Hi All, (01)
Sorry guys if I missed something in this thread but when I hear SOS I cannot
be out :) (02)
Sometimes the jokes have meaning - it's not a joke (03)
I want to share few links here which make a sense for me regarding the topic (04)
I mean the Feigenbaum Universality
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitchell_Feigenbaum and the Matthew Cook
and/or Stephen Wolfram Rule 110 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_110 (05)
Каждый понимает в меру своей
испорченности, но, как хорошо всем
известно,
все уже было давно украдено до нас... тьфу ты
- сказано, конечно :) (06)
BTW I guess but don't understand why we use English instead of Russian
language to discuss such complicated topics - as it is so naturally to use
the best tool (the language formal or informal in this case) if we plan to
make a quality artifact - Anatoly Levenchuk understands me ;) (07)
Even the self-reference paradox and recursion has been discussed for
thousands years today we have few outstanding discoveries that could move
this topic from metaphysics to computational science to implement the new
understanding of SOS (both self-organized systems and systems of sysmems),
complex and universal dynamics of non-linear systems into the engineering
area and computing. (08)
As futher generalization I want to hope that the universal laws (both
natural and human) show us the universal paths, and we just need to catch
the hints to reach the universal goals. (09)
I have to focus on some practical things right now, so I apologize ahead -
if I miss some comments, if the coments, and if so on :)
Hope to participate in this great dicussion later (010)
Thanks for your attention
Yuriy Milov (011)
----- Original Message -----
From: "henson graves" <henson.graves@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "'Ontology Summit 2012 discussion'" <ontology-summit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2012 11:31 AM
Subject: Re: [ontology-summit][BigSystems and
SystemsEngineering]Systemofsystems (012)
> Anatoly,
> I do not think I am disagreeing with you very much. I certainly agree with
> your definition of sos. Your classification of sos makes good sense. The
> principles needed to analyze, organize sos can be developed. They are
> somewhat different from traditional SE theory and practice, but so what.
> - henson
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ontology-summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:ontology-summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Anatoly
> Levenchuk
> Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2012 10:18 AM
> To: 'Ontology Summit 2012 discussion'
> Subject: Re: [ontology-summit] [BigSystems and
> SystemsEngineering]Systemofsystems
>
> Henson refer to my text from another thread, I need to repeat it here:
> --- /quote---
> Need to clarify: systems of systems is not simply about decomposition of
> system to another systems!
>
> 1. ISO 15288 intentionally depart from traditional terminology
> "system-subsystem" and have only "system" at all levels - for stressing
> recursive usage of systems engineering life cycle processes on all levels.
> This is not "system of systems", it another wording: every "system"
> consists
> from "system elements" that can be regarded as "systems". This is "systems
> in system" hierarchy (while usually this has no usage as a term and words
> "system" stay apart in a sentence). This is all about modules.
>
> All this system-of-interest has "passive" systems/modules in it, thus
> permitting usual development lifecycle
> (requirements-architecture-design-implementation-integration-transfer into
> operation-operations-retirement). This life cycle applicable on every
> level
> of systems in system (of interest, not system-of-systems!).
>
>
> 2. "System of systems" is a term that describe specific situation when we
> need create system from already established systems (not modules!) while
> each of this established systems has autonomy (owner, systems in
> operational
> environment, enabling systems etc.) and thus have difficulties to change
> to
> fit upper level "system of system". There was (and is) multiple attempts
> to
> develop special "system of systems" methodologies but all of them appear
> like retelling of management, conflictology, politics, economy and so on
> theories with "system" language. Nothing new was created up to now, no
> specific concepts and processes appears, no strong results obtained. There
> is one exclusion: system of systems impossible to "develop" and apply to
> them usual engineering process (like that in ISO 15288): there is
> nonsufficient authority to perform it due to autonomy of each system (each
> of this system have its own architector and primary stakeholders). Thus
> system of systems can only evolve during evolution process with
> coordinated
> development in each of its systems. If you have system of systems (e.g. in
> organizational engineering) you have to think in evolution terms, not in
> traditional engineering ones.
>
> System of systems is all about autonomy and independence and impossibility
> of developing in usual process --
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/System_of_systems
>
> We have several meetings of INCOSE Russian chapter where think about
> system
> of systems in application to enabling system (that is usually organization
> that have every single employee as owner of oneself thus autonomous and
> not
> permit to "developing" as a passive system-of-interest). I have a talk
> about
> it a couple years ago on one of the international system of systems
> workshop
> -- http://www.slideshare.net/ailev/enabling-systems-of-systems-engineering
> ---quote/-------
>
> There is classification of system of systems in the relation of
> "architectural manageability" that mentioned by Henson:
> -- directed (that have appointed architect that have authority and
> resources
> to rule systems in system of systems);
> -- acknowledged (that have recognizable architect of system of systems,
> but
> architect have no authority and resources to command each of systems);
> -- collaborative (systems negotiate in every evolution step, but there are
> no system of systems architect or project manager);
> -- virtual (systems in system of systems do not know about existence of
> each
> other, overall system of systems exist only in somebody mind)
>
> Best regards,
> Anatoly Levenchuk
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: ontology-summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ontology-
>> summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of henson graves
>> Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2012 7:57 PM
>> To: 'Ontology Summit 2012 discussion'
>> Subject: Re: [ontology-summit] [BigSystems and
>> SystemsEngineering]Systemofsystems
>>
>>
>> I agree with Anatoly's characterization of "System of systems" is a
>> term
> that
>> describe specific situation when we need create system from already
>> established systems (not modules!) while each of this established
>> systems has autonomy (owner, systems in operational environment,
>> enabling systems
>> etc.) and thus have difficulties to change to fit upper level "system
>> of
> system.
>> However, when the owners of the systems agree on a common objective
>> they can sometimes achieve a common objective while continuing with
>> individual systems pursuits. It is definitely possible to build
>> theories
> which
>> can be used to analyze when a system of systems is likely to work and
> when
>> it is almost certainly likely to fail.
>>
>> For example most large scale aerospace programs include many
>> individual enterprises which also compete, e.g., Lockheed Martin and
>> Boeing on the same team. By looking at how the system of enterprises
>> is organized one can make good predictions of its success and
>> potential problems. This is
> not
>> my primary intellectual interest but I have observed and participated
>> in these systems of systems.
>> - Henson
>>
>>
>> ________________________________________________________________
>> _
>> 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/ (013)
_________________________________________________________________
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/ (014)
|