Value and benefits of model‐based systems engineering (MBSE): Evidence from the literature

Abstract

Traditional document‐based practices in systems engineering are being transitioned to model‐based ones. Adoption of model‐based systems engineering (MBSE) continues to grow in industry and government, and MBSE continues to be a major research theme in the systems engineering community. In fact, MBSE remains a central element in the International Council on Systems Engineering (INCOSE)’s vision for 2025. Examining systems engineering literature, this paper presents an assessment of the extent to which benefits and value of MBSE are supported by empirical evidence. A systematic review of research and practice papers in major systems engineering archival journals and conference proceedings was conducted. Evidence was categorized in four types, two of which inductively emerged from the results: measured, observed (without a formal measurement process), perceived (claimed without evidence), and backed by other references. Results indicate that two thirds of claimed MBSE benefits are only supported by perceived evidence, while only two papers reported measured evidence. The aggregate assessment presented in this paper indicates that claims about the value and benefits of MBSE are mainly based on expectation. We argue that evidence supporting the value and benefits of MBSE remains inconclusive.

Is CAD A Good Paradigm for MBSE?

“…MBSE Benefits. The benefits expected of MBSE have been recently evaluated in a systematic literature review of over 800 papers related to MBSE (Henderson & Salado, 2021). This review found 48 different benefits that are claimed throughout the literature, although most of these benefit claims are stated without any supporting evidence.…”

“…The simplicity of adopting CAD makes it more straightforward to justify benefits; one can simply compare the cost of the CAD license with gains in productivity. MBSE, as a process, is more complicated and is therefore more difficult to measure benefits or calculate the ROI (Henderson & Salado, 2021). Furthermore, due to the more complex nature of the SE process compared to CAD, the period of time which MBSE is used is typically much longer.…”

Conjoining Wymore’s Systems Theoretic Framework and the DEVS Modeling Formalism: Toward Scientific Foundations for MBSE

“…Recent thrust in the systems engineering (SE) community has been toward the use of models to perform SE activities [1]. This change comes from a desired conversion away from document-based SE (DBSE) to model-based SE (MBSE) to leverage potential improvements such as traceability through authoritative sources of truth [2]. However, a recent survey presented several obstacles to the adoption of MBSE in practice [3], alluding, among others, to conceptual misalignment.…”

Comparative Analysis of Model-Based and Traditional Systems Engineering Approaches for Architecting a Robotic Space System Through Automatic Information Transfer

“…The MSR CCRS COM Pre-Phase A architectural development activity was used as a case study to assess the benefits of MBSE over traditional systems engineering in achieving automatic information transfer. This research is motivated by the observation that despite the claims made in the literature that MBSE is beneficial to the development of engineered systems, there is lack of empirical evidence in the literature that supports this hypothesis [18]. Additionally, there is a limited number of case studies with side-by-side comparison of MBSE and non-MBSE approaches that provide quantitative evidence of the advantages MBSE approaches over traditional, document-based approaches [16].…”