MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

3.4.1 Technology and Obsolescence Sustainment for Integrated Systems

2006· article· en· W2029563767 on OpenAlexaff
Tom Herald, Dennis Genaw

Bibliographic record

VenueINCOSE International Symposium · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicTransportation Systems and Infrastructure
Canadian institutionsLockheed Martin (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsObsolescenceContext (archaeology)Product life-cycle managementSystems engineeringProduct (mathematics)System lifecyclePlan (archaeology)Product lifecycleEngineeringRisk analysis (engineering)Computer scienceProcess managementNew product developmentReliability engineeringBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Large, network‐centric systems utilizing legacy elements, integrating newest commercial technologies and involving highly diverse joint‐forces and international stakeholders have increased the magnitude and complexity of systems development and, subsequently, the system sustainment. This forces the need for additional bottoms‐up tangible change management decision and optimization support for the systems and supportability engineers. This paper addresses two critical aspects in the context of system‐level obsolescence management. The first is System Obsolescence Life Cycle Forecasting and the second is Product and Technology Obsolescence Surveillance and Health Assessment. Proactive forecasting and assessment condense into a sustainment plan that encompasses the complete product operational life cycle. Product surveillance is the real‐time data monitoring mechanism that calibrates the accuracy of the forecast and the implementation plan. This paper provides recommendations specifically for the supportability engineer and the systems engineer in order to optimize the design for system affordability and to monitor change through market surveillance of the system baseline elements toward continued support of program decisions. This paper is broken into five parts in order to highlight the needs and solutions which apply to each life cycle phase. This provides a complete technology management strategy for an integrated system that is comprised of varying commercial technologies, readily available Commercial‐off‐the‐Shelf (COTS) elements, and required legacy systems. Part 1: Overview of Technology Management (TM) Requirements and Approach. Includes a discussion of the “life cycle mismatch” facing any operational system, wherein the desired system operation period is much longer than the life cycle of the constituent parts. This obsolescence mismatch must be managed at the system level to ensure program affordability. Parts 2‐4: Development, Production and Sustainment phase TM needs and solutions. Part 5: Conclusions and Recommendations. Two distinct TM variables are covered; the life cycle phases and the program complexity. Understanding these variables guides the systems and logistics engineers to an optimal operational solution.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.004
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.197 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueINCOSE International SymposiumSame topicTransportation Systems and InfrastructureFrench-language works237,207