Exploring the Impact of Systems Architecture and Systems Requirements on Systems Integration Complexity

Jain, Rashmi; Chandrasekaran, Anithashree; Elias, Glêdson; Cloutier, Robert

doi:10.1109/jsyst.2008.924130

Cited by 42 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The boundary and boundary criteria for complex systems are dynamic and must evolve with new understanding Katina & Keating, 2014) Contextual Dominance A complex situation can exhibit contextual issues that can stem from differing managerial world views, and other nontechnical aspects stemming from the elicitation process (Katina & Keating, 2014) Emergent Complex systems may exist in an unstable environment and be subject to emergent behavioral, structural, and interpretation patterns that cannot be known in advance and lie beyond the ability of requirements to effectively capture and maintain (Katina & Keating, 2014) Environmental Exogenous components that affect or are affected by the engineering system; that which acts, grows, and evolves with internal and external components (Bartolomei, Hastings, de Nuefville, & Rhodes, 2012;Glass et al, 2011;Hawryszkiewycz, 2009) Functional Range of fulfilling goals and purposes of the engineering system, ease of adding new functionality or ease of upgrading existing functionality, the goals and purposes of the engineering systems, ability to organize connections (Bartolomei et al, 2012;Hawryszkiewycz, 2009;Jain, Chandrasekaran, Elias, & Cloutier, 2008;Konrad & Gall, 2008) …”

Section: Attribute Definitionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Holistic Consider the whole of the system, consider the role of the observer, and consider the broad influence of the system on the environment (Haber & Verhaegen, 2012;Katina & Keating, 2014;Svetinovic 2013) Interdependencies A number of systems are dependent on one another to produce the required results (Katina & Keating, 2014) Multifinality Two seemingly identical initial complex systems can have different pathways toward different end states (Katina & Keating, 2014) Process Processes and steps to perform tasks within the system, methodology framework to support and improve the analysis of systems, hierarchy of system requirements (Bartolomei et al, 2012;Haber & Verhaegen, 2012;Konrad & Gall, 2008;Liang, Avgeriou, He, & Xu, 2010) Predictive Proactively analyze requirements arising due to the implementation of the system underdevelopment and the system's interaction with the environment and other systems (Svetinovic, 2013) Social Social network consisting of the human components and the relationships held among them; social network essential in supporting innovation in dynamic processes; centers on groups that can assume roles with defined responsibilities (Bartolomei et al, 2012;Hawryszkiewycz, 2009;Liang et al, 2010) Technical Physical, nonhuman components of the system to include hardware, infrastructure, software, and information, complexity of integration technologies required to achieve system capabilities and functions (Bartolomei et al, 2012;Chittister & Haimes, 2010;Haber & Verhaegen, 2013;Jain et al, 2008) Complex systems are large and multidimensional with interrelated dependent systems. They are challenged with dynamic, national-level, or international intricacies as social, political, environmental, and technical issues evolve (Bartolomei et al, 2012;Glass et al, 2011).…”

Section: Attribute Definitionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Complex Acquisition Requirements Analysis Using a Systems Engineering Approach

Stuckey¹,

Sarkani²,

Mazzuchi³

2017

Defense ARJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The technology revolution over the last several decades has compounded system complexity with the integration of multispectral sensors and interactive command and control systems, making requirements development more challenging for the acquisition community. The imperative to start programs right with effective requirements is becoming more critical.Research indicates the Department of Defense lacks consistent knowledge as to which attributes would best enable more informed trade-offs. This research examines prioritized requirement attributes to account for program complexities, using the expert judgement of a diverse and experienced panel of acquisition professionals from the Air Force, Army, Navy, industry, and additional government organizations. This article provides a guide for today's acquisition leaders to establish effective and prioritized requirements for complex and unconstrained systems needed for informed trade-off decisions.The results found the key attribute for unconstrained systems is "achievable" and verified a list of seven critical attributes for complex systems. Recent Government Accountability Office (GAO) reports outline concerns with requirements development. One study found programs with unachievable requirements cause program managers to trade away performance and found that informed trade-offs between cost and capability establish better defined requirements (GAO, 2015a(GAO, , 2015b. In another key report, the GAO noted that the Department of Defense could benefit from ranking or prioritizing requirements based on significance (GAO, 2011).Establishing a key list of prioritized attributes that supports requirements development enables the assessment of program requirements and increases focus on priority attributes that aid in requirements and design trade-off decisions. The focus of this research is to define and prioritize requirements attributes that support requirements development across a spectrum of system types for decision makers. Some industry and government programs are becoming more connected and complex while others are geographically dispersed yet integrated, thus creating the need for more concentrated approaches to capture prioritized requirements attributes.The span of control of the program manager can range from low programmatic authority to highly dependent systems control. For example, the program manager for a national emergency command and control center typically has low authority to influence cost, schedule, and performance at the local, state, and tribal level, yet must enable a broader, national unconstrained systems capability. On the opposite end of the spectrum are complex, dependent systems. The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter's program manager has highly dependent control of that program, and the program is complex as DoD is building variants for the U.S. Air Force, Navy, and Marine Corps, as well as multiple foreign countries.Complex and unconstrained systems are becoming more prevalent. There needs to be increased focus on complex and unconstrained systems r...

show abstract

Section: Attribute Definitionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Attribute Definitionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Complex Acquisition Requirements Analysis Using a Systems Engineering Approach

Stuckey¹,

Sarkani²,

Mazzuchi³

2017

Defense ARJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The boundary and boundary criteria for complex systems are dynamic and must evolve with new understanding Katina & Keating, 2014) Contextual A complex situation can exhibit contextual issues Dominance that can stem from differing managerial world views, and other nontechnical aspects stemming from the elicitation process (Katina & Keating, 2014) Emergent Complex systems may exist in an unstable environment and be subject to emergent behavioral, structural, and interpretation patterns that cannot be known in advance and lie beyond the ability of requirements to effectively capture and maintain (Katina & Keating, 2014) Environmental Exogenous components that affect or are affected by the engineering system; that which acts, grows, and evolves with internal and external components (Bartolomei, Hastings, de Nuefville, & Rhodes, 2012;Glass et al, 2011;Hawryszkiewycz, 2009) Functional Range of fulfilling goals and purposes of the engineering system, ease of adding new functionality or ease of upgrading existing functionality, the goals and purposes of the engineering systems, ability to organize connections (Bartolomei et al, 2012;Hawryszkiewycz, 2009;Jain, Chandrasekaran, Elias, & Cloutier, 2008;Konrad & Gall, 2008) …”

Section: Attribute Definitionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Holistic Consider the whole of the system, consider the role of the observer, and consider the broad influence of the system on the environment (Haber & Verhaegen, 2012;Katina & Keating, 2014;Svetinovic 2013) Multifinality Two seemingly identical initial complex systems can have different pathways toward different end states (Katina & Keating, 2014) Predictive Proactively analyze requirements arising due to the implementation of the system underdevelopment and the system's interaction with the environment and other systems (Svetinovic, 2013) Technical Physical, nonhuman components of the system to include hardware, infrastructure, software, and information, complexity of integration technologies required to achieve system capabilities and functions (Bartolomei et al, 2012;Chittister & Haimes, 2010;Haber & Verhaegen, 2013;Jain et al, 2008) Interdependen cies A number of systems are dependent on one another to produce the required results (Katina & Keating, 2014) Process Processes and steps to perform tasks within the system, methodology framework to support and improve the analysis of systems, hierarchy of system requirements (Bartolomei et al, 2012;Haber & Verhaegen, 2012;Konrad & Gall, 2008;Liang, Avgeriou, He, & Xu, 2010) Social Social network consisting of the human components and the relationships held among them; social network essential in supporting innovation in dynamic processes; centers on groups that can assume roles with defined responsibilities (Bartolomei et al, 2012;Hawryszkiewycz, 2009;Liang et al, 2010) Complex systems are large and multidimensional with interrelated dependent systems. They are challenged with dynamic, national-level, or international intricacies as social, political, environmental, and technical issues evolve (Bartolomei et al, 2012;Glass et al, 2011).…”

Section: Attribute Definitionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Untitled

2017

Defense ARJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article discusses cyber security controls and a use case that involves decision theory methods to produce a model and independent first-order results using a form-fit-function approach as a generalized application benchmarking framework. The frame work combines subjective judgments that are based on a survey of 502 cyber security respondents with quantitative data and identifies key performance drivers in the selection of specific criteria for three communities of interest: local area network, wide area network, and remote users. p. 222The Threat Detection System That Cried Wolf: Reconciling Developers with Operators Shelley M. CazaresThreat detection systems that perform well in testing can "cry wolf" during operation, generating many false alarms. The author posits that program managers can still use these systems as part of a tiered system that, overall, exhibits better perfor mance than each individual system alone. (Ret.), Shahram Sarkani, and Thomas A. Mazzuchi Programs lack an optimized solution set of require ments attributes. This research provides a set of validated requirements attributes for ultimate program execution success. Given the recent enhancements in acquisition data collection, a meta-analysis reveals that nonparametric data mining techniques may improve the accuracy of future DoD cost estimates. CONTENTS | Featured Research Critical Success Factors for Crowdsourcing with Virtual Environments to Unlock InnovationGlenn E. Romanczuk, Christopher Willy, and John E. Bischoff Delphi methods were used to discover critical success factors in five areas: virtual environments, MBSE, crowdsourcing, human systems integra tion, and the overall process. Results derived from this study present a framework for using virtual environments to crowdsource systems design using warfighters and the greater engineering staff.http://www.dau.mil/library/arj p. 376 Defense ARJ Guidelines for ContributorsThe Defense Acquisition Research Journal (ARJ) is a scholarly peer-reviewed journal published by the Defense Acquisition University. All submissions receive a blind review to ensure impartial evaluation.p. 381 Call for AuthorsWe are currently soliciting articles and subject matter experts for the 2017-2018 Defense ARJ print years. p. 384Defense Acquisition University WebsiteYour online access to acquisition research, consulting, information, and course offerings. FROM THE CHAIRMAN AND EXECUTIVE EDITORDr. Larrie D. Ferreiro [R&E]), will carry out the mission of defense technological innovation. The second office, the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment (USD[A&S]), will ensure that sus tainment issues are integrated during the acquisition process. The articles in this issue show some of the innovative ways that acqui sition can be tailored to these new paradigms.The first article is "Using Analytical Hierarchy and Analytical Network Processes to Create Cyber Security Metrics" by George C. Wilamowski, Jason R. Dever, and Steven M. F. Stuban. It was the recipient (from among strong co...

show abstract

“…Several metrics for measuring system effectiveness have been proposed, such as integration goodness [11], system affordability [12], system elegance [13], or affordable operational effectiveness [14]. For the purpose of this paper, affordable operational effectiveness (ref.…”

Section: Measuring System Effectivenessmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exile: A natural consequence of autonomy and belonging in systems-of-systems

Salado

2016

2016 Annual IEEE Systems Conference (SysCon)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Governance is one of the key differentiating elements between traditional systems and systems of systems. While systems are governed by a single authority, systems within a system of systems are often independently governed or governed by fully empowered entities. Such independence is a necessary condition for the autonomy of each constituent system and for enabling the concept of belonging. At the same time, the capability to be autonomous and the voluntary nature of belonging, enables a system of systems to voluntarily expel or exile one or more of its constituent systems. Yet, research has not addressed so far the implications and modeling of potential exile into the operational effectiveness of a system within a system of systems and its impacts on the engineering of systems of systems. This paper presents the concept of system exile as a philosophical necessity in the definition of systems of systems, it discusses some visions to measure the risk of exile, and proposes a way forward to explore mitigation techniques.

show abstract

Exploring the Impact of Systems Architecture and Systems Requirements on Systems Integration Complexity

Cited by 42 publications

References 8 publications

Complex Acquisition Requirements Analysis Using a Systems Engineering Approach

Complex Acquisition Requirements Analysis Using a Systems Engineering Approach

Untitled

Exile: A natural consequence of autonomy and belonging in systems-of-systems

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About