Title | ||
---|---|---|
An Interactive Portfolio Decision Analysis Approach for System-of-Systems Architecting Using the Graph Model for Conflict Resolution |
Abstract | ||
---|---|---|
A novel approach based on the graph model for conflict resolution (GMCR) methodology is proposed to address the problem of multistakeholder system portfolio decision analysis encountered in architecting a system of systems (SoS) with desired capabilities. More specifically, a flexible four-process framework for capability-based SoS architecting containing interactive portfolio decision analysis to promote multistakeholder design negotiations on system portfolio selections is presented. By taking full advantage of the inherent realistic and flexible design of the GMCR paradigm, an interactive portfolio decision analysis approach is designed to facilitate the systematic modeling and analysis of system portfolio decisions at the SoS level in order to achieve potential compromises among all key stakeholders having disparate preferences and interacting according to different conflict behavior patterns. This approach permits the prediction of possible mutually agreeable system portfolios for SoS architecture development. Last, the feasibility of the proposed approach is demonstrated using an illustrative example. |
Year | DOI | Venue |
---|---|---|
2014 | 10.1109/TSMC.2014.2309321 | IEEE T. Systems, Man, and Cybernetics: Systems |
Keywords | Field | DocType |
Portfolios,Analytical models,Educational institutions,Robustness,Logic gates,Standards,Cybernetics | Decision analysis,Computer science,System of systems,Conflict resolution,Robustness (computer science),Portfolio,Artificial intelligence,Systems architecture,Cybernetics,Management science,Software engineering,Machine learning,Negotiation | Journal |
Volume | Issue | ISSN |
44 | 10 | 2168-2216 |
Citations | PageRank | References |
8 | 0.49 | 17 |
Authors | ||
5 |
Name | Order | Citations | PageRank |
---|---|---|---|
Bingfeng Ge | 1 | 46 | 11.25 |
K. W. Hipel | 2 | 812 | 116.70 |
Liping Fang | 3 | 143 | 19.37 |
Ke-wei Yang | 4 | 193 | 22.65 |
Ying-wu Chen | 5 | 227 | 16.61 |