System have a functions and perform service. Service is a behavior. No service – no system. System is a “select” operator over objects and relations that convenient to description of reality chunk. No human action with goal – no system. Solar system have a boundary depending of your as a stakeholder going to do with this system: you perform your system definition for Solar system that dependent of your activity as a stakeholder in your projects with solar systems. If you have several stakholders with different systems definition you can perform belief revision and ontology evolution (if not choose to ingnore other system definition for Solar system). There are (according to ISO 15288 systems engineering life cycle reference processes and current INCOSE Handbook) system-of-interest (that perform target service) and enabling system. Service of enabling system is performing of engineering process (including system engineering process) upon a system-of-interest. Systems engineering is a method of work (this is class of class for class of system engineering process that we meet in engineering enterprise – endeavour according to ISO 24744 that is standard). Actual processes (cases) of the endeavour is classified by systems engineering if compliant to systems engineering method of choice (or several such a methods). Contemporary PLM systems have repository for system-of-interest and related model (including behavioral models with processes of operation temporal parts of this target system – “product model”) and workflow/issue traker engine that deal with enabling system models (“project model”, “organizational model). Usual in systems engineering we have “behavior with object” sentences where “behavior” is from enabling system and object is from target system. Due to this human action (praxeology) paradigm we have joint data model (ontology) in contemporary PLM: we need both model of enabling system and it structure (“active structure” in Archimate) and processes and system-of-interest and it structure (“passive structure” in Archimate) to say something useful for engineers. There are no “recursion” because we have different stakeholders that provide different goals for system-of-interest and enabling system while enabling system have it one enabling systems (e.g. people that in reflexive – not recursive – position in relation to their enterprise where they have roles of system engineering activities performers). I support joining of both tracks while you have no consensus about overall systems engineering and systems ontology. Key to this systems engineering ontology is stakeholder (agent with goals and authority to perform actions). But I do not believe to you have an agreement in few month: there are no such thing as one-ontology-fit-all. Therefore join of system-of-interest and enabling systems (system engineering method that define processes of enabling system) tracks helps keep discussion about whole thing that reflected in data model of contemporary PLM systems. Best regards, Anatoly Levenchuk TechInvestLab, president INCOSE Russian Chapter, research director (past president) Moscow, Russia Blog: http://levenchuk.com and in Russian http://ailev.ru Profile in LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/ailev Mobile: +7 916 673 4900 GoogleTalk: ailevenchuk Skype: levenchuk Mail: ailev@xxxxxxxxxxx From: ontology-summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ontology-summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jack Ring
Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2012 4:30 PM
To: Ontology Summit 2012 discussion
Subject: Re: [ontology-summit] FW: Track 1&2 Joint Mission and Session Abstracts Matthew, Try thinking of it this way. If SE, the activity, is not a system then the activity can be conducted in any arbitrary order. Don't let the current examples of human activity that are called SE and are conducted irrationally confuse you. Properly conducted SE is as much a system as the London Philharmonic when performing. Systems only exist when performing. Meanwhile you have a nascent configuration. Now, its your job to converge all these ideas!!! On Jan 26, 2012, at 2:56 AM, Matthew West wrote:
That will be an interesting discussion then, because I would not consider Systems Engineering (the activity) to be a System. I expect a system to be something that performs an activity – yet still exists when it is not performing that activity, not that is an activity. This email originates from Information Junction Ltd. Registered in England and Wales No. 6632177. Registered office: 2 Brookside, Meadow Way, Letchworth Garden City, Hertfordshire, SG6 3JE. Furthermore, when we get to the notion that SE, the activity, qualifies as a system then when we try to discuss how to SE system engineering certainly great confusion will set in. On Jan 25, 2012, at 8:57 AM, joseph simpson wrote: Combining these two tracks will make things more difficult, in my opinion.
In my view the difficulty is associated with the elimination of the boundary between natural systems and industrial (or engineered) systems.
These are key distinctions that are important in this area.
Some of the main distinctions are outlined in "The Sciences of the Artificial," by Herbert A. Simon.
Other distinctions also exist, for example, production system and product system are clearly identifiable in an industrial system context.
In the context of natural systems, the concept of a production system and product system are less clear.
Further, the description of these tracks may benefit from the clear identification of what type of system and what type of model is being described and/or referenced.
Simply because an ontology is a model and a system at the same time, and the recursion used in the application of these concepts can quickly become confusing.
Have fun,
Joe All,
Matthew West and Henson Graves came up with their joint Track 1&2 Mission Statement, along with Session Abstracts. We discussed this a bit, and would like the entire Ontology Summit 2012 community to see this, and comment.
We think this merger of the two Tracks is useful.
Thanks,
Leo and Nicola
-----Original Message-----
From: Matthew West [mailto:matthew.west@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2012 2:49 PM
To: 'Peter Yim'; 'Henson Graves'; 'Nicola Guarino'; Obrst, Leo J.
Subject: Track 1&2 Joint Mission and Session Abstracts
Dear all,
Peter just put me on the hook to come up with an overall mission statement
for Tracks 1&2, which it looks like we are going to merge (as long as Henson
is happy with that), and also an abstract for the first two sessions. Here
goes:
Track 1&2: Ontology for Big Systems & Systems Engineering
Mission
We aim to bring key challenges to light with large-scale systems and systems
of systems for ontology and identify where solutions exist, where the
problems require significant research, and where we can work towards
solutions as part of this summit. The areas to be considered include:
- working with and integrating the results of models using multiple
modeling languages
- the systems lifecycle and the issues of sharing data within and between
lifecycle stages
- the difference between requirements and the delivered system
- systems of systems vs systems,
- the nature of system components and the difference between these and the
parts installed,
- the connections between system components and what they carry,
- systems behaviour,
- federated systems both as a bit system, and as a solution to some of the
challenges,
- principles of how to construct good quality reusable models (ontologies)
- the management of ontologies of and for large systems and the challenges
in developing and maintaining them.
session-03: Ontology for Big Systems & Systems Engineering - I: The Systems
and Systems Engineering Problem Space
Abstract
In this session we want to look at the problems in big systems and systems
engineering where ontology has a role to play. The aim is to uncover the
various areas where challenges exist that the world of ontology can
contribute to.
session-04: Ontology for Big Systems & Systems Engineering - II: a response
to the problem space and setting out the working program for this Summit
Track
Abstract
In this session we will consider the output of the first session, and try to
identify:
- where there are solutions already available, if you know where to look,
- where the problems require significant research,
- where there is an opportunity to make useful progress within the
timescale of the ontology summit.
Regards
Matthew West
Information Junction
Tel: +44 1489 880185
Mobile: +44 750 3385279
Skype: dr.matthew.west
matthew.west@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.informationjunction.co.uk/
http://www.matthew-west.org.uk/
This email originates from Information Junction Ltd. Registered in England
and Wales No. 6632177.
Registered office: 2 Brookside, Meadow Way, Letchworth Garden City,
Hertfordshire, SG6 3JE.
_________________________________________________________________
Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-summit/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2012/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2012
Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
_________________________________________________________________
Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-summit/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2012/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2012
Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
|
_________________________________________________________________
Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-summit/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2012/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2012
Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ (01)
|