32
Relative Readiness by Category
Likelihood: Resources > Impediments
Likelihood: Valid Objectives
Recommendations16
3. Findings
Impediments Influence MapStage 6 Stage 13
Models are not deliverables nor documents. (62B)
Failure to state the goals of the model before modeling (82D)
Lack of willingness to be responsible and accountable. (93D)
Insufficient shared language among modelers (30E)
Lack of temporal dynamics in models (100D)
Criteria for assessing meaning of the model output (67H)
V&V model quality and utility (113H)
Insufficient knowledge shared between modelers and intended model users.(31C)General lack
of modeling discipline (in the SE population) (74H)
Engineers have to quit arguing about this, and just "get 'er done" (90E)
To model or not - cost, risks, benefits (105H)
Defining scope of the model (system limits) (106H)
Should be interpreted as “significantly help reduce”[email protected], 9/1/2007
Lack of integration between modeling tools (86G)
Intersection of Orthogonal Models: (53G)
Deciding Investment= f(Quality, Scope) (55E)
Modeling extra-system (non-designed) interactions to the system (112D)Inability to
control level of abstraction (when modeling) (78H)
Selection of assumptions, definitions, and evaluation criteria (108H)
Impediments Influence MapStage 1
Should be interpreted as “significantly help reduce”
Stage 6
Modern systems exhibit complex behavior (1A)
Preoccupation with Requirements Management obfuscates systems engineering. (115H)
Confusion of virtual reality and reality in simulation and modeling (125F)
Funding profile does not support early modeling (83B)
Lack of clarity of purpose of models (54B)
Practitioners stuck in an inadequate paradigm (99E)
The correct level(s) of detail for models (107B)
General desire to avoid precision (in the SE process) (75E)
Difficulty validating complex simulation outcomes (6G)
Reliance on intuition instead of reason for big-picture decisions. (119B)
Failure to state the goals of the model before modeling (82D)
Insufficient language regarding system attributes (29H)
[email protected] 9/1/2007
Impediments Influence MapStage 6 Stage 13
62B82D
93D
30E100D
67H
113H
31C
74H90E
105H
106H
Should be interpreted as “significantly help reduce”[email protected], 9/1/2007
86G 53G
55E
112D
78H
108H
Impediments Influence MapStage 1
Should be interpreted as “significantly help reduce”
Stage 6
1A
115H
125F
83B
54B
9E
107B
75E
6G
119B
82D
29H
[email protected] 9/1/2007
(54B) Lack of clarity of purpose of models
(99E) Practitioners stuck in an inadequate paradigm (99E) Practitioners stuck in an inadequate paradigm
(107B) The correct level(s) of detail for models
(1A) Modern systems exhibit complex behavior
(6G) Difficulty validating complex simulation outcomes
(83B) Funding profile does not support early modeling
(119B) Reliance on intuition instead of reason for big-picture decisions.
(125F) Confusion of virtual reality and reality in simulation and modeling
Most Influential Impediments
2. Process Flow
Panelists11+Moderator
Nominate Impediments141
Each Pick Top 511 29
“IA aggravates IB”Y/N
ImpedimentsCategoryScores
10
Influence Map13 stages
Nominate Resources
9+2 91
Each Pick Top 58 32
Relative Readiness by Category
Likelihood: Resources > Impediments
Likelihood: Valid Objectives
Recommendations16
Impediment Category Scores
CI Category
100 B-Worth (perception by stakeholders/sponsors of Value = Worth – Cost of a system model and a modeling activity)
47 G-Technologies for modeling and simulation
37 A-Challenge (degree of extent, variety, ambiguity, complexity inherent in the situation)
34 E-Capacity of SE Workforce to satisfy world-wide demand
24 F-Liability for inadequate, inaccurate, misleading models.
22 D-Producing Results (modeler methods, styles, proficiencies)
-16 H-BoK, access to an adequate, accurate and timely Body of Knowledge regarding whole system modeling.
-18 C-Communicating (gaps and issues in ensuring that beneficiaries comprehend a system model)
2. Process Flow
Panelists11+Moderator
Nominate Impediments141
Each Pick Top 511 29
“IA aggravates IB”Y/N
ImpedimentsCategoryScores
10
Influence Map13 stages
Nominate Resources
9+2 91
Each Pick Top 58 32
Relative Readiness by Category
Likelihood: Resources > Impediments
Likelihood: Valid Objectives
Recommendations16
Relative Readiness Scores
CI OR Category
47 100 G-Technologies for modeling and simulation
100 88 B-Worth (perception by stakeholders/sponsors of Value = Worth – Cost of a system model and a modeling activity)
34 81 E-Capacity of SE Workforce to satisfy world-wide demand
37 41 A-Challenge (degree of extent, variety, ambiguity, complexity inherent in the situation)
-16 31 H-BoK, access to an adequate, accurate and timely Body of Knowledge regarding whole system modeling.
-18 28 C-Communicating (gaps and issues in ensuring that beneficiaries comprehend a system model)
22 6 D-Producing Results (modeler methods, styles, proficiencies)
24 0 F-Liability for inadequate, inaccurate, misleading models.
Reconciling Different Scales
Impediments Resources
e.g. Fahrenheit e.g. Celsius
2. Process Flow
Panelists11+Moderator
Nominate Impediments141
Each Pick Top 511 29
“IA aggravates IB”Y/N
ImpedimentsCategoryScores
10
Influence Map13 stages
Nominate Resources
9+2 91
Each Pick Top 58 32
Relative Readiness by Category
Likelihood: Resources > Impediments
Likelihood: Valid Objectives
Recommendations16
Likelihood of Achieving Objective?
CI OR Category FS %
100 88 B-Worth (perception by stakeholders/sponsors of Value = Worth – Cost of a system model and a modeling activity)
2.8 H
34 81 E-Capacity of SE Workforce to satisfy world-wide demand
2.3 H
37 41 A-Challenge (degree of extent, variety, ambiguity, complexity inherent in the situation)
2.1 M
-18 28 C-Communicating (gaps and issues in ensuring that beneficiaries comprehend a system model)
2.1 M
22 6 D-Producing Results (modeler methods, styles, proficiencies)
1.7 M
-16 31 H-BoK, access to an adequate, accurate and timely Body of Knowledge regarding whole system modeling.
1.2 L
24 0 F-Liability for inadequate, inaccurate, misleading models. 1.1 H
47 100 G-Technologies for modeling and simulation 1 M
Fused Score key: 1 = greatly insufficient, 2 = insufficient, 3 = sufficient
Validity of Presumed Objective
Objectives Degree of Need
Concurrence Level
Whole System Models Necessary 75% (fairly high)
By year 2015 Too late 75% (fairly high)
100,000 practitioners About right 59% (fairly low)
10X better About right 59% (fairly low)
Highlights of 16 Conclusions
1. The systems engineering community is not ready to meet the presumed societal need.
2. Our estimate of probable error in our findings indicates that a more comprehensive and thorough study be conducted.
3. The strategic objectives of 100,000 practitioners at 10X productivity by 2015 should be confirmed or revised.
4. Meanwhile, the systems engineering community should conduct a real project to demonstrate the worth of whole systems modeling
Else?
See Also ---
http://newsmanager.commpartners.com/ieeetw/issues/2009-02-23/4.html
--- first IEEE Conference in Serious Games and Virtual Worlds, 24-25 March, 2009
There’s no better way to prepare for the rigors of the systems world than locking yourself in a room and playing a video game.
AND
http://blog.wolfram.com/2009/03/05/wolframalpha-is-coming/
For a forthcoming MBSE tool.
Questions?
Thank You!