A vision for advancing systems science as a foundation for the systems engineering and systems practice of the future
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract In this paper, I argue that the fragmented state and uneven maturity of current systems science will render it increasingly inadequate for meeting the future needs of the engineering and practice disciplines depending on it. I explain that it is not the case that System Science is a holistic discipline in contrast with the reductionism of classical science, but that Systems Science has both reductionistic and holistic dimensions, dealt with respectively by two “movements” within systems science, which I will designate as “Complexity Science” and “Systems Research”. I argue that in many situations the internal workings of a system can be satisfactorily addressed with the mainly reductionistic methods of Complexity Science, whereas when external factors play a significant role, the mainly holistic methods of Systems Research are brought to the fore. This suggest that Complexity Science and Systems Research are not really as disjunct as often portrayed, but represent special cases under a wider conception that would hold across a spectrum of ratios between ‘internal complexity’ and ‘external complexity’ of the system of interest, and that would entail a differential emphasis on reductionistic and holistic methods based on contextual factors. Such a wider conception could not only help to unify systems science, but would also support analysis and intervention in the ‘middle ground’ between these polar types. This is relevant for Systems Engineering and Practice because as the world's complexity grows engineers and practitioners will increasingly have to deal with situations that are complex both internally and externally. This suggests an increasingly urgent need for the development of the envisioned ‘wider conception’ of systems in which we can deal in an elegant and principled way with shifts in the balance between internal and external complexity. In this paper I propose that a scientific general theory of systems could provide such a wider conception, and that it could serve as a basis for the unification of systems science, provide support for the scientific maturation of the discipline, and extend the capability and utility of systems science in important ways. I present approaches and frameworks that would support the development of such a theory, present wide‐ranging evidence suggesting that we are in a favourable position for developing one, and indicate important areas to focus on in future research.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,065 | 0,025 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,006 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,008 | 0,059 |
| Communication savante | 0,027 | 0,035 |
| Science ouverte | 0,003 | 0,014 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,017 | 0,022 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,009 | 0,003 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».