January 11, 2007Russ Abbott Complex systems are no longer mysterious.Complex systems are no longer mysterious. We have a broad consensus aboutWe have a.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
An introduction to complexity in Management Science: a personal view Mike Pidd Management Science
Advertisements

Stereotypes & Framework in conceptual architecture Lecture
Multimedia Specification Design and Production 2013 / Semester 1 / week 7 Lecturer: Dr. Nikos Gazepidis
Finance | Ralfi Vanlaethem | 5 May 2008 | 1 5 May 2008Finance | Ralfi Vanlaethem1 Fortis Group 5 th of May 2008.
Not a mystery any more. Complex Systems Engineering Not a mystery any more. It’s time to put complex systems to work.
Complex Systems CoP Complex System Engineering R. Abbott Corporate Chief Architect/Engineer Division (Rotation) 19 April 2007.
GOAL: UNDERSTAND CAUSAL AND INFLUENCE NETWORKS IN COMPLEX ADAPTIVE SYSTEMS IN ORDER TO CONTROL THEM.
System Theory A quick look at systems. General Systems Theory Ludwig von Bertalanffy Peter Checkland General Systems Theory: There are parallels found.
January 11, 2007Russ Abbott Complex systems are no longer mysterious.Complex systems are no longer mysterious. We have a broad consensus aboutWe have a.
We have a broad consensus about what we mean by a c omplex system.We have a broad consensus about what we mean by a c omplex system. They are not a mystery.
1 Introduction to Complex Systems: How to think like nature Russ Abbott Sr. Engr. Spec. Rotn to CCAE  The.
January 11, 2007Russ Abbott Complex systems are no longer mysterious.Complex systems are no longer mysterious. We have a broad consensus aboutWe have a.
January 11, 2007Russ Abbott Complex systems are no longer mysterious.Complex systems are no longer mysterious. We have a broad consensus aboutWe have a.
Complex systems are no longer mysterious.Complex systems are no longer mysterious. We have a broad consensus aboutWe have a broad consensus about –what.
Complex systems are no longer mysterious.Complex systems are no longer mysterious. We have a broad consensus aboutWe have a broad consensus about –what.
We have a broad consensus about what we mean by a c omplex system.We have a broad consensus about what we mean by a c omplex system. They are not a mystery.
We have a broad consensus about what we mean by a c omplex system.We have a broad consensus about what we mean by a c omplex system. They are not a mystery.
January 11, 2007Russ Abbott Complex systems are no longer mysterious.Complex systems are no longer mysterious. We have a broad consensus aboutWe have a.
The Unified Modeling Language (UML) Class Diagrams.
Chapter 7 Designing Classes. Class Design When we are developing a piece of software, we want to design the software We don’t want to just sit down and.
Why Analysis Process Refer to earlier chapters Models what the system will do makes it easier for understanding no environment considered (hence, system.
CSE 303 – Software Design and Architecture
University of Utah SoCCS Lecture 61 Architecture – An Introduction CS Lecture 6 Nathan Dykman.
9/10/2012ISC 329 Isabelle Bichindaritz1 Entity Relationship (E-R) Modeling.
1 CMPT 275 Software Engineering Requirements Analysis Phase Requirements Analysis Activity (Identifying Objects, Scenarios) Janice Regan,
11 Chapter 11 Object-Oriented Databases Database Systems: Design, Implementation, and Management 4th Edition Peter Rob & Carlos Coronel.
Sommerville, Mejia-Alvarez, 2009Software Engineering, Slide 1 Software Design u Deriving a solution which satisfies software requirements.
1 Systems Analysis and Design in a Changing World, Thursday, January 18, 2007.
CS 4310: Software Engineering Lecture 4 System Modeling The Analysis Stage.
Develop a Safety Assurance approach for Complex Systems (Problem Definition) Supervisors: Tim Kelly, Rob Alexander Chris Leong HISE Group Giving a Presentation.
Service Oriented Architecture CCT355H5 Professor Michael Jones Suezan Makkar.
Software Engineering Principles. SE Principles Principles are statements describing desirable properties of the product and process.
Effort.vs. Software Product “Quality” Effort Product “Quality” Which curve? - linear? - logarithmic? - exponential?
1 CMPT 275 High Level Design Phase Modularization.
The Rational Unified Process 1 EECS810: Software Engineering.
® IBM Software Group © 2004 IBM Corporation Developing an SOA with RUP and UML 2.0 Giles Davies.
1 Database Systems Entity Relationship (E-R) Modeling.
INFO 620Lecture #71 Information Systems Analysis and Design Design Class Diagrams and others INFO 620 Glenn Booker.
Bits don’t have error bars Russ Abbott Department of Computer Science California State University, Los Angeles.
Bits don’t have error bars Russ Abbott Department of Computer Science California State University, Los Angeles.
Agent-Based Modeling PSC 120 Jeff Schank. Introduction What are Models? Models are Scaffolds for Understanding Models are always false, but very useful.
Generalizable Element Namespace Model Element name visibility isSpecification Classifier isRoot Constraint Body Coming up: Unified Modeling Language Introduction.
Gerhard Dueck -- CS3013Analysis 1. Gerhard Dueck -- CS3013Analysis 2 Why analysis?  Yield a more precise specification of the requirements.  Introduce.
Chapter 2 Introduction to OS Chien-Chung Shen CIS/UD
Object Oriented Analysis and Design Introduction to Rational Rose.
1 SYS366 Week 2 - Lecture 2 Visual Modeling & UML.
Chapter 10 Software quality. This chapter discusses n Some important properties we want our system to have, specifically correctness and maintainability.
Generalizable Element Namespace Model Element name visibility isSpecification Classifier isRoot Constraint Body Introduction to the Unified Modeling Language.
Getting the Architecture Right Jeffrey D. Taft, PhD Chief Architect for Electric Grid Transformation Pacific Northwest National Laboratory March 17, 2016.
Information Systems in Organizations 2.1 Analyzing organizations as systems and processes & Modeling Processes with Swimlane Diagrams.
CompSci 280 S Introduction to Software Development
Software Engineering Lecture 4 System Modeling The Analysis Stage.
Copyright © 2014 Hassan Gomaa and Robert Pettit
Introduction to the Unified Modeling Language
Common Design Patterns
Coupling and Cohesion 1.
which satisfies software requirements
Quantum Computers Superposition Interference Entanglement and Quantum Error Correction Lesson 1 By: Professor Lili Saghafi
Java Messaging Service (JMS)
Software Defined Networking (SDN)
Java Messaging Service (JMS)
Introduction to the Unified Modeling Language
Introduction to the Unified Modeling Language
Software Design Lecture : 8
Software Analysis.
Linear Vector Space and Matrix Mechanics
Object-Oriented PHP (1)
5 Themes of Geography.
Chapter 6: Architectural Design
Chapter 2: Building a System
Presentation transcript:

January 11, 2007Russ Abbott Complex systems are no longer mysterious.Complex systems are no longer mysterious. We have a broad consensus aboutWe have a broad consensus about –what we mean by a complex system, –what their properties are, and –how they operate. It’s time to put complex systems to work.It’s time to put complex systems to work.

January 11, 2007Russ Abbott Multi-scalar, i.e., multiple levels of abstractionMulti-scalar, i.e., multiple levels of abstraction –IT systems involve quantum physics, solid-state electronics, gates & logic, software (often many levels), CONOPs, … –Prone to phase transitions/chaos: small change → big effect. –Each level illustrates emergence, sometimes planned sometime unplanned. If the system involves real physical stuff …If the system involves real physical stuff … –No useful bottom level. Quarks? Quantum waves? Strings? Hence no good models of evolutionary arms races.Hence no good models of evolutionary arms races. –The levels cannot be completely isolated from each other … or we would have magic, i.e., new sources of causation, e.g., vitalism.or we would have magic, i.e., new sources of causation, e.g., vitalism. except when implemented in software.except when implemented in software. Includes “loosely coupled” components with a certain degree of autonomy, e.g., agents.Includes “loosely coupled” components with a certain degree of autonomy, e.g., agents.

January 11, 2007Russ Abbott Intimately entangled with its environment.Intimately entangled with its environment. –Built to interact with its environment—to do something in the world. –Can often be controlled/manipulated by modifying its environment. Each level of abstraction is often a multi-sided platform.Each level of abstraction is often a multi-sided platform. –A shopping center, an operating system, a browser, a standard. –Whoever owns it controls it! (See governance below.) Boundaries are deliberately permeable and indistinct.Boundaries are deliberately permeable and indistinct. –Must extract energy from its environment to persist. (“Far from equilibrium.”) –Societies (of internal and external “agents”); not monolithic structures. System of systems; the operator goes home; a new president is elected.System of systems; the operator goes home; a new president is elected. Must adapt to a continually changing environmentMust adapt to a continually changing environment –The environment continually adapts to it. –Simultaneously (a) deployed and (b) under development and self-repair. e.g., us (you and me), a government, a corporation, Wikipedia.e.g., us (you and me), a government, a corporation, Wikipedia. –A social entity; hardware and software are only bones and nerves. –Requires a well thought out governance structure.

January 11, 2007Russ Abbott To refine, clarify, and formalize them.To refine, clarify, and formalize them. To evangelize.To evangelize. –To make them intuitive, commonplace, and everyday—a part of everyone’s vernacular. To use them to conceptualize our systems.To use them to conceptualize our systems. To make them operational.To make them operational. –To adapt them to practice in building real systems. –To create development processes based on them. –To build tools that allow anyone to use them.