bluuebunny/crossref_metadata_2025_split huggingface dataset:
4.2.3 A Systems Approach to the Transition of Emergent Technologies into Operational Systems – Herding the Cats, the Road to Euphoria and Planning for Success
Authors: Austin Marc F. , York Donald M. , Zakar Joseph D. , Pettersen Leonard A. , Duff Eva M. 
Published: November 2014

AbstractThe prosecution of the National Security Agency's mission has evolved from the relatively static, industrial age, Cold War communications environment to the ubiquitous, high speed, and multi‐functional technologies of today's information age. In an Agency whose success depends on acquiring and deploying the latest technologies for collecting and protecting information, a system engineering approach is mandated to successfully transition and manage the complexity of new technologies.Using such a systems approach, this paper proposes a model and a process for technology transition. The development of the technology transition model is based upon NSA's need to establish a repeatable, reliable and predictable technology transition process at an enterprise level. The model is established using a systems view, is based on the principles of systems life cycle planning, a business case, and critical decision points for any technology transition activity.The latter part of the paper demonstrates how the principles of Portfolio Management can be used in conjunction with the technology transition model to enable strategic systems planning, ensure technology readiness, and guarantee a focus on technology relevance and feasibility.Effective methods, such as the one proposed in this paper, for the transition and infusion of new technologies into mission will enable NSA to maintain its preeminence in a global environment of rapid technology change.
4.4.1 A System‐of‐Systems Framework for the Future Hydrogen‐Based Transportation Economy
Authors: Duffy Michael , Sandor Debra 
Published: November 2014

AbstractToday, almost 60% of the petroleum consumed in the United States is imported. The nation's current transportation system of systems (SoS) relies almost exclusively on refined petroleum products, accounting for over two‐thirds of the oil used in the United States each day. As a nation, we must work to reduce our dependence on foreign sources of oil in a manner that is affordable, ensures national energy security, and preserves environmental quality. In the long term, a potential solution to the nation's transportation energy problems is an operational hydrogen‐based transportation economy. Transitioning to any alternative transportation fuel on a national scale will require the creation of a robust and cost‐effective system of systems that operates in concert with the dynamics of today's mature and highly‐networked transportation infrastructure. Using a supply‐chain point of view to trace the flow of transportation fuels through the necessary SoS, this paper addresses the current petroleum‐based economy for transportation, the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE's) vision for a future hydrogen‐based transportation economy, and the significant challenges associated with such a massive market and infrastructure transformation.
4.4.3 Applying Principles for Sustainable Design to Sustainable Management of a Natural System
Authors: Frank Moti , Zeitouni Naomi 
Published: November 2014

AbstractThe idea that a system design must be sustainable as regards its impact on environmental concerns throughout its life cycle, as much as meeting the customer's requirements, is not new to Systems Engineering. However, in recent years, society's awareness about sustainability issues has increased and numerous papers, books, and conferences have dealt with this important subject. The current paper examines the way in which the system engineering community should be prepared in an age where there is a strong social demand to build systems according to an approach that takes both social and environmental variables into account. The paper focuses on the issue of the sustainable design of systems and presents several principles of sustainable design. The second part of the paper presents a case study that relates to the designing of a groundwater preservation system, as an example of implementing some principles of sustainable design. The paper advances the systems engineering body of knowledge by gathering principles for the sustainable design of systems.
5.4.1 Design for Sustainability – The Challenge for Systems Engineering
Authors: Zonnenshain Avigdor , Sheps Isaac 
Published: November 2014

AbstractOrganizations should continually aspire to “meet the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”. This is the essence of the sustainability approach and of sustainability management in organization and businesses. Sustainability is a perfect system concern which involves stakeholders of all kinds, deals with the entire lifecycle of products and systems, incorporates economic, environmental and social considerations in management and engineering, and entails new risks and opportunities to be managed by the organizations. We propose an integrated model for the design and management for sustainability in business. This model relies on some key Systems Engineering methodologies and Quality Management approaches. Also described is some of our experience with sustainability progress in both our companies – RAFAEL and Carlsberg‐Srbija.
6.1.2 Systems Architecting for Sustainable Delivery of Value
Authors: Huynh Thomas V. , Osmundson John S. 
Published: November 2014

AbstractRequirements need be established for architecting a large scale, complex system for sustainable delivery of value to users. In this paper, we describe a general methodology to establish requirements on design of a complex system to provide sustainable delivery of value. The methodology involves a system architecture paradigm, a sustainability analysis, and the derivation of design requirements. The methodology is described in concrete terms as it is applied to an ad hoc sensor network, which is required to provide sustainable delivery of information for use within the context of a missile defense system. Bounds are then established on the network connectivity and interoperability measures. This work demonstrates a methodology to enable designing requirements for architecting a system for sustainable delivery of value.
6.3.1 Secure Adaptive Response Potential (SARP): A System Security Metric
Authors: Simpson Joseph J , Miller Ann , Dagli Cihan H 
Published: November 2014

AbstractSystem design, development and operational activities are monitored and evaluated to facilitate proper system security management in all phases of the system life‐cycle. Effective system security metrics must address all phases of the system life‐cycle as well as the associated organizational elements that interact during the system life‐cycle to produce and operate the system of interest. A single system security metric, built from multiple components, is presented here as a fundamental system management security metric. This single technical security metric is used to support and evaluate the allocation of corporate and program resources, including time and budget.
6.4.2 Life extension of Civil Infrastructural works ‐ a systems engineering approach
Authors: van der Laan Jan M. 
Published: November 2014

AbstractThis paper discusses the application of Systems Engineering in projects where large civil structures like bridges, ship locks, weirs and tunnels are being renovated and prepared for a new phase in their life cycle. In the Systems Engineering literature there is little attention given to life extension of such structures. Some of the typical problems with renovation projects of civil infrastructure works are described, and based on that a practical approach is presented using Systems Engineering principles. This results in a few simple process models who also close the gap that exists between Systems Engineering standards and Asset management standards. These models can be used to plan and execute these kinds of projects in a systematic way.
7.1.0 How Should We Respond to the Next Global Terrorist Attack or Natural Disaster Event
Authors: Mackey W , Sutton S , Jackson S , Tulodieski C , Nolte J , Long J , Carl J 
Published: November 2014

AbstractDuring the past few years, natural disasters including the major earthquakes in Pakistan, the Tsunami floods of Indonesia, and the hurricanes and destruction in New Orleans, LA and the Gulf Coast region of the United States have caused major loss of life, injury and significant loss of property.During the same period, insurgent attacks in Iraq, subway bombings in London, fire attacks on the city of Paris, and continued threats of terrorists throughout the world have placed life at risk.Terrorism is the systematic use of violence and force as a means of coercion through fear and intimidation. As we have seen since World War II and experienced first hand since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, the calculated murder of political personalities has given way to the random killing of innocent people and civilian populations.Natural disasters are perhaps even more threatening. Are we building systems and responding in a way that permits these communities to respond properly and be resilient to these kinds of events? How can the discipline of systems engineering assist in preparing for, responding to, recovering from and mitigate against the risks of natural disasters and terrorist events.Since September 11, 2001, INCOSE through its Anti‐Terrorism International Working Group (ATIWG) has focused the principles, techniques, and practices of systems engineering on how to reduce and eradicate international terrorism. We have taken this opportunity to expand emergency preparedness efforts to natural disasters as well.Through the ATIWG sponsoring of panels at previous INCOSE symposia (2002–2007), writing papers for publication (2003), a tutorial (2004), an Insight Issue (2006) and working group activities, the systems engineering community has discussed the application of collaborative engineering environments, simulation and modeling, religion, system solutions to defend against terrorism, psychology, and root causes of terrorism to address the vulnerabilities of systems as well as the attack responses to threats.This panel continues the INCOSE application of systems engineering to these international problems by discussing the proper responses, recovery and resiliency of society and the systems it builds to natural disaster events and terrorist attacks.
7.3.3 Intuition and the Systems Engineer: Learning from Management
Authors: Bosman Reinier A. , Wiersma Erik J.W.F. 
Published: November 2014

AbstractSince the 1970's the industry and information technology has had to cope with a rapidly changing environment. To deal with this, management had to accelerate their decisions and found that top level managers often applied intuition for important decisions. Intuition can be immediate, and is usually a sort of feeling which direction should be taken.Systems Engineering (SE) nowadays has also to cope with the same environment as management, to deal with complex design decisions with inadequate data and under time pressure. This paper discusses whether intuition can be a factor to make the practice of Systems Engineering an even more effective and complete methodology to assure the quality of technology.
7.5.0 Global SE: The Reality and the Challenges
Authors: Valerdi R , Yeo T S , van der Linden H H , Loureiro G , Fernandez J L 
Published: November 2014

AbstractThe discipline of systems engineering has made significant strides in expanding throughout the world. INCOSE now boasts 7,000 members but, compared to other organizations such as IEEE and PMI, there are still many opportunities for broader international reach. With international expansion as a strategic priority for INCOSE, significant challenges remain to be addressed. The most critical is the adaptation of the INCOSE model across different technical cultures. This panel will explore these issues from their own perspectives which include Singapore, the Netherlands, Brazil, Spain, and the United States.
8.3.2 It's More Than Just Numbers: How to Implement a Qualitative Risk Analysis Approach
Authors: Lane Courtney E. 
Published: November 2014

AbstractEngineers often feel more comfortable using quantitative methods to solve problems; their approach to risk management is no exception. Quantitative methods are not always the best solution for effective risk management, though. For example, countless hours have been spent by risk management teams trying to determine which risk is more important. Is a risk scored 9.0 any more important than a risk scored 8.5? Maybe so, but the factors that make it more important such are often difficult, if not impossible, to quantify. By applying quantitative techniques to qualitative data, or by using unproven data in complicated risk analysis models, managers may not receive an accurate representation of their ‘top’ risks and may base critical decisions on poor information. This paper will discuss when qualitative risk analysis techniques are most appropriate, examine common challenges associated with qualitative analysis, and discuss solutions for overcoming them.
9.1.1 Method & Tools for constrained System Architecting
Authors: Voirin Jean‐Luc 
Published: November 2014

AbstractThis paper describes a system or software architecture engineering approach, named ARCADIA (ARChitecture Analysis & Design Integrated Approach), based on architecture‐centric and model‐driven engineering activities. It targets systems whose architecture is largely constrained by issues such as performance, safety, security, when these issues must simultaneously be taken into account to find the best architectural compromise out of them. Tools supporting the method allow formalizing these constraints, modeling the architecture, and evaluating its compliance with these constraints in an iterative and short‐loop way, while capitalizing engineering know‐how.
9.2.2 Evaluating Aspects of Systems Modeling Languages by Example: SysML and OPM
Authors: Grobshtein Yariv , Dori Dov 
Published: November 2014

AbstractAs systems are becoming larger and more complex, the challenge of developing quality systems efficiently is on the rise. While traditionally document‐centric approaches have been used, in recent years the benefits of model‐based systems engineering have been acknowledged. Recognizing the importance of modeling as a key factor in managing system development complexity, the selection of the modeling language to be used should be considered. This work evaluates aspects of two systems modeling languages: SysML – OMG's Systems Modeling Language and OPM – Object‐Process Methodology. The evaluation was done on the basis of a concrete sample problem, in which multiple aspects of the system were modeled in both SysML and OPM. Some of the findings, which were generalized from the case study, suggest that OPM is usually advantageous in presenting the system different hierarchy levels and combining structure with behavior, while SysML is more convenient for modeling detailed views of some aspects.
9.3.2 Design to Decision Objectives – Decision Support in the Aircraft Engineering Process
Authors: Lochow Tim , Schmidt‐Schaeffer Tobias , Mauritz Axel 
Published: November 2014

AbstractThe aircraft development process is a very complex, iterative and decision driven process. For future aircraft development programs, running within extended enterprises, involving several stakeholders and giving consideration to changing objectives from infrastructural aspects to environmental impacts, the need for decision support is eminent.To address these issues, and improve the development process by a better process flow, avoidance of unnecessary iteration loops, reduction of lead time and development costs, an approach will be presented called Design to Decision Objectives (DtDO). This approach describes a flexible Decision Support Framework (DtDO Framework) that can be tailored to the specific needs of the various decision situations within an extended enterprise. Further it provides means to complement the company knowledge base in terms of decisions along the entire engineering process.
10.2.1 Improving the Practice of Systems Engineering at JPL
Authors: Jones Ross 
Published: November 2014

AbstractJPL has been investing in a focused effort to improve its practice of systems engineering. The Lab's senior management formed the Systems Engineering Advancement (SEA) Project in order to significantly advance the practice and organizational capabilities of systems engineering at JPL on flight projects and ground support tasks. This paper describes JPL's approach to improving the practice of systems engineering. It describes the general approach used and how they address the three key aspects of change: people, process and technology. It describes plans and progress in each of those three dimensions of change and concludes with some initial work in acquiring systems engineering metrics.
11.1.1 Using Natural Value‐Centric Time Scales for Conceptualizing System Timelines through Epoch‐Era Analysis
Authors: Ross Adam M. , Rhodes Donna H. 
Published: November 2014

AbstractA traditional approach to system design is to optimize the system with regard to a set of system objectives, as defined in a given context. This approach falls short when designing systems that are capable of delivering sustained value to stakeholders in the face of a rapidly changing world. In order to achieve this value robustness, systems should be designed using natural value‐centric time scales, as defined by their contexts, for conceptualizing system timelines. Epoch‐Era Analysis is an approach that provides for visualization and a structured way to think about the temporal system value environment. This paper discusses Epoch‐Era Analysis as central to a tradespace exploration process for system design comparison and selection, invoking passive or active value robustness design strategies. The analysis can also serve as a socio‐technical bridge, integrating the tradespace exploration activities of architects and engineers, which may be traditionally independent efforts in contemporary engineering programs.
11.1.2 A Process Modelling Framework for Formal Validation of Panama Canal System Operations
Authors: Johnson John , Austin Mark A. 
Published: November 2014

AbstractIn this paper we develop a process modeling framework for the evaluation and formal validation of Panama Canal system operations. Component‐ and architecture‐level processes are organized into a three level hierarchy and modeled in LTSA. Safety and progress requirements are formally expressed as processes that can be evaluated through compositional and search processes, respectively.
11.2.2 A Framework for System Resilience Discussions
Authors: Sheard Sarah 
Published: November 2014

AbstractThis paper presents a framework for discussions of system resilience. The framework has five aspects: time periods, system types, events, resilience actions, and properties to preserve. The five time periods are well defined, but the other four aspects vary according to author, type of system, and purpose of the discussion, so what is presented is the variation that occurs among definitions.The framework is followed by a cataloging of principles for creating emergence, including a number of rubrics. Finally the paper discusses factors affecting resilience, including improving resilience, tradeoffs, and loss of resilience. An appendix details specific definitions and distinguishers from related properties.
11.2.3 Security for the 22nd Century
Authors: De Spain Mark , Darby John , Cloutier Robert 
Published: November 2014

AbstractAsymmetric threats are the new face of security in the 21st century, where a new breed of adversary threatens long established, essentially monolithic institutions at the core of western civilization. The direction of technology development has the potential to further exacerbate the unbalanced standoff between the new threat and established institutions, whether government, commercial, industrial or cultural, particularly when the adversary is a determined and ideologically driven foe that is willing to bide their time and develop their resources over extended periods that may stretch into decades. Systems Engineering has the potential of offering security solutions that look beyond the traditional approach of adding layers of security to functional systems. Security that is inherent to the product or process may be more adept at addressing the dynamic threat environments of today. The restructuring of organizational and product architectures may “rebalance” the threat/risk equation and reduce potentially catastrophic asymmetric threats to a tolerable symmetric “standoff.” Such restructuring does not come about easily or quickly, however, and fundamental shifts in infrastructure and culture can require generations to fully implement, so research into new security concepts today may not be completely realized until the 22nd century.
11.3.1 Formal Verification in System Design Process: From EFFBDs to Petri nets
Authors: Seidner Charlotte , Lerat Jean‐Philippe , Roux Olivier H. 
Published: November 2014

AbstractSafety analysis in Systems Engineering (SE) processes, as usually implemented, rarely relies on formal methods such as model checking since such techniques, however powerful and mature, are deemed too complex for an efficient use. This paper thus aims to improve verification practice in SE design: considering the widely used model of EFFBDs (Enhanced Function Flow Block Diagrams), it proposes a method for a translation into time Petri Nets (TPNs); known results are then applied from TPNs to EFFBDs, leading to the possibility of assessing a number of safety‐critical properties. This paper also presents some tools developed in application of these results and in which the underlying complexity is totally concealed from the end‐user.
11.4.2 Applying SE Methods Achieves Project Success to Evaluate Hammer and Fixed Cutter Grinders Using Multiple Varieties and Moistures of Biomass Feedstock for Ethanol Production
Authors: Zirker Larry R. , Wright Christopher T. , Hamelin R. Douglas 
Published: November 2014

AbstractApplying basic systems engineering (SE) tools to the mission analysis phases of a 2.5‐million dollar biomass pre‐processing project for the U.S. Department of Energy directly assisted the project principal investigator understand the complexity and identify the gaps of a moving‐target project and capture the undefined technical/functional requirements and deliverables from the project team and industrial partners. A creative application of various SE tools by non‐aerospace systems engineers developed an innovative “big picture” product that combined aspects of mission analysis with a project functional flow block diagram, providing immediate understanding of the depth and breath of the biomass preprocessing effort for all team members, customers, and industrial partners. The “big picture” diagram became the blue print to write the project test plan, and provided direction to bring the project back on track and achieve project success.