LOGIC-COGNITIVE MODELS, INFORMATION AND SYSTEM TECHNOLOGIES FOR IDENTIFYING THE STRUCTURE OF HIERARCHICAL SYSTEMS TO PROVIDE SUPPORT FOR SOLUTIONS IN CRISIS AND CONFLICT SITUATIONS
Authors:   Lviv Polytechnic National University, Sikora L. S. , Lysa N. K. ,   Lviv Polytechnic National University, Miyushkovych Yu. G. ,   Lviv Polytechnic National University, Martsyshyn R. S. ,   Lviv Polytechnic National University
Published: April 2021

The ar­tic­le pre­sents sche­mes and mo­dels to sup­port de­ci­si­on-ma­king for the eli­mi­na­ti­on of thre­ats du­ring emer­gen­ci­es in hi­erarchi­cal systems. The construc­ti­on of sche­mes and mo­dels was ba­sed on in­for­ma­ti­on and system techno­lo­gi­es (ba­sed on the con­cept of iden­ti­fi­ca­ti­on). In mo­dern techno­lo­gi­cal pro­duc­ti­ons with a complex hi­erarchi­cal struc­tu­re, the cau­ses of an emer­gency can be: fa­ilu­res, obstac­les, mal­functi­ons (both in in­for­ma­ti­on ma­na­ge­ment struc­tu­res and in pro­duc­ti­on units, and in ca­se of techno­logy vi­ola­ti­on). In the event of er­rors (which may be ma­de in the pro­cess of analyzing a li­mi­ting sit­ua­ti­on or emer­gency) and in­cor­rect de­ci­si­ons, the dyna­mics of the de­ve­lop­ment of events will ha­ve di­sastro­us con­seq­uen­ces. To pre­vent the de­ve­lop­ment of events un­der such a sce­na­rio, ope­ra­ti­onal and techni­cal per­son­nel sho­uld ha­ve an approp­ri­ate le­vel of syste­ma­tic know­led­ge. This al­lows staff to iden­tify the so­ur­ces of ha­zards and fac­tors, to bu­ild a cau­se-and-ef­fect re­la­ti­onships. This be­co­mes the ba­sis for the analysis of the sta­te of po­ten­ti­ally dan­ge­ro­us ob­jects (PDO) in the hi­erarchi­cal struc­tu­re of the system. This system-in­for­ma­ti­on ba­sis is ne­ces­sary for construc­ting sce­na­ri­os for the de­ve­lop­ment of events, iden­tif­ying bottle­necks and ma­king de­ci­si­ons in the con­text of eli­mi­na­ting thre­ats and emer­gency con­di­ti­ons by the ope­ra­ti­onal ma­na­ge­ment te­am. For complex struc­tu­res of techno­ge­nic systems, the prob­lem of iden­ti­fi­ca­ti­on (both dyna­mics and in­ter­con­nec­ti­ons of aggre­ga­tes) is not fully re­sol­ved. This req­ui­res the de­ve­lop­ment of new met­hods ta­king in­to ac­co­unt hu­man be­ha­vi­or. Mo­dern pro­duc­ti­on is a complex in­teg­ra­ted hu­man-mac­hi­ne control­led system and ma­na­ge­ment stra­tegy (which are inclu­ded both in the struc­tu­re of the au­to­ma­ted control system and in the know­led­ge ba­se and pro­fes­si­onal skills of the hu­man ope­ra­tor). A cha­rac­te­ris­tic fe­atu­re of such systems is the distri­bu­ti­on of in­for­ma­ti­on lo­ad in ac­cor­dan­ce with the tar­get tasks. This req­ui­res the de­ve­lop­ment of da­ta flows of va­ri­ous in­for­ma­ti­onal sig­ni­fi­can­ce, iden­tif­ying the cha­rac­te­ris­tic signs of the system's be­ha­vi­or re­la­ti­ve to the tar­get, and for­ming so­lu­ti­ons for co­or­di­na­ting the system's mo­ve­ment in the di­rec­ti­on of the tar­get area. The­se de­ci­si­on-ma­king pro­ces­ses and pro­ce­du­res incre­ase the men­tal ten­si­on of the ope­ra­tor. This may le­ad to de­ci­si­ons to un­ne­ces­sary risk. That is, in ac­cor­dan­ce with the sit­ua­ti­on, the pri­ce of er­ror incre­ases. This is what forms the set of req­ui­re­ments for the ope­ra­tor: both to the le­vel of his in­tel­lec­tu­al re­adi­ness, and to his psychophysi­olo­gi­cal cha­rac­te­ris­tics.