bluuebunny/crossref_metadata_2025_split huggingface dataset:
2.1.3 Managing Systems of Systems Interoperability ‐ Federated SOA and Reference Architectures
Authors: Chang Chai Fung , Tan Pong Heng , Tam Soh Khum 
Published: November 2014

AbstractNew and emerging threats, technology advancements and the advent of the Knowledge Age are driving change in Armed Forces around the world. The Singapore Armed Forces is in the midst of transformation into the 3rd Generation SAF to meet these challenges. As military systems morph into increasing networked and interdependent system of systems, the Defence Science and Technology Agency (DSTA) has also adopted strategies and put in systems engineering efforts to manage the interoperability requirements and complexities of this system of systems. In 2006 DSTA adopted Enterprise Architecture (EA) to facilitate businessInformation Technology (IT) alignment and subsequently established a Reference Architecture Framework to ensure interoperability across systems. In this article, we describe the Reference Architecture Framework, the linkage between EA and the Framework, and how the framework will guide the development of the solution blueprint to enable 3rd Generation SAF transformations.
3.1.3 A study of heterogeneous network deployment for WiMax and current wireless LAN
Authors: Liou Bo‐Shen , Heng Ching‐Feng , Hsu Victor , Wang Jing‐Liang 
Published: November 2014

AbstractIn Taiwan, Trial‐and‐error method is adopted in practice in the Base Station (BS) deployment of complex heterogeneous wireless local area network, which is subject to high uncertainty and high cost. Based on existing WiFi hypothesis signal demand, the author utilizes hierarchical clustering method in the SPSS analysis, and combines with different weights, to calculate the LOS and NLOS. The outcomes show that the new method can cover the entire area with less number of BS.
3.3.2 Collaborative Systems Thinking: A response to the problems faced by Systems Engineering's “middle tier”
Authors: Pfarr Barbara B. , Lamb Caroline Twomey , So Maria M. , Rhodes Donna H. 
Published: November 2014

AbstractExperienced systems engineers are adept at more than implementing systems engineering processes: they utilize systems thinking to solve complex engineering problems. Within the space industry demographics and economic pressures are reducing the number of experienced systems engineers that will be available in the future. Collaborative systems thinking within systems engineering teams is proposed as a way to integrate systems engineers of various experience levels to handle complex systems engineering challenges. This paper uses the GOES‐R Program Systems Engineering team to illustrate the enablers and barriers to team level systems thinking and to identify ways in which performance could be improved. Ways NASA could expand its engineering training to promote team‐level systems thinking are proposed.
3.3.4 Active Brainstorming: ‐ A systemic and systematic approach for idea generation
Authors: Kasser Joseph E. 
Published: November 2014

AbstractMany systems engineers and other problem solvers practice some aspects of idea generation when problem solving but tend not to practice it systemically and systematically. This paper addresses that aspect of problem solving and introduces a systemic and systematic way of idea generation via four new problem solving idea storage templates similar in concept to the Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats (SWOT) template using a combination of:

Three new problem solving templates which have been successfully used in several iterations of a postgraduate introductory course on systems engineering (Kasser, et al., 2008) and several one‐day workshops on applying systems thinking to problem solving and managing research.
A standard set of system thinking perspectives (STP) (Kasser and Mackley, 2008) arranged around a perspectives perimeter which provide anchor points fo r viewing and discussing issues noting that combinations of the STPs are also useful.
A fourth template in the form of a work sheet for triggering ideas based on a combination of the STPS a nd the six questions “who”, “what”, “where”, when, “why” and “how” introduced by (Kipling, 1912).
4.2.3 Cultural Differences in Systems Engineering: What They Are, What They Aren't, and How to Measure Them
Authors: Collins Shawn T. , Callahan Christopher W. 
Published: November 2014

AbstractDespite frequent use of the term culture in contemporary engineering practice, there is currently no reliable way of understanding what constitutes true shared beliefs and meanings that impact how groups of Systems Engineers spread across multiple departments and countries work together. This paper develops a framework to address that gap and measure cultural variation in Systems Engineering contexts. Drawing from the field of cultural anthropology, we demonstrate methods to empirically measure cultural consensus and divergence related to fostering collaboration, understanding business success or failure, and identifying characteristics of effective cross‐functional teams. The discussion identifies substantive content of what real organizational cultures are, where they are different, and where they overlap. That quantified content feeds culture as a rigorous element of organizational strategy into global alignment and process excellence or six sigma initiatives targeted at changing team behavior. The result is a framework for conducting rigorous, empirical investigations to truly understand the human dimensions that are critical to effective Systems Engineering practice. We discuss areas this approach applies to global process alignment and team effectiveness.
6.3.4 Culture: A Key Factor for Implementing the Integrated Concurrent Engineering Approach
Authors: Ogawa Akira , Rhodes Donna H. 
Published: November 2014

AbstractIntegrated Concurrent Engineering (ICE) is a design approach initially developed in the United States (US) to reduce schedule time and cost while achieving high design quality in the aerospace mission or system design activities. Many organizations in the US and Europe have confirmed these benefits, however, none beyond these regions. In this paper, we focus on a case in which a Japanese organization within the space domain failed to effectively utilize the ICE approach. This case is analyzed from both the systems engineering (SE) and cultural perspectives with comparison to the successes in the US and Europe to identify the main factors differentiating them. The key findings in this paper will provide organizations with information on where to focus in order to successfully implement the ICE approach and any related IT methodologies, and may better inform the strategy for collaboration of organizations within different cultures.
6.4.0 System Engineering Management Plan (SEMP): DOES ONE SIZE FIT ALL?
Authors: Zonnenshain A. , Malotaux N. , Malotaux N.R. , Honour E. , Kasser J. , Urio U. , Shabtay M. 
Published: November 2014

AbstractOne of the managerial and professional tools of the systems engineers in a project is the Systems Engineering Management Plan (SEMP). According to the INCOSE Systems Engineering Handbook, the SEMP is the top‐level plan for managing the Systems Engineering effort. The SEMP defines how the project will be organized, structured, and conducted and how the total engineering process will be controlled to provide a system that meets stakeholder requirements. The Handbook guides projects to tailor the SEMP to fit project, customer, or company standards.There are several procedures and templates for the SEMP. But in many organizations, companies and projects we find SEMPs that are not tailored for the project needs and goals and are not presenting specific and effective SE efforts to cope with the real project risks. It appears that many organizations believe that one SEMP size fits all projects, and work effectively from that belief. This panel will discuss the application and tailoring of the SEMP to different domains; how to make it effective. In particular, the panel will consider the following questions and dilemmas:
How is the SEMP different than the actual planning?
What are the special characteristics of a SEMP for developing:

Complex Systems?
Systems with high Technology Uncertainty?
Systems with high Novelty and Innovation?
Systems at a fast pace, or for Agile development?

How to integrate effectively the SEMP into the project and system development planning and execution?
How to integrate effectively the SEMP into evolutionary processes?
How to deal with the most important requirement‐time? Can an effective SEMP contribute to the success of the project?
7.3.2 Monte‐Carlo Simulation Approach for System Readiness Level Estimation
Authors: Tan Weiping , Sauser Brian , Ramírez‐Márquez Jose 
Published: November 2014

AbstractA system‐focused prescriptive metric, called System Readiness Level (SRL), which incorporates both the current Technology Readiness Level (TRL) scale and the concept of an Integration Readiness Level (IRL) has recently been established to measure current and future readiness status of a system under development. In previous research, deterministic values for components' TRLs and IRLs estimation were assumed, which involves much human subjectivity. Moreover, only point estimation from calculation was proposed in previous research. In order to reduce the subjective influence, we propose a probabilistic method here to combine all evaluators' estimation towards a system's components and integration points. Based on the probabilistic form of TRLs and IRLs, a Monte‐Carlo simulation methodology is followed herein to assess the maturity status (SRL) of a system. An illustrative example is examined to show how to employ the proposed methodology. The paper concludes with the discussion of the gained value of the new methodology as well as its limitation.
8.2.3 Demystifying Ambiguity in The Design of Amorphous Systems
Authors: Kim Sun K. , Ishii Kosuke 
Published: November 2014

AbstractDesigning amorphous systems is challenging because of the broad scope of the task. The design team must integrate various solution elements, such as hardware, software, service, and infrastructure, while resolving the communication challenges among different domain‐experts. This research begins with the observation that, at the onset of an amorphous system‐oriented project, design teams struggle because they are limited to knowledge of fewer than 4 of the 6 W's (Who, What, Where, When, Why, How); rather than having detailed functional or structural specifications as is the case with hardware or software products. The proposed scenario‐based approaches enable design teams to effectively deal with ambiguity and to communicate their ideas among team members and managers, as well as with customers through a common language. Based on the Scenario‐based Design for Amorphous Systems, methods such as the Scenario Graph and the Scenario Menu help design teams through the exploration stage of a new system development. A case‐study from industry demonstrates how a multi‐disciplinary design team extracted high‐level functions and requirements from scenarios dealing with an open‐ended project theme. The integrated framework of Scenario‐based Design for Amorphous Systems guides the design teams in visualizing and organizing scenarios and making decisions in order to define an amorphous system.
8.3.3 Different Levels of Centralized Engineering Database Strategies for Integrated Development
Authors: Eckl Carolin , Brandstätter Markus 
Published: November 2014

AbstractThe development of large and complex products is currently carried out in small, separate teams of engineers trained in diverse disciplines. Mechanical and electrical engineers are involved in the development of high‐tech and embedded systems as well as software designers. This diversity of disciplines interferes with the efficiency of communication, which is usually carried out in (informal) discussions and by passing documents and models.Within this paper, the passing of documents is explained and enhanced in several levels. Solutions, which are currently available (such as tool chains) are discussed as well as approaches that rest upon a central, document‐ and object‐oriented database. The most elaborate database strategy presented uses similarity relations between documents to infer semantic meaning and facilitate the access to meaningful and relevant development data. This paper concludes with the description of development processes that are introduced with the use of this database solution.
9.2.2 A Decision Analysis Framework for Resilience Strategies in Maritime Systems
Authors: Mansouri Mo , Mostashari Ali , Nilchiani Roshanak 
Published: November 2014

AbstractThis research is an effort to develop a Risk Management‐based Decision Analysis (RMDA) framework based on the common fundamental elements that define the nature of resilience in Maritime Infrastructure and Transportation Systems (MITS). The framework develops a systemic approach to the decision making process in regards to investing on resilience strategies. It also enables stakeholders and decision makers of maritime systems to identify, analyze, and prioritize risks involved in MITS operations; to define ways for risk mitigation, plan for contingencies, and devise mechanisms for continuously monitoring and controlling risk factors and threats to the system; and to value the adopted resilience investment plans and strategies. Our suggested RMDA framework is developed based on the Six‐element Flexibility Framework, which is offered for assessing the value of flexibility strategies in Space Systems, and utilizes a Decision Tree Analysis (DTA) methodology for assessing the cost‐effectiveness of the devised strategies.
10.1.1 An Exploration of Matching Teaching to the Learning Preferences of Systems Engineering Graduate Students
Authors: Valerdi Ricardo , Ferris Tim , Jain Rashmi , Kasser Joseph 
Published: November 2014

AbstractThis paper provides an exploratory study on the relationship between learning preferences of systems engineering graduate students and delivery methods of systems engineering coursework. We begin by providing an overview of learning in the systems engineering context, followed by two central research questions that guide the rest of the paper. Our study is focused on measuring learning preferences based on a previously developed survey instrument called VARK. We provide a detailed description of VARK and some insight into the existing database that sheds light on the typical distribution of learning preferences across disciplines. We provide some preliminary results and discuss their implications on systems engineering curriculum development and delivery. Finally, we discuss additional questions that remain to be explored as we strive to understand the learning preferences of systems engineering graduate students.
QoS Control in MANETs — A State‐of‐the‐Art Perspective
Authors: Sapienza Thomas J. 
Published: November 2014

AbstractThis paper examines the state‐of‐the‐art of Quality of Service (QoS) control for wireless Mobile Ad‐hoc Networks (MANETs) based on an exhaustive literature search comprising over 70 journal papers and conference proceedings and standardization development, per the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers and the Internet Engineering Task Force. Site visits to selected United States Government facilities augmented this literature search by addressing –real‐world” models for a comprehensive series of follow‐on simulations and analyses. This paper defines prominent QoS metrics, such as throughput, delay, packet delivery rate and jitter and then proposes that design parameters, such as data rate, packet size, transmitted power, etc., influence QoS in a way to formulate a Multi‐Objective Function (from the QoS metrics) subject to constraints (from design factors) that will solve an optimization problem using evolutionary computation techniques. This research will foster improvements for data link layer and network layer protocols optimizing QoS control.
Aircraft Emergency Evacuation: A Multi Agent Optimization Approach
Authors: Poudel Minesh , Cosenza Carlos A. Nunes , Mora‐Camino Félix 
Published: November 2014

AbstractIn this communication we consider the problem of modelling a multi agents system evolving over a bi dimensional grid. Starting from an initial state, it is considered that the overall aim of the agents population is to behave so that the system reaches a desired final state in a minimum time. Each agent is characterized by motion parameters while to each cell is associated a current capacity. The application of interest in this study is relative to emergency evacuation of aircraft and the influence of cabin crew over its performance. a non standard assignment problem is formulated so that cabin crew can be used efficiently during emergency evacuation. The solution of this problem should provide minimum time standards as well as insights for the design of personal guidance assistance in emergency situations.
1.1.0 Is MBSE a Tectonic Shift in the Way We Perform Systems Engineering?
Authors: Raymond Jorgensen , Cook Stephen , Watson John , Van Gaasbeek James , Hartmann Ralf 
Published: November 2014

AbstractExplore the possible transformation of system engineering from a document‐centric culture/ old school system engineering thinking to a model‐centric culture/ information mgt thinking perspectives ‐ and all the hurdles, hijinks, hysteria, and hype that we'll encounter along the way.
2.3.1 Systems Engineering for Space Solar Power Architectures
Authors: Bayer Martin , Born Andrew , Davis Dean , McCormick David , Potter Seth 
Published: November 2014

AbstractConcerns about the availability and use of conventional nonrenewable energy sources have led to an increasing interest in renewable energy. Because renewable energy sources tend to be dilute and intermittent, solar power satellites have been proposed as a means of supplying large amounts of power continuously. Space solar power (SSP) will not be competitive for commercial‐scale baseload power without some combination of greatly reduced launch and non‐recurring engineering costs as well as space resource utilization. However, SSP may be competitive in the near term for niche markets where the fully burdened cost of delivery of conventional fuel is much higher than that for commercial markets. A model under development provides a tool to assess masses and costs of solar power satellites at a variety of power levels, orbits, and power transmission frequencies.
2.4.1 Application of System Engineering to a Major ITS Project
Authors: Fehon Kevin , Fehon Timothy 
Published: November 2014

AbstractThis paper describes the application of system engineering to a major innovative transportation project in the San Francisco Bay Area, the I‐80 Integrated Corridor Mobility (ICM) Project. In addition to being one of the first applications of Active Traffic Management (ATM) to a freeway corridor in U.S.A., it is also one of the first detailed applications of formal system engineering processes to a major highway traffic management project in the U.S.A.Rigorous application of the system engineering process allowed the study team to put a structure around a loosely defined concept and a wide‐ranging but incomplete set of system requirements. The study team followed the Federal Highway Administration's (FHWA) “System Engineering for Intelligent Transportation Systems” and also made extensive use of INCOSE's “Systems Engineering Handbook”. Using IBM Rational DOORS software allowed the team to decompose the initial concepts, identify the linkages between requirements at different levels and establish a full audit trail so that all elements of stakeholder input could be shown to be adequately addressed.The paper describes how the gradual education of the stakeholders in the system engineering process was needed to enable the requirements to be fully developed, in particular to allow the study team to differentiate between legitimate requirements and premature design decisions. The stratification of requirements allowed stakeholders at various levels (board member, executive, manager and operator) to understand how their objectives were being met or how they would be able to operate to fulfill their assigned duties.It is concluded that the FHWA and INCOSE guidelines provide excellent, practical guidance for the development of complex transportation infrastructure systems.
3.1.1 A Generic Quantitative Approach to Resilience: A Proposal
Authors: Henry Devanandham , Ramirez‐Marquez Jose Emmanuel 
Published: November 2014

AbstractResilience is the ability to bounce back from a disruption. Of late, applying the concept of resilience to systems and enterprises is gaining importance because major disruptions are becoming more unpredictable, more frequent, and more severe. While there have been some efforts on defining metrics and measuring resilience, there is no generic quantitative approach to resilience that can be used to measure, predict or compare resilience. This paper proposes a generic quantitative approach to defining and measuring resilience. A simple resilience model is introduced using five critical states of a system, and a set of assertions based on a resource based view. These assertions are treated mathematically in the generic resilience model, and a formula for computing resilience is defined. Two simple cases are also discussed to illustrate the usefulness and potential of this approach.
4.1.0 Motor Sports Accelerates SySTEM Learning
Authors: Ring Jack , Settles Stan , George Al , Mackey William , Hylton Peter , Martin Richard , Berg Ken 
Published: November 2014

AbstractThe Motor Sports WG is developing ways to leverage the excitement and enthusiasm in motor sports to accelerate education, especially SySTEM education. Each panellist will address a pro and con for each of four claims:Claim 1:The real payoff from revitalizing science, technology, engineering and mathematics, STEM, education will come from learning to meld these and other disciplines/technologies into whole systems solutions, SySTEM.Claim 2: SySTEM learning can be accelerated by experiences that are meaningful to the learner, notably, intellectual and visceral immersion in real world, rewarding, reflective, learning environments.Claim 3: Because meaningful learning sessions about systems are difficult to create in a campus‐only setting this panel will address ways that motor sports can augment campus‐centered SE educationClaim 4: A ‘laboratory on many wheels’ has been and can be used to accelerate SySTEM learning.
4.2.1 Multi‐scale performance evaluation in Naval Combat Systems domain
Authors: Squarcia Elvio , Gaeta Vito , Ciambra Francesco 
Published: November 2014

AbstractPerformance evaluation of modern and future combat systems in complex operating scenarios is strictly related to modeling and simulation techniques. A “multi‐scale” methodology is employed to evaluate performances of naval combat systems in multi‐platform operating scenarios (e.g. naval fleet, border control, homeland defence and security) through numerical simulation tools, named ICS‐Sim (Integrated Combat Systems Simulation). ICS‐Sim allows integration of software simulations models with high degree of accuracy to analyse and evaluate systems performances for studying innovative algorithms (e.g. asymmetrical threats contrast) integrated in a systems of systems simulation environment.