Science topic

# Systems Theory - Science topic

Principles, models, and laws that apply to complex interrelationships and interdependencies of sets of linked components which form a functioning whole, a system. Any system may be composed of components which are systems in their own right (sub-systems), such as several organs within an individual organism.

Questions related to Systems Theory

I am researching the process that specific churches have gone through in deciding what they want to do regarding legalized same-gender weddings. Bowen Theory presents that those who resist change will be the more emotional due to lack of differentiation individually. They will be more anxious/scared and will probably express it as anger as they attempt to sabotage any plans to change from the old way - the literal interpretation of the Bible (seven isolated passages) that seems to say that homosexuality is a sin in those days.

The basic idea behind Systems Theory is, “The whole is greater than the sum of its parts.". This is a narrow idea and in our complex world with climate change, environmental degradation, and global inequalities. The pragmatic and positivist trend in the world was to oriented research towards explanations and causes, i.e. in-between of input and output, causes and effects. For no-system theoreticians, the idea is to observe systems as forms with enough inner complexity to reduce the external complexities by the means of selections that stabilized meaning. In this context, it is the self-observation of the form that has been investigated as a system. Once again why system theory is developed into a theory of self-organizing systems.

The question arises from complex systems theory, in which I faced a contradiction, as earlier I thought the equilibrium state of a system means maximum order. The obstacle in my way is thermodynamics. Please help me to better understand and potentially solve this contradiction.

If you build a parameter learning algorithm based on the Lyapunov stability theorem for updating the parameters of an adaptive fuzzy controller, how to determine the cost function and Lyapunov function? Is there a physical connection between them?

I call a digraph G= (V,E)

*essentially interconnected*if whenever any vertex $a$ is removed from $G$ there is always at least one pair of distinct vertices $v$ and $w$ which can no longer be joined by an oriented path in $G$.Are there essentially interconnected graphs ?

Example: The cycle: (a,b), (b,c),(c,a)

If I remove $b$ then I cannot connect $a$ to $c$ (although I can connected $c$ to $a$) and analogusly for $a$ and $c$.

Can we characterise such digraphs in general ?

In fact, it is the fundamental defects in the work of “quantitative cognition to infinite things” that have been troubling people for thousands of years. But I am going on a different way from many people.

1, I analysis and study the defects in existing classical infinite theory system disclosed by the suspended "infinite paradox symptom clusters" in analysis and set theory from different perspectives with different conclusion: to abandon the unscientific (mistaken) "potential infinite and actual infinite" concepts in existing classical infinite theory system and discover the new concepts of "abstract infinite and the carriers of abstract infinite", especially to replace the unscientific (mistaken) "actual infinite" concept in existing classical infinite theory by the new concept of “carriers of abstract infinite" and develop a new infinite theory system with “mathematical carriers of abstract infinite and their related quantitative cognizing operation theory system ". From now on, human beings are no longer entangled in "potential infinite -- actual infinite", but can spare no effort to develop "infinite carrier theory", and develop comprehensive and scientific cognition of various contents related to "mathematical carrier of abstract infinite concept".

2, Abstract concept - abstract concept carrier theory, new infinite theory system, carrier theory, infinite mathematical carrier gene, infinite mathematical carrier scale,...The development of basic theory determines the construction of "quantum mathematics" based on the new infinite theory system.

3, I have up loaded 《On the Quantitative Cognitions to “Infinite Things” (IX) ------- "The Infinite Carrier Gene”, "The Infinite Carrier Measure" And "Quantum Mathematics”》2 days ago onto RG introducing " Quantum Mathematics". My work is not fixing here and there for those tiny defects (such as the CH theory above) but carrying out quantitative cognitions to all kinds of infinite mathematical things with "quantum mathematics" basing on new infinite theory system.

According to my studies (have been presented in some of my papers), Harmonic Series is a vivid modern example of Zeno's Paradox. It is really an important case in the researches of infinite related paradoxes syndrome in present set theory and analysis basing on unscientific classical infinite theory system.

All the existing (suspending) infinite related paradoxes in present set theory and analysis are typical logical contradictions.

The revolution in the foundation of infinite theory system determines the construction of "Quantum Mathematics" based on the new contents discovered in new infinite theory system: infinite mathematical carrier, infinite mathematical carrier gene, infinite mathematical carrier measure,... in new infinite carrier theory. So, the "Quantum Mathematics" mentioned in my paper is different from Quantum Logic and Quantum Algebras;

According to my studies (have been presented in some of my papers), “Non-Standard Analysis and Transfinite numbers” is all the infinite related things in unscientific classical infinite theory system based on the trouble making "potential infinite and actual infinite" --------- Non-Standard Analysis is equivalence with Standard Analysis while Transfinite is an odd idea of “more infinite, more more infinite, more more more infinite, more more more more infinite,…”).

I am using technology adoption as a dependent variable and need a reliable survey instrument. My literature review includes Socio-Technical Systems Theory, TAM, TAM2, Theory of Planned Behavior, Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology.

Our studies have proved that there have been two fundamental defects in present classical infinite theory system: (1) theoretically, confusion on the concepts of “potential infinite and actual infinite”; (2) operationally, confusion on the contents of “potential infinite and actual infinite”. And, these two very defects decide the unavoidable generation of all kinds of infinite relating paradoxes in present mathematical analysis and set theory--------the 2500 years old un-dispersed cloud of “infinite paradoxes syndrome” hanging over the sky of our science. As it turns out, the concepts of “potential infinite” and “actual infinite”, which are un-scientifically defined and mutually contradictory, must be abandoned, and the new infinite theory system basing on ““abstract things—the carriers of abstract things” as well as the systematic theory of “infinite carriers” must be constructed.

We call present classical infinite theory system basing on "potential infinite and actual infinite" concepts "the first generation of infinite theory system" and the new infinite theory system basing on "abstract things and the carriers of abstract things" concepts "the second generation of infinite theory system".

The emergence of the new infinite theory system determines the emergence of the second generation of infinite set theory and the fourth generation of mathematical analysis------- we call present classical infinite set theory basing on present classical infinite theory system “the first generation of infinite set theory (the old infinite set theory)" and the new infinite set theory basing on the new infinite theory system the second generation of infinite set theory"; we call "the first, second and third generations of mathematical analysis (before standard analysis, standard analysis and non-standard analysis) " basing on present classical infinite theory system “the present classical mathematical analysis (the old mathematical analysis) " and the new mathematical analysis basing on the new infinite theory system the fourth generation of mathematical analysis".

We have understood from the studies of infinite related mathematics’ history that present classical infinite theory system is based on the concepts of "potential infinite and actual infinite", which cannot be defined scientifically and contradict each other. This fatal flaw in the basic theory deeply affects the scientific nature of mathematical behavior of mathematical workers in the field related to the concept of "infinite". So, one cannot escape the constraint of the two false concepts of "potential infinite and actual infinite", and one cannot stop the emergence of various infinite related paradoxes. In addition, these paradoxes must exist in the form of "family (infinite paradox syndrome)". In different historical periods, the constantly emerging paradox family members repeatedly reveal the fundamental defects in the classical infinite theory system from different perspectives and call on people to solve these very defects. The fatal fundamental defects in present classical infinite theory system are the source of the second and the third mathematical crisis: more than 2500 years, no one can get rid of a kind of disease in the infinite related fields of mathematics --------- a diseases produced by the confusion of "potential infinite and actual infinite" concepts in set theory diagnosed clearly by Poincare, Frege, and Weyl more than 100 years ago. Studies have proved that this is the common "disease" existing in many infinite related mathematical disciplines with the foundation of present classical infinite theory system: the various "number and non--number mathematical things” -------- “variables of not only potential infinite but also actual infinite (the ‘ghost’ disappearing and reappearing at any time?)" for all the family members of Zeno's Paradox and Berkeley's Paradox in mathematical analysis [1-6]; the mathematical things with the property of "elements belonging and not belonging to a set ----------

*T*= {*x*|*x*📷*x*} (variable elements of not only potential infinite but also actual infinite: the ‘ghost’ disappearing and reappearing at any time?) " for all the family members of Russell paradox in set theory；…This is why we are so sure to say that the Third Mathematical Crisis in present scientific theory system is unsolvable and the Third Mathematical Crisis is another manifestation of the Second Mathematical Crisis in set theory. They are "twins".

��

How do we best classify ethical issues in AI and robotics? Which disciplines provide possible classification frameworks i.e. philosophy of ethics, psychology of moral reasoning, the law and human rights, the study of etiquette, sociology of norms, control systems theory, neuroscience of impulse regulation, science fiction, etc. etc.

Many possibilities - can you point me in the direction of any possible frameworks?

By reading a paper by F.Baldini "Freud's Line of Reasoning", ( ) I found the application of a black box model to test the analyst construction with reference to the symptom. The application is the following: the analyst does not know anything about the causes of a specific symptom and then he needs to treat the system that provoked the symptom as a black box. The methodology used to solve this situation is simply to apply some inputs to the system that are the so-called "constructions" that could either be true or false. After the construction is communicated to the patient, the symptom could either stay the same or ameliorate/worsen. Assuming that the modifications are indicators of a true construction (in the paper the methodology is explained), then it is possible to retrieve the cause of the symptom and so the box becomes white.

I guess this is possible because the input is the attempt to find the cause, i.e. transforming the blackbox in a white one!

I would like to know if there are similar examples in science.

Please advise.

Many thanks.

For example; can the dynamical systems theory help us find underlying general structures of the systems to make more accurate models?. Perhaps some data reflect these structures that are not evident by analyzing them from a purely statistical point of view. Having in mind that the data usually comes from dynamic systems.

Are there any works that relate to these areas? Or is it just a naive question?

Thanks,

I am preparing to write an article about the development of the basic assumptions or way of thinking toward organisations and people that underpin Strategic Management.

About the development of Strategic Management, I read some articles and books relating to system theory, and complexity theory. Can anybody recommend some book or article that includes systematic descriptions about the development of Strategic Management and the characteristics of each phase. Thank you very much.

Many autorities of complex systems theory claim that where the chaos theory begins, classical science ends.The theory of the chaos provides a different approach to solving problems, first of all, in natural sciences.It shows that centuries interpretations of physical phenomena(mechanic paradigm) still do not apply to a significant extent. Will the chaos theory overcomes the centuries mechanic paradigm in economics, leadership and management?

I have been working on a research project where i am constructing a complex system theory - that has race, gender, class, age and most importantly language as a system components - that lead to the emergence of social identities which in turn impede the peace building efforts taking place around the world. Therefore, I am currently looking for a suitable methodology. I also need a GPS conflict site tracking website for my case selection. This is my first time working for such a complicated framework as an undergrat and would really appreciate if you could help!

The fatal defects in the foundations of present science system inevitably lead to the existence of “self-refutation mechanism”. Our 2500 years unsuccessful “infinite relating paradoxes” fighting history (the most typical example is Zeno's “Achilles--Tortoise Paradox”) has proved clearly that in present science theory system, it is impossible to solve those self-refutation mechanism relating paradox family members produced by the fundamental defect of theory system itself (unsolvable). The underlying origin of self-refutation mechanism should be studied and the theory of “abstract concept and the carriers of abstract concept” should be studied and developed. This is the only way to eradicate thoroughly those paradox families produced by “self-refutation mechanism” in different fields of human science (including philosophy and mathematics).

The unavoidable fatal defect of “’potential infinite--actual infinite’ confusion” in present classical infinite idea inevitably leads to the unceasingly production of “paradox events” (different in forms but same in nature) from many infinite relating fields in present science theory system and, the self-contradictory (

**Self-refutation****Mechanism**) “self and non-self” contents in present set theory (such as*T*={*x*|*x*📷*x*}) and mathematical analysis (such as the number-of-non-number variable) is a typical example. It is true that people have been trying very hard to solve those infinite relating paradoxes, but the mistaken working idea brought very little effect-------since antiquity, people have been unaware of that these suspended “infinite paradox events” are in fact an “infinite paradox syndrome” disclosing from different angles exactly the same fundamental defects in present classical infinite theory system, have not been studying seriously the consanguineous ties among the paradoxes in the syndrome, have not been studying seriously the consanguineous relations among these paradoxes and the foundations of their related theory systems (such as number system) , have not been studying seriously and deeply the fundamental defects in present classical infinite theory system disclosed jointly by different infinite paradox families; but merely studied, made up and developed very hard all kinds of formal languages, formal operations and formal logics specially for solving surface problems. So, not only these “infinite paradox families” have never been solved but developing and expanding unceasingly. v

I am interested to know, why is control set in control systems theory, usually assumed convex, more specifically, a convex cone, a convex hull or a convex set? Please let me know if you've gotten the answer.

Thank you.

All,

I am considering looking into the relationship of SME Family Firm performance,internationalization, and sustainability through the prism of SEW and Bowen's Family Systems Theory.

I have seen a lot of literature on SEW. Has someone recently considered the relationship between SEW and Bowen's Family Systems Theory and the impact upon performance,internationalization, and sustainability?

Thanks.

Gerald

We all know for a control system, the quality of information (e.g. state info, context info) could have significant impacts on control performance like stability and convergence rate, etc. To theoretically explore such impacts, it is important to adopt suitable system model and corresponding theory. for example, multi-agent system and theory to model coordination control problems and analyze the impact of information flow. In context of cloud computing and IoT more information could be available for a typical control system like traffic control, I just wonder what popular theory framework can apply to such applications? Is there any related surveys to read? thanks a lot.

Does anyone know any criticism of systems theory and approaches, and point me to supporting references?
I have a draft paper on an assessment of road safety strategies, based on systems criteria.
But one of the reviewers raised an interesting question;
“The conclusions, while good, could be expanded by describing the limitations and complexities of systems work.”

Could you let me know if you can suggest any literature that could inform this question.

Thanks for any help.

Regards, Brett

What are the metrics for assessing the tipping points for a hydrological systems? I know they look appearances and disappearances of species for ecological systems but just wondering if there are any (certain) thresholds for hydrological systems!

I have studied systems theory in the more complex mathematical version and have a handout in Dutch describing an organisation as a system with the primary process and two kinds of feedback loops. But that contsins no reference to official literature and none in English. Who can point out a useful source?

One of the critiques for systems theory of aeston is its limitations in non western systems? Do you agree with this ? Is it applicable in authoriterians context or it needs supportive theories?

My theoretical framework for my dissertation is based on

**System Theory**.However, since I will be looking at

**Information System adoption**, I want to use the**Technology-Organisation-Environment (TOE) theory**as a framework to develop my conceptual framework that will thus include the concepts that will be measured with the appropriate scales (e.g. under**Organisation**, top management support will be measured with an appropriate scale).So, I will be saying something (broadly) like "adoption can only happen if there is a holistic view of the aspects (T-O-E) that influence this adoption)".

Can this work?

How do you know that from the almost infinite action (toolbox), which action you need to choose (which is A , B etc..) to get the next step within the progress toward the target. (Starting point (like sitting in the armchair) -> A -> B -> C -> Cooked a Pizza or Went out of the room through the door )

What algorith/method the most effective when the task is NEW, so you need planning, don't just solve this with previous experience.

And this method should be universally applicable because the animals can solve problems with a very high diversity interval.

I hope you get is what the question is.

I am working on a research and recently after a review a colleague asked me to consider combining dynamical complex systems theory and grounded theory. the study is on the relationship between social protection and sustainable peace.

Thanks

Re: cognitive-developmental psychology: Is it a bad sign if one has only done ONE thing in her/his entire lifetime?

This is basically, in part, a confession. If you knew how true the "one thing" was in my life, you would likely consider me lazy and privileged. I can accept both labels and can clearly see it that way (at least from the standpoint of some very good people). Moreover, I have had the ability to have anything and everything I thought I needed -- essentially at all times.

But, perhaps as is the only interpretation imaginable, you suspect I am making such admissions just to further the exposure of my perspective and approach. That is completely true. And, I do contend that (with having all resources), I lived virtually all the years of my life looking for a complete and the best thoroughly empirical perspective. Even in my decades of college teaching (more like 1.5 decades), my courses and presentations had coherence most certainly as a function of my views. THUS, indeed, in fact: I have never done anything else in my life other than that needed to produce the papers, book, essays, etc. that I present here on RG (or make readily available through RG). To have a picture of my life, one should imagine about 30 years of it operating much as a hermit (for all that can be good for -- and I do believe it can be good for something).

I started with a core and moved carefully in adopting any aspect of my perspective (basically starting from the position of just what is possibly at-the-very-least needed, and maintaining extreme parsimony). And, again, I am a most thorough-going empiricist, believing that EVERYTHING has a core foundation of some behavior which, at least at some key point, is both overt (though maybe quite subtle) AND directly observable (and now practically so, via eye-tracking). My entire perspective and approach relies pivotally and mainly on such foundations and otherwise only on the best findings and extremely widely-affirmed processes IN ALL OF PSYCHOLOGY (things showing the very best inter-observer agreement). All this is not any kind of abstract or wide set of things. The other prime objective ("directive") has been to NOT [just] link but PUT behavior (behavior patterns) clearly IN a biological framework -- showing as much as possible the "biology of behavior"; this had the rewarding result of eliminating critical and serious dualisms, esp. nature/nurture.

Assumptions or presumptions (pseudo-asssumptions) in Psychology had to be exposed as both unproven and not well-founded. A half dozen central "assumptions" have been replaced in my system BY BASICALLY THE OPPOSITES -- these assumptions being fully consistent with biological principles and more likely true. I also show in my work how to use all the terms of classical ethology, this also allowing or furthering the "biology of behavior".

In short, though this should be to some degree a shameful confession (and many would have to believe that is part of it), my work is MINE (compromising nothing; adhering to principles) -- and it is good **. Please take some time to explore it, starting at: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Brad_Jesness2 Thank you.

** FOOTNOTE: The perspective and approach is explicit and clear enough for artificial intelligence also -- a good test. BUT: For the great advancements needed in Psychology and major practical utility in AI, we

**need DISCOVERIES**, the nature of which are**indicated in testable (verifiable) hypotheses, clear in my writings**-- MUCH awaits those discoveries.**The same discoveries are involved for either field.**P.S. For 20 years of my hermitage I did have the strong "hobby" (avocation) of JavaScript programming; I never made any money from this. I tell you this just to make sure the portrayal is accurate -- and to in no way mislead. (See http://mynichecomputing.org , if you are curious.)

Good day,

I am doing my PhD in operation research in logistics. I want to create an urban logistics simulation, during which I would show how autonomous vehicles can adapt to disruptions and resilience would emerge. The theoretical approach is based on complex-adaptive systems theory.

As I understand, the routing should be made by using “reinforcement learning for combinatorial optimization”, however, I do not have experience related to RL application for route scheduling. Could anyone recommend courses or literature related to this topic?

If anyone has developed such a model, maybe could provide some insights in to the data architecture? As I understand this would be similar to supervised learning, however sequence of categories must also be taken into consideration.
Should the implementation be based on graphs?
Or should I have features categorizing a trip with evaluation of the cost function?

In my case, I am having a e-commerce industry with product delivery to end-consumer, during the day I am generating traffic jams, which would block the routs. The algorithm should learn from the environment and select better routes automatically by considering the goal function.

Hello,

This project aims are to address the theory of dynamic systems from the pedagogy point of view or these intend to study the possibilities for the reformulations, for the re-conceptualizations ... of pedagogy from the perspective of the theory of complex systems?

In any cases, I thing that this project is very interesting and useful too for the knowledge society.

If I misunderstood, please give me some details about the objectives of your proposed project.

Sincerely,

Bogdan Nicolescu

I'm interested to know about good Sci-Fi books that deal with e.g., species extinction and/or recovery, habitat destruction and/or restoration, climate change, ocean acidification, land-use change, and so on. If you read interesting Sci-Fi books on this type of topics, please let me know. I'd be very grateful :)

Have you considered any family - relationship factors as a source of chronic stress beyond the "usual suspects"? For example being the preferred child or parental expectations.

Bowen Family Systems Theory can give you ideas of family relationship patterns that put pressure on individuals and which are not often overlooked.

Mariana

I work on my master thesis with the working title

**"system competence for people in leadership"**. So I assume that system theories, like synergetics, chaos theory as well as system thinking and system practice could create a solid theoretical framework and some practical implications when it comes to empower, coach or educate leaders.So do you know of (empirical) research about "agility", "vuca", "system thinking", "system practice" or "system competence" in the context of leadership?

**! Thanks in advance .... Marcus**

*Any ideas are welcomed*Hello All,

I am preparing to write a paper on the application of contemporary management theories with focus on social/systems theory. I have not been able to access enough articles on the subject. Can someone please direct me links where I can source required articles from?

Processes, information feedback, policy and time delays are the important elements of System Dynamics modeling. Boundary setting is equally important component in SD modeling given the fact that endogeneous and exogeneous variables are determined based on boundary only.

Consider the discrete system

x' = A(t)x + B(t)u

y = C(t)x' + D(t)u

The matrices A, B, C, D contain time-varying parameters (calculated by a second model) which are given in the initial state, but will develop randomly.

How can I check the observability of the system above?

How can I construct a multi-attribute utility function for attributes that I cannot prove utility independence for?

Thanks.

I am interested in how these two theories interrelate and complete one another, both as an explanation of two-couple relationship dynamics, and also in workplace dynamics/leadership issues.

Could anybody point out trusty and high rank journal discuss that Multiple Model Control with hard switching is applicable to system with fast dynamics ?

Thanks.

Related literature would also be appreciated.

I am working on qualitative, collective case study research with Total Quality Management as the conceptual framework. I'm looking for other frameworks that support or contrast against TQM. For example, Systems Theory is documented as a supporting theory of TQM. Peer-reviewed articles from 2012 or newer would be great.

Dear all

Given a dynamical system x\dot=f(x,u) defined on a state space X with initial condition x

_{0 }and a control law u.my question is that : is it possible that the invariant set in Lasalle's invariance principle is nowhere dense? under which conditions it could be (nowhere dese)? i would like also to know if there is any related works about this topic

It is claimed that human’s decision making is not logical necessarily [1].

Here is an example from [2].

Task 1: choose one of the following options:

a) 80% chance to win 4000$.

b) 3000$ for sure.

Task 2: choose one of the following options:

c) 20% chance to win 4000$.

d) 25% chance to win 3000$

In the first task, most people choose option (b) and in the second task most people prefer option (c). However the only difference between two tasks, is the multiplication of probabilities to 0.25, which shouldn’t change the decision.

Kahneman and Tvresky proposed two statistical curves for weighting “probability” and “value” in human mind (figure 1) [2]. However we want to model the dynamic of this behavior. A very rough idea is to consider a set of differential/difference equations and collecting some data for determining the structure and parameters.

Any suggestion and comment?

Thank you in advance,

Sajad

References:

[1] Ariely, Dan. "Predictably Irrational: The Hidden Forces That Shape Our Decisions.”

[2] Kahneman, Daniel, and Amos Tversky. "Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk." Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society (1979): 263-291.

^{I have been exploring Mario Bunge's Ontology and System Theory for a couple of years now. I started with Transport Research and now I am considering expanding to urban systems. It's a remarkably fecund framework to work with. }

^{I would really like to find other researchers to exchange ideas on Mario Bunge's Ontology and its applications. }

- properties of phase transition of 2D ferroelectric system
- theory of ferroelectric system
- theory of phase transition of 2D Ferroelectric

I need to identify which resources (goods, materials, instruments, persons) can become a physical constraint or bottleneck in the logistic system of an enterprise / Necesito identificar qué recursos (activos, materiales, instrumentos, personas) pueden convertirse en una restricción física o cuello de botella en el sistema logístico de una empresa.

Are there educators and or researchers who know of situations where systems theory and or ecological models are being used in postsecondary education classrooms?

I want to know if general systems theory can be applied using the following?

Input: organizational/individual skill, experience, training

Object: IT network

Output: security risk rating

how is system theory a synthesis to other management theories

What are the necessary books for understanding, Perceiving and then execution of system thinking in people’s attitude and improvement of their lives by better Decision Making Process, And also for increase quality of policies and decisions in organizations?

Control system concepts.... using Input output data we could model a system... and using physical laws also...

In the dynamical systems theory, "edge of chaos" is a metaphor describing the transition point between order and chaos. For example, in the context of the logistic map the edge of chaos corresponds to

*a*= 5.569945.., with*a*the bifurcation parameter. But inside the large chaotic region there are a lot of islands of periodicity characterized by a period-doubling cascade to chaos. Do we have more edges of chaos? What happens for Tinkerbell map, where there is no obvious road from period-doubling bifurcation to chaos? Where is the edge of chaos?What theory contradicts the assertions of General Systems Theory?

I'm working in my doctoral thesis and I will use a neurophenomenological approach in order to shed light about how dual systems theory of decision making (i.e Kahneman and Tversy) are interrelated and controlled.

My background is on engineer but I am very interested in take a mixed complementary approach that include cognitive tasks and measurement, neurological data gathering (by EEG use), and phenomenological interviews in order to deal with the issue from multiple and concurrent approaches. I lack of any experience using phenomenological research but I understand that is not an easy task, then I am wondering if this great research community could provide some help to me

I'm building a framework to analyse and evaluate the level of peacefulness of theoretical political economic systems.

I'm concerned about which methodology to use in order to come up with the criteria of reference I will use to evaluate the different systems.

I've been researching system methodologies and design methodologies extensively but couldn't satisfy my specific need.

So far I'm using a design methodology (use case): goal, functions, requirements (= criteria). I could use an evaluation methodology: variables, dimensions, indicators.

Any other idea?

I have been utilising in-vivo codes on various established definitions in two fields of study in order to determine if theories derived from the code analysis can be grouped into the two fields of studies. What has emerged is 141 codes that have been grouped into 11 logical categories.

These categories can be linked to some prominent theories such as System Theory and Institution Theory but others cannot.

I need assistance with:

- Are there any principles in linking coding outputs to established theories?
- Are there any principles in handling code categories that do not logically link to established theories?

Thanks.

Given a matrix k(z)=k_1 z^{-1}+k_2 z^{-2}+... of dimension (s x s) whose elements are rational function, one can obtain a matrix fraction description (MFD) (a(z),b(z)), where a(z) and b(z) are polynomials in z, such that they satisfy the conditions in, e.g. "Hannan, Deistler 1988 - The statistical theory of linear systems" page 58 or "Guidorzi 75 - Canonical Structures in the Identification of Multivariable Systems". Is there an algorithm in Maple/Mathematica/some other language available to get (a(z),b(z)) for a given k(z)?

Systems thinking have been quite appealing to academia and industry folks for quite some time now. Many people believe System thinking has not lived up to the expectations. What are the possible causes of its failure and what can be done to make systems thinking an effective problem solving tool? Is it time to propose a new paradigm to understand and solve new age problems?

Say we have a complex network made of

*n*sub-networks and*m*nodes. Some of the sub-networks share some of the*m*nodes. Say that such complex network (aka**Interdependent Network**) is under attack, and say that this attack is not targeted (e.g., does not look for high degree nodes only) nor random, but spatial (both low degree and high degree nodes are being removed). Now, say that the failure cause is external, in addition to being spatial, and that it can feature many levels of spatial extent. Hence, the higher the level, the higher the number of nodes involved, the higher the disruption (theoretically).**My problem relates to the failure threshold qc (the minimum size of the disrupting event that is capable of producing 0 active nodes after the attack).****My question**: does the

**failure threshold qc**depend on how nodes are connected only (e.g., the qc is an intrinsic feature of the network)? Or is it a function of how vast the spatial attack is? Or does it depend on both?

Thank you very much to all of you.

Francesco

From a design and operational systems perspective: Is complexity always a "bad thing"? and, should simplicity be always preferred over complexity? To what extent the complexity vs simplicity debate influences systems design? Support your answer/comments with examples.

can anyone help me out and have some information about that

We are looking for people in control theory working on the problem of regulation output for non-autonomous linear systems on infinite dimensional state spaces.

Grey theory is an extension of fuzzy set theory and rough set theory where two memberships function a lower one and an upper one are used with interval. Grey system theory is a unique concept which deals with continuous systems including uncertain. Grey theory classifies sets into three groups: White sets, Black sets and Grey sets. White set contains objects that have complete knowledge behavior, while black set contains objects which have unknown behavior.

What are the limitation of Grey set as uncertainty model?

Both TISm and ISm are interpretive in nature; and TISM has been extension of ISM proposed by Honorable Professor Sushil (IIT, Delhi, India).

Hi everyone,

I want to identify linear model for a pneumatic proportional valve that has hysteresis behavior. I split region of system to 9 sub-regions and apply a PRBS as input of system for every sub-region. Input-output data shows that because of hysteresis, upper bound of sub-region does not match on lower bound of next sub-region. for example, for the first sub-region, input PRBS with bounds of [3350 , 4200] is applied that leads to output flow of [7 , 13] as fig. 1.

for second sub-region, to reaching of output flow in range of [13 , 20], input PRBS with bounds of [3850 , 4280] is applied as fig. 2.

As can be seen, these sub-regions have overlap and cause problem for identification. how can i solve this problem ?

It is often said in the field of complex systems that such systems achieve self-organisation through simple order-generating rules. Under what conditions is such self-organisation achieved?

Why delays exist in system dynamics given the fact that nothing is standstill in the system dynamics world? When there is a delay between training and its impact on productivity it is not the case that nothing is happening in the duration of 'delay'; nothing is standstill during that period. Delay is only for the purpose of modeling.

HR system is a pattern(unique) of the alignment of different HR practices.