Sympérasmology: A Proposal for the Theory of Synthetic System Knowledge

Abstract

Owing to the results of research in system science, artificial intelligence, and cognitive engineering, engineered systems are becoming more and more powered by knowledge. Complementing common-sense and scientific knowledge, system knowledge is maturing into a crucial productive asset. However, an overall theory of the knowledge of intellectualized systems does not exist. Some researchers suggest that time has come to establish a philosophically underpinned theoretical framework. This motion is seconded by the on-going intelligence revolution, in which artificial intelligence becomes a productive power, enabler of smart systems, and a strong transformer of the social life. The goal of this paper is to propose a skeleton of the needed generic theory of system knowledge (and a possible new branch of philosophical studies). The major assumption is that a significant part of the synthetic system knowledge (SSK) is “sympérasma”, that is, knowledge conjectured, inferred, constructed, or otherwise derived during the operation of systems. This part will become even more dominant in the future. Starting out from the above term, the paper suggests calling this theory “sympérasmology”. Some specific domains of “sympérasmological” studies, such as (i) manifestations of SSK, (ii) mechanisms of generating SSK, (iii) dependability of SSK, (iv) operational power of SSK, (v) composability of SSK, and (vi) advancement of SSK, are identified. It is understood that the essence and status of SSK cannot be investigated without considering the related cognitive processes and technological enablers. The paper presents a number of open questions relevant for follow-up discussions.

The epsilon-knowledge: an emerging complement of Machlup's types of disciplinary knowledge

“…The comparative analysis presented in the rest of the paper intended to show that SSK indeed represents a different genre. Starting out from the cognitive framework of sympérasmology, the paper will identify and propose some important issues for further studies (Horváth, 2020).…”

Connectors of smart design and smart systems

“…Ko et al (2012) also exemplified that cyber-physical augmentation can introduce novel primary functions. In another research project, the term “cognitive engineering” was adopted and adapted to describe the interconnected processes of (i) intellectualization of product/systems and (ii) designing physical, cognitive, and affective interaction of humans with smart products/systems (Horváth, 2020 b ).…”

“…Smart design is not computational design or automated design or axiomatic design, but a sophisticated design process completed by a synergistic cooperation of human experts and intellectualized systems. As mentioned earlier, it is enabled by an extensive utilization of AI-based system resources (Smithers et al , 1990) and system-generated synthetic knowledge, which augments intuitive human knowledge (Horváth, 2020 b ). Though not exclusively, it has effects on the methodology of designing smart products, systems, services, and experiences too.…”

“…Some years ago, the concept of systelligence (self-managed system intelligence) emerged. It is supposed to make intellectualized engineering systems capable to sense, stream data, build awareness, infer and reason, monitor operation, plan self-adaptation, and enhance their performance as focused smart problem solvers (Horváth, 2020 b ). Thus, rapid technological advances may be one of the reasons why system smartness means a different thing for everyone dealing with it!…”

“…AI-knowledge primarily means problem solving knowledge, rather than system development knowledge (Horváth, 2020 b ). The two main constituents of AI-knowledge are (i) codified human knowledge and (ii) self-generated illative knowledge.…”