A technology forecasting method for capabilities of a system of systems

Kuikka, Vesa; Nikkarila, Juha-Pekka; Suojanen, Marko

doi:10.1109/picmet.2015.7273141

Cited by 5 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Kuikka et al [24][25][26][27] proposed a system of systems (SoS) model to evaluate the impact of technologies and systems on military tasks and military capabilities. The conceptual and mathematical models define the relationship between technologies, systems, and capabilities.…”

Section: Capability As Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Furthermore, the model could be utilized in capability management. 25 The Guide to the Systems Engineering Body of Knowledge 28 defines capability as "the ability to do something useful under a particular set of conditions." From the (systems engineering) enterprise perspective, organizational, system, and operational capability are identified.…”

Section: Capability As Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In Park et al's framework, the military unit is implicitly presented as the systems and resources. Kuikka et al's model [24][25][26][27] focuses on future systems; therefore, systems are presented as generic objects characterized by functional capabilities rather than as specific system components. However, the relations between the capability models follow the same logic as the other models.…”

Section: Capability As Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Weapons system or a platform DOTMLPF 16 (US), DOTmLPF-P 5 (US), DOTMLPFI 21 (NATO), TEPIDOIL 7,16 (UK), PMDOI 13 (FI) [24][25][26][27] Diagram, mathematical Physical system -functional capability -task SEBoK enterprise capabilities model 28 Data model People -organization -system -operations…”

Section: Capability Model Representation Capability Considerationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Conceptual model for capability planning in a military context – A systems thinking approach

Koivisto

Ritala

Vilkko

2022

Systems Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

During recent decades, planning defense systems have evolved into capability-based planning (CBP) processes. This paper seeks to answer two questions: firstly, how to express a complex, real-world capability requirement; and secondly, how to assess if a system with interacting elements fulfills this requirement. We propose that both a capability need and the solution fulfilling it are expressed with a consistent set of models in a traceable manner. The models integrate current capability models, specific to planning level and capability viewpoint, with systems thinking approach. Our conceptual model defines the defense system in its environment, our data model defines and organizes the CBP terms, and our class diagram defines the CBP planning elements. We illustrate the approach by giving an example of capability parametrization and compare it both with the DODAF capability view and with the generic CBP process. Our data model describes how capabilities are degraded in action and extends the approach toward capability dynamics. The quantitative capability definition aims to support efforts to solve for real world interacting subsystems that combined implement the required capability.

show abstract

Section: Capability As Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Capability As Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Capability As Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%