Systems Engineering Discipline Research Articles

Towards a Method to Enable the Selection of Physical Models within the Systems Engineering Process: A Case Study with Simulink Models

The use of different techniques and tools is a common practice to cover all stages in the development life-cycle of systems generating a significant number of work products. These artefacts are frequently encoded using diverse formats, and often require access through non-standard protocols and formats. In this context, Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) emerges as a methodology to shift the paradigm of Systems Engineering practice from a document-oriented environment to a model-intensive environment. To achieve this major goal, a formalised application of modelling is employed throughout the life-cycle of systems to generate various system artefacts represented as models, such as requirements, logical models, and multi-physics models. However, the mere use of models does not guarantee one of the main challenges in the Systems Engineering discipline, namely, the reuse of system artefacts. Considering the fact that models are becoming the main type of system artefact, it is necessary to provide the capability to properly and efficiently represent and retrieve the generated models. In light of this, traditional information retrieval techniques have been widely studied to match existing software assets according to a set of capabilities or restrictions. However, there is much more at stake than the simple retrieval of models or even any piece of knowledge. An environment for model reuse must provide the proper mechanisms to (1) represent any piece of data, information, or knowledge under a common and shared data model, and (2) provide advanced retrieval mechanisms to elevate the meaning of information resources from text-based descriptions to concept-based ones. This need has led to novel methods using word embeddings and vector-based representations to semantically encode information. Such methods are applied to encode the information of physical models while preserving their underlying semantics. In this study, a text corpus from MATLAB Simulink models was preprocessed using Natural Language Processing (NLP) techniques and trained to generate word vector representations. Then, the presented method was validated using a testbed of MATLAB Simulink physical models in which verbalisations of models are transformed into vectors. The effectiveness of the proposed solution was assessed through a use case study. Evaluation of the results demonstrates a precision value of 0.925, a recall value of 0.865, and an F1 score of 0.884.

Model‐based systems engineering approaches to chemicals and materials manufacturing

AbstractModel‐based systems engineering (MBSE) is part of a long‐term trend toward model‐centric approaches adopted by many engineering disciplines. We establish the need of an MBSE approach by reviewing the importance, complexity, and vulnerability of the U.S. chemical supply chains. We discuss the origins, work processes, modeling approaches, and supporting tools of the systems engineering discipline (SE) and discuss limitations of the Process Systems Engineering (PSE) framework. We make the case for MBSE as a more generalizable approach. We introduce systems modeling strategies for MBSE, and a novel MBSE method that supports the automation tailored and extended to support the analysis of chemical supply chains. We demonstrate a specific use case of this method by creating a systems model for the manufacturing of an active pharmaceutical ingredient, Atropine. We conclude with a prospectus on developmental opportunities for extracting greater benefit from MBSE in the design and management of chemical supply chains.

Social Systems Engineering for Achieving Cyber Physical‐Social System Multi‐Concern Assurance

AbstractNovel technologies and cyber innovations applied to physical control system infrastructures such as power, water, wastewater, and dams are about to change the world, not just for short‐term profits but also for broader societal interest. The Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD) is an example of constructing one of the largest physical control system infrastructures today, creating a reservoir on the Blue Nile to supply electricity to Ethiopia and support the country's societal development. GERD has also created discord with neighboring downstream countries Egypt and Sudan, whose economies depend on the Blue Nile. Internet Protocol (IP)‐connected control systems of the GERD infrastructure make operations vulnerable to cyber failure. Uncertainty of agreement among professionals about cybersecurity and system security engineering coupled with unpredictable social and political developments and uncertainty of the technologies themselves make these systems and societies interacting with the systems more vulnerable to disruption. There are many ways advances in systems sciences and digital engineering converge with the systems engineering (SE) discipline. Such advances require cultural and systems engineering process and methodology changes to support the digital transformation of physical systems. Societal benefits and vulnerabilities to these advances illustrate the value of social systems engineering models and methodologies for measuring the uncertainty of agreement for achieving control physical‐social system multi‐concern assurance.

An interdisciplinary strategy to advance systems engineering theory: The case of abstraction and elaboration

AbstractPrior advances in systems engineering (SE) theory were instrumental in defining the discipline and its tools, but are limited in perspective. The SE community needs new theoretical advances to address its existing and emerging sociotechnical challenges. This communication paper is a product of an NSF/SERC/INCOSE funded workshop on theory building in SE with a focus on the use of abstraction and elaboration. The overarching goals of the workshop were twofold. First, to illustrate the nuances and complexities of the theory building process with an emphasis on developing theory about the SE discipline rather than about a particular system of interest. The second goal was to stimulate a new wave of SE theory by providing a set of frames that could be used for formal theory articulation in follow‐up research. The workshop focused on abstraction and elaboration due to their richness and pervasiveness in SE and investigated the concept in two interrelated contexts: (a) the social coordination of design teams and (b) its strategic use during system design. For each research context, we offer a structured guideline for theorizing, and provide an understanding and framing of some of the generalized abstraction and elaboration uses in SE. Research frames articulated in this workshop could serve as the first step for future research on SE theory, which necessitates hypotheses generation, data collection, validation, and refinement.

Systems Theory: Bridging the Gap Between Science and Practice for Systems Engineering

AbstractThis paper explores Systems Theory (ST) contributions to improve the Systems Engineering (SE) discipline and practice. Recently, INCOSE has recognized that ST can provide a valuable theoretical and conceptual foundation to better ground the evolving SE discipline. At a fundamental level ST can be described as a set of axioms (taken for granted truths about systems) and propositions (principles, concepts, and laws that explain system behavior, structure, and performance) with a basis in the underlying science of systems. Our purpose is to bridge the gap between Systems Science and SE by exploring the practical implications for ST to improve both the SE discipline and practice. Following a short introduction to ST in the context of the SE discipline challenges, two primary objectives are pursued: (1) overview and positioning of ST for contribution to SE development, and (2) examination of articulation of ST axioms and associated propositions and their implications for enhancing SE practice. The paper closes with suggestion of the reciprocal contributions for SE and ST as well as the enhancement of SE to deal more effectively with increasingly complex systems and their problems.

Applying Model‐Based Systems Architecture Processes (MBSAP) Methodology for Diversified MBSE Projects with Efficient Systems of Systems Accomplishments

AbstractThis is a paper I will like to share with my Systems Engineering Development Life Cycles (SDLC) tactics by adapting to the MBSAP methodology from the text applicable to the real‐world MBSE tasks. These involved diversified MBSE developments and research according to my working projects scope aspects. The text introduces MBSE as the state of the practice in the dynamic Systems Engineering discipline that manages complexity and integrates technologies and design approaches to achieve effective, affordable, and balanced system solutions to the needs of all stakeholders within the systems development resources. All my successful accomplishments will be demonstrated that MBSAP is an effective MBSE and Systems Architectures research methodology for any future digital systems engineering development life cycles.

The SE Handbook: What Does It Mean to Me? A Proposal to Improve the Practical Application of the SE Handbook

AbstractThe INCOSE systems engineering (SE) handbook (Haskins, 2015) has served our discipline well for the years of its application. The authors foresee the future applicability of the contents in section 1.1 Purpose where it defines the discipline and practice of systems engineering (SE) for students and practicing professionals alike. The SE Handbook provides an authoritative reference to understand the SE discipline in terms of content and practice. Additionally, section 1.2 Application describes, while being consistent with the ISO/IEC/IEEE 15288, the handbook further elaborates on the practices and activities necessary to execute the processes, and that it is recommended that the tailoring guidelines in chapter 8 be used.With the strong baseline of defined systems engineering, Chapter 8 of the handbook addresses the Tailoring Process and Application of Systems Engineering. As of now, only 18 of the 290 handbook pages (6.2%) are dedicated to the tailoring process and applied tailoring. Section 8.2, Tailoring for Specific Product Sector or Domain Application is only afforded 5 pages (1.7% of the handbook total). The planned update of the INCOSE SE handbook offers an opportunity to enhance the practical application of the SE handbook. This paper reviews the current SE handbook structure, proposes an envisioned solution, provides a proof of concept, and discusses the recommended adjustments using a holistic systems engineering approach.

A Historical Perspective on Development of Systems Engineering Discipline: A Review and Analysis

Since its inception, Systems Engineering (SE) has developed as a distinctive discipline, and there has been significant progress in this field in the past two decades. Compared to other engineering disciplines, SE is not affirmed by a set of underlying fundamental propositions, instead it has emerged as a set of best practices to deal with intricacies stemming from the stochastic nature of engineering complex systems and addressing their problems. Since the existing methodologies and paradigms (dominant patterns of thought and concepts) of SE are very diverse and somewhat fragmented. This appears to create some confusion regarding the design, deployment, operation, and application of SE. The purpose of this paper is 1) to delineate the development of SE from 1926–2017 based on insights derived from a histogram analysis, 2) to discuss the different paradigms and school of thoughts related to SE, 3) to derive a set of fundamental attributes of SE using advanced coding techniques and analysis, and 4) to present a newly developed instrument that could assess the performance of systems engineers. More than Two hundred and fifty different sources have been reviewed in this research in order to demonstrate the development trajectory of the SE discipline based on the frequency of publication.

Assessing the Potential of IoT in Systems Engineering Discipline

AbstractInternet of Things (IoT) is becoming more and more important in many industry sectors and domains. Digital transformation is at the heart of business strategies nowadays and it begins with the executive mandate. There is a strong sense of urgency among executives as the threat of digitally enabled competitors remains high on the list of concerns. From the birth of IoT in 1999 to 2003, the number of devices grew to 500 million connected devices. By 2023, the forecast is for over 50 billion connected devices serving a population of 7.6 billion people (Dave 2011)Metcalfe's Law reminds us that three interconnected components result in a maximum of three interconnections, but with four the maximum number of interconnections rises to six, and with ten components, designers must deal with 45! This law illustrates how so many connected devices will challenge the way system engineering is carried out now. IoT is NOT a distant future, it's happening now. As a system engineering professional we have to be ready for the kind of thinking and tools that will be needed to address such a level of complexity. The IoT is, in a sense, a hyper‐scale System of Systems problem with multiple environments, requirements, governance structures and millions of stakeholders. So what tools can the SE discipline provide to manage this growing technology?This exploratory research is targeted towards identifying the various IoT characteristics and their impact on System Engineering discipline. A methodology was developed to establish the relationship between the IoT characteristics and System Engineering elements (Design requirements). Matrix methodology also helped in identifying the positive and negative correlation between the IoT characteristics and its linkage with various systems engineering element. This investigative research could be used by System Engineering professional to understand the impact of IoT on the practice of Systems Engineering.

Towards the Grand Unification of Process Design, Scheduling, and Control—Utopia or Reality?

As a founder of the Process Systems Engineering (PSE) discipline, Professor Roger W.H. Sargent had set ambitious goals for a systematic new generation of a process design paradigm based on optimization techniques with the consideration of future uncertainties and operational decisions. In this paper, we present a historical perspective on the milestones in model-based design optimization techniques and the developed tools to solve the resulting complex problems. We examine the progress spanning more than five decades, from the early flexibility analysis and optimal process design under uncertainty to more recent developments on the simultaneous consideration of process design, scheduling, and control. This formidable target towards the grand unification poses unique challenges due to multiple time scales and conflicting objectives. Here, we review the recent progress and propose future research directions.

Systems Engineering: Transforming Digital Transformation

AbstractWhile complex systems transform the landscape, the Systems Engineering discipline is also experiencing a transformation to a model‐based discipline. In alignment with this, one of the International Council on Systems Engineering (INCOSE) strategic objectives is to accelerate this transformation. INCOSE is building a broad community that promotes and advances model‐based methods to manage the complexity of systems which seamlessly integrate computational algorithms and physical components across domains and traditional boundaries. This paper addresses contextual drivers for transformation as well as obstacles, enablers, and INCOSE re‐sources aligned with accelerating the transformation of Systems Engineering to a model‐based discipline.

The State of Systems Engineering Technical Practice versus Discipline: A Survey of INCOSE Chapter Attendees in North America

AbstractIn 2017, the author initiated a Systems Engineering (SE) Fundamentals Research Project to assess the “current state” of SE practice versus the “should be state” of the discipline of SE. Peer level Engineering often question and challenge SE as a domain of Engineering due to a lack of codified concepts, principles, and practices despite having a body of knowledge.This paper summarizes results of a series of research surveys concerning the “gap” between the state of SE practice versus the discipline of SE. Survey results represent “core samples” from INCOSE chapter meeting attendees at geographically dispersed locations in North America. Survey participants included INCOSE Systems Engineering Professionals (SEPs) i.e., INCOSE Acquisition SEPs (ASEPs), Certified SEPs (CSEPs), Expert SEPs (ESEPs), Non‐SEP members, and non‐members. Project survey results correlate with Wasson's (2018) personal assessment over 30 years and serve as a frame of reference for INCOSE's Future of SE (FuSE) Team for instituting corrective actions to achieve its Vision 2025.The paper concludes with findings and recommended corrective actions that industry, government, academia, professional societies, and standards organizations collectively need to reestablish SE technical core competency as a cornerstone of the discipline of SE. Then, in combination with SE Management and processes, achieve a proper balance between the two (Ryschkewitsch, et al, 2009).

A historical perspective on systems engineering

AbstractWith 20 years of the Systems Engineering journal completed, this short article considers its impact on the discipline of systems engineering (SE) as a whole. It reviews the founding principles of this journal and assesses how well it has advanced those principles. In a broader sense, it also reviews 70 years of existence of the SE discipline and then looks ahead for its promises. After several decades of rapid growth, SE appears to have partially stagnated in the 1990s and 2000s in the face of process control pressures. The use of first principles has dwindled. Resurgence in the field, however, has been coincident with the time frame of this journal, as first principles are being redeveloped and new methods are arising. This journal successfully acts as a stimulus for that resurgence.

8.4.2 On the Right Track: A Case for Applying Systems Engineering to Writing Transport Policy

AbstractGovernment policy documents communicate the high‐level requirements for many of the complex systems at the centre of modern society. In Great Britain, national and European policy has a significant influence on transport systems. However, government publications are often difficult to interpret by the engineers responsible for the delivery of political objectives. The Systems Engineering discipline advocates the importance of accurately defining the purpose of a system early in the development stage. However, efforts in this area are typically focussed on engineering processes. Yet if high‐level requirements are poorly defined at a policy level, this can be detrimental to the success of a system. This research therefore proposes the application of Systems Engineering principles earlier in the lifecycle, during the policy‐writing process. The paper presents an analysis of the 2011 European Union White Paper for transport, which was compared against Systems Engineering best practice. The results show ambiguity, poor structure and lack of traceability in the document. The paper provides an introduction to the problem and identifies a number of alternative approaches for writing policy which will be further explored in future work. The case study focusses on the British rail system, but lessons learned can equally be applied to transport systems worldwide, and other policy‐driven domains.

2.2.1 Decision Management (DM) as the engine for scalable cross domain Systems Engineering (SE)

AbstractDecisions create the future in any industry or human endeavor. A robust Decision Management (DM) capability is the key enabler for accelerating the benefits of Systems Engineering (SE) discipline to new domains. Effective Decision Management is comprised of three elements: 1) decision patterns; 2) DM methods engine; 3) decision‐centric information model.INCOSE can leverage DM as an engine for SE outreach to new industries and domains. DM is highly scalable and integrates knowledge from many processes and stakeholders. A “decisions‐first” outreach strategy offers a clear value proposition to the primary stakeholders who must be convinced of the benefits of SE discipline. Existing decision‐makers gain a new set of techniques that improve decision quality, speed and execution. Subject matter experts gain a method for influencing designs with their unique knowledge and preserving their knowledge in the form of decision patterns. Project managers gain the ability to proactively identify and prioritize decisions and manage their impact on project cost/schedule baselines. Solution developers gain a better understanding of the upstream decisions that drive their requirements.Most of the cross‐domain benefits of DM can be demonstrated through rapid‐payback pilots without commitment to wholesale adoption of more comprehensive, complex and costly SE frameworks. The authors propose to engage INCOSE's Decision Analysis working group as the forum for investigating the cross‐domain applicability of DM.

4.4.2 INCOSE Systems Engineering Handbook v3.2: Improving the Process for SE Practitioners

AbstractThe INCOSE Systems Engineering Handbook is the official INCOSE reference document for understanding systems engineering (SE) methods and conducting SE activities. Over the years, the Handbook has evolved to accommodate advances in the SE discipline and now serves as the basis for the Certified Systems Engineering Professional (CSEP) exam. Due to its evolution, the Handbook had become somewhat disjointed in its treatment and presentation of SE topics and was not aligned with the latest version of International Organization for Standardization (ISO)/International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) 15288:2008, Systems and Software Engineering. As a result, numerous inconsistencies were identified that could confuse practitioners and directly impact the probability of success in passing the CSEP exam. Further, INCOSE leadership had previously submitted v3.1 of the Handbook to ISO/IEC for consideration as a Technical Report, but was told that the Handbook would have to be updated to conform with the terminology and structure of new ISO/IEC15288:2008, Systems and software engineering, prior to being considered.The revised INCOSE Systems Engineering Handbook v3.2 aligns with the structure and principles of ISO/IEC 15288:2008 and presents the generic SE life‐cycle process steps in their entirety, without duplication or redundancy, in a single location within the text. As such, the revised Handbook v3.2 serves as a comprehensive instructional and reference manual for effectively understanding SE processes and conducting SE and better serves certification candidates preparing for the CSEP exam.

Erratum zu: Moden und Trends in Wirtschaftsinformatik und Information Systems – Eine vergleichende Literaturanalyse

The business and information systems engineering (BISE) discipline, dominating in the German-speaking countries, where it is called Wirtschaftsinformatik, is currently undergoing a phase of increasing internationalization and the U.S.-based Information Systems (IS) discipline is often considered an ideal. Studies show that BISE has often dealt with fads in the past - for IS there are no findings reporting on the diffusion of fads. The objective of the paper is to close this research gap. We conducted a literature analysis that investigates the development of topics and terms in BISE and IS from 1994 to 2007. Titles, abstracts and keywords of 2,564 articles in three BISE journals and 5,647 articles in five IS journals were analyzed. The results show that BISE is topically more diverse and concrete than IS. In addition, the rate of fads is higher in BISE than IS. We concede that being engaged in fads is not necessarily negative - rather, it may considerably contribute to the relevance of research. However, it has to be considered that an overly intense orientation on fads may negatively influence a cumulative research progress. Hence, we conclude that for BISE and IS, which both have a theoretical and pragmatic mission, a balanced ratio of short- and long-term topics seems appropriate.

Fads and Trends in Business and Information Systems Engineering and Information Systems Research – A Comparative Literature Analysis

The business and information systems engineering (BISE) discipline, dominating in the German-speaking countries, where it is called“Wirtschaftsinformatik”, is currently undergoing a phase of increasing internationalization and the U.S.-based Information Systems (IS) discipline is often considered an ideal. Studies show that BISE has often dealt with fads in the past – for IS there are no findings reporting on the diffusion of fads. The objective of the paper is to close this research gap. The authors conducted a literature analysis to investigate the development of topics and terms in BISE and IS from 1994 to 2007. Titles, abstracts and keywords of 2,564 articles in three BISE journals and 5,647 articles in five IS journals were analyzed. The results show that BISE is topically more diverse and concrete than IS. In addition, the rate of fads is higher in BISE than IS. Being engaged in fads is not necessarily negative – rather, it may considerably contribute to the relevance of research. However, it has to be considered that an overly intense orientation on fads may negatively influence a cumulative research progress. Hence, the authors conclude that for BISE and IS, which both have a theoretical and pragmatic mission, a balanced ratio of short- and long-term topics seems appropriate.

The Systems Approach View from Professor Andrew P. Sage

Andrew P. Sage is the Founding Dean Emeritus University Professor, and First American Bank Professor in the Systems Engineering and Operation Research Department at George Mason University in USA. Professor Sage is recognized as one of the shapers of the Systems Engineering discipline by his important academic, scientific and consulting contributions for advancing the scientific knowledge and the practice of Systems Engineering from 1960s in the topics of: Systems Integration and Architecting, Complex Adaptive Systems and Knowledge Management, Economic Systems Analysis, and Systems Management. Professor Sage is author or co-author from several books on Systems Engineering and of more than 100 papers in top journals and conferences. Professor Sage has been Editor in Chief of the IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (January 1972 - December 1998), Editor of Automatica (July 1981 - June 1996) and Co-Editor in Chief (with W. B. Rouse) of Information, Knowledge, and Systems Management, IOS Press, from April 1999 at present. Currently, Professor Sage is the Editor In Chief of the International Council on Systems Engineering Journal Systems Engineering from, January 1998. He has received several international awards for his academic and professional activities such as: the International Council on Systems Engineering (INCOSE) Pioneer Award (2002), the Eta Kappa Nu Eminent Member Award (2002) and the Third Millennium Medal IEEE (2000) among others. His formal education is a B.S.E.E. (The Citadel, 1955), a S.M.E.E. (Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1956), a Ph.D. (Purdue University, 1960), a D.Engr. (University of Waterloo, 1987, Honoris Causa) and a D.Engr. (Dalhousie University, 1997, Honoris Causa). His wisdom has been gained during more than 40 years doing teaching, research and consulting. In IJITSA journal, we are honored to present the system’s view and thoughts from Professor Sage with the goal to contribute in the systemic integration of the Information Systems, Systems Engineering and Software Engineering disciplines. IJITSA’s questions and Professor Sage’s views are presented in next paragraphs.

7.2.3 On enabling a model‐based systems engineering discipline

AbstractThis paper considers the requirements of a model‐based systems engineering (MBSE) discipline and the benefits that would be realized from it. A premise of MBSE is that the technical environment supporting systems engineering has evolved, and is still evolving. We analyze the basis of systems engineering decision making in conjunction with the technical environment in which it may soon be performed. The analysis provides insight into the requirements that, when met, enable a model‐based systems engineering discipline. We report on our practical experience toward meeting the requirements using UML, SysML, AADL, AP233, and a systems engineering tool interoperability testbed.