"The principle of complementarity states that no single model is possible which could provide a precise and rational analysis of the connections between these phenomena [before and after measurement]. In such a case, we are not supposed, for example, to attempt to describe in detail how future phenomena arise out of past phenomena. Instead, we should simply accept without further analysis the fact that future phenomena do in fact somehow manage to be produced, in a way that is, however, necessarily beyond the possibility of a detailed description. The only aim of a mathematical theory is then to predict the statistical relations, if any, connecting the phenomena." (David Bohm, "A Suggested Interpretation of the Quantum Theory in Terms of ‘Hidden’ Variables", 1952)
"My analysis of living systems uses concepts of thermodynamics, information theory, cybernetics, and systems engineering, as well as the classical concepts appropriate to each level. The purpose is to produce a description of living structure and process in terms of input and output, flows through systems, steady states, and feedbacks, which will clarify and unify the facts of life." (James G Miller, "Living Systems: Basic Concepts", 1969)
"When the phenomena of the universe are seen as linked together by cause-and-effect and energy transfer, the resulting picture is of complexly branching and interconnecting chains of causation. In certain regions of this universe (notably organisms in environments, ecosystems, thermostats, steam engines with governors, societies, computers, and the like), these chains of causation form circuits which are closed in the sense that causal interconnection can be traced around the circuit and back through whatever position was (arbitrarily) chosen as the starting point of the description. In such a circuit, evidently, events at any position in the circuit may be expected to have effect at all positions on the circuit at later times." (Gregory Bateson, "Steps to an Ecology of Mind", 1972)
"A system may be specified in either of two ways. In the first, which we shall call a state description, sets of abstract inputs, outputs and states are given, together with the action of the inputs on the states and the assignments of outputs to states. In the second, which we shall call a coordinate description, certain input, output and state variables are given, together with a system of dynamical equations describing the relations among the variables as functions of time. Modern mathematical system theory is formulated in terms of state descriptions, whereas the classical formulation is typically a coordinate description, for example a system of differential equations." (E S Bainbridge, "The Fundamental Duality of System Theory", 1975)
"General systems theory deals with the most fundamental concepts and aspects of systems. Many theories dealing with more specific types of systems (e. g., dynamical systems, automata, control systems, game-theoretic systems, among many others) have been under development for quite some time. General systems theory is concerned with the basic issues common to all these specialized treatments. Also, for truly complex phenomena, such as those found predominantly in the social and biological sciences, the specialized descriptions used in classical theories (which are based on special mathematical structures such as differential or difference equations, numerical or abstract algebras, etc.) do not adequately and properly represent the actual events. Either because of this inadequate match between the events and types of descriptions available or because of the pure lack of knowledge, for many truly complex problems one can give only the most general statements, which are qualitative and too often even only verbal. General systems theory is aimed at providing a description and explanation for such complex phenomena." (Mihajlo D. Mesarovic & Yasuhiko Takahare, "General Systems Theory: Mathematical foundations", 1975)
"A model is an abstract description of the real world. It is a simple representation of more complex forms, processes and functions of physical phenomena and ideas." (Moshe F Rubinstein & Iris R Firstenberg, "Patterns of Problem Solving", 1975)
"There is a strong current in contemporary culture advocating ‘holistic’ views as some sort of cure-all […] Reductionism implies attention to a lower level while holistic implies attention to higher level. These are intertwined in any satisfactory description: and each entails some loss relative to our cognitive preferences, as well as some gain [...] there is no whole system without an interconnection of its parts and there is no whole system without an environment." (Francisco Varela, "On being autonomous: The lessons of natural history for systems theory", 1977)
"[…] a complex system is incomprehensible unless we can simplify it by using alternative levels of description." (John L Casti, "On System Complexity: Identification, Measurement, and Management" [in "Complexity, Language, and Life: Mathematical Approaches"] 1986)
"[…] complexity emerges from simplicity when alternative descriptions of a system are not reducible to each other. For a given observer, the more such inequivalent descriptions he or she generates, the more complex the system appears. Conversely, a complex system can be simplified in one of two ways: reduce the number of potential descriptions (by restricting the observer's means of interaction with the system) and/or use a coarser notion of system equivalence, thus reducing the number of equivalence classes."
"[…] error (or surprise) always involves a discrepancy between the objects (systems) open to interaction and the abstractions (models, descriptions) closed. to those same interactions. The remedy is equally clear, in principle: just supplement the description by adding more observables to account for the unmodeled interactions. In this sense, error and surprise are indistinguishable from bifurcations. A particular description is inadequate to account for uncontrollable variability in equivalent states and we need a new description to remove the error."
"Mental models are the mechanisms whereby humans are able to generate descriptions of system purpose and form, explanations of system functioning and observed system states, and predictions of future system states." (William B Rouse & Nancy M Morris, "On looking into the black box: Prospects and limits in the search for mental models", Psychological Bulletin (3), 1986)
"The idea of one description of a system bifurcating from another also provides the key to begin unlocking one of the most important, and at the same time perplexing, problems of system theory: characterization of the complexity of a system."
"A conceptual model is a qualitative description of the system and includes the processes taking place in the system, the parameters chosen to describe the processes, and the spatial and temporal scales of the processes." (A Avogadro & R C Ragaini, "Technologies for Environmental Cleanup", 1993)
"A model for simulating dynamic system behavior requires formal policy descriptions to specify how individual decisions are to be made. Flows of information are continuously converted into decisions and actions. No plea about the inadequacy of our understanding of the decision-making processes can excuse us from estimating decision-making criteria. To omit a decision point is to deny its presence - a mistake of far greater magnitude than any errors in our best estimate of the process." (Jay W Forrester, "Policies, decisions and information sources for modeling", 1994)
"The impossibility of constructing a complete, accurate quantitative description of a complex system forces observers to pick which aspects of the system they most wish to understand." (Thomas Levenson, "Measure for Measure: A musical history of science", 1994)
"A measure that corresponds much better to what is usually meant by complexity in ordinary conversation, as well as in scientific discourse, refers not to the length of the most concise description of an entity (which is roughly what AIC [algorithmic information content] is), but to the length of a concise description of a set of the entity’s regularities. Thus something almost entirely random, with practically no regularities, would have effective complexity near zero. So would something completely regular, such as a bit string consisting entirely of zeroes. Effective complexity can be high only a region intermediate between total order and complete." (Murray Gell-Mann, "What is Complexity?", Complexity Vol 1 (1), 1995)
"In the new systems thinking, the metaphor of knowledge as a building is being replaced by that of the network. As we perceive reality as a network of relationships, our descriptions, too, form an interconnected network of concepts and models in which there are no foundations. For most scientists such a view of knowledge as a network with no firm foundations is extremely unsettling, and today it is by no means generally accepted. But as the network approach expands throughout the scientific community, the idea of knowledge as a network will undoubtedly find increasing acceptance." (Fritjof Capra," The Web of Life: a new scientific understanding of living systems", 1996)
"A dictionary definition of the word ‘complex’ is: ‘consisting of interconnected or interwoven parts’ […] Loosely speaking, the complexity of a system is the amount of information needed in order to describe it. The complexity depends on the level of detail required in the description. A more formal definition can be understood in a simple way. If we have a system that could have many possible states, but we would like to specify which state it is actually in, then the number of binary digits (bits) we need to specify this particular state is related to the number of states that are possible." (Yaneer Bar-Yamm, "Dynamics of Complexity", 1997)
"When the behavior of the system depends on the behavior of the parts, the complexity of the whole must involve a description of the parts, thus it is large. The smaller the parts that must be described to describe the behavior of the whole, the larger the complexity of the entire system. […] A complex system is a system formed out of many components whose behavior is emergent, that is, the behavior of the system cannot be simply inferred from the behavior of its components." (Yaneer Bar-Yamm, "Dynamics of Complexity", 1997)
"The concept ‘complexity’ is not univocal either. Firstly, it is useful to distinguish between the notions ‘complex’ and ‘complicated’. If a system - despite the fact that it may consist of a huge number of components - can be given a complete description in terms of its individual constituents, such a system is merely complicated. […] In a complex system, on the other hand, the interaction among constituents of the system, and the interaction between the system and its environment, are of such a nature that the system as a whole cannot be fully understood simply by analysing its components. Moreover, these relationships are not fixed, but shift and change, often as a result of self-organisation. This can result in novel features, usually referred to in terms of emergent properties."
"Systems thinking expands the focus of the observer, whereas analytical thinking reduces it. In other words, analysis looks into things, synthesis looks out of them. This attitude of systems thinking is often called expansionism, an alternative to classic reductionism. Whereas analytical thinking concentrates on static and structural properties, systems thinking concentrates on the function and behaviour of whole systems. Analysis gives description and knowledge; systems thinking gives explanation and understanding." (Lars Skyttner, "General Systems Theory: Ideas and Applications", 2001)
"Ecology, on the other hand, is messy. We cannot find anything deserving of the term law, not because ecology is less developed than physics, but simply because the underlying phenomena are more chaotic and hence less amenable to description via generalization." (Lev Ginzburg & Mark Colyvan," Ecological Orbits: How Planets Move and Populations Grow", 2004)
"Engineers use abstraction to simplify the description or specification of the system, extracting the properties of the system they find most relevant and ignoring other details. While this is a useful tool, it assumes that the details that will be provided to one part of the system (module) can be designed independently of details in other parts." (Yaneer Bar-Yam, "Making Things Work: Solving Complex Problems in a Complex World", 2004)
"[…] systems engineering is a process - a process that transforms a functional need, a mission capability requirement, or market opportunity into a complete description for a system that meets the need." (John Boardman & Brian Sauser, "Systems Thinking: Coping with 21st Century Problems", 2008)
"A perturbation in a system with a negative feedback mechanism will be reduced whereas in a system with positive feedback mechanisms, the perturbation will grow. Quite often, the system dynamics can be reduced to a low-order description. Then, the growth or decay of perturbations can be classified by the systems’ eigenvalues or the pseudospectrum." (Gerrit Lohmann, "Abrupt Climate Change Modeling", 2009)
"The difference between complex adaptive systems and self-organizing systems is that the former have the capacity to learn from their experience, and thus to embody successful patterns into their repertoire, although there is actually quite a deep relationship between self-organizing systems and complex adaptive systems. Adaptive entities can emerge at high levels of description in simple self-organizing systems, i.e., adaptive systems are not necessarily self-organizing systems with something extra thrown in." (Terry Cooke-Davies et al, "Exploring the Complexity of Projects", 2009)
"In chaotic deterministic systems, the probabilistic description is not linked to the number of degrees of freedom (which can be just one as for the logistic map) but stems from the intrinsic erraticism of chaotic trajectories and the exponential amplification of small uncertainties, reducing the control on the system behavior." (Massimo Cencini et al, "Chaos: From Simple Models to Complex Systems", 2010)
"What advantages do diagrams have over verbal descriptions in promoting system understanding? First, by providing a diagram, massive amounts of information can be presented more efficiently. A diagram can strip down informational complexity to its core - in this sense, it can result in a parsimonious, minimalist description of a system. Second, a diagram can help us see patterns in information and data that may appear disordered otherwise. For example, a diagram can help us see mechanisms of cause and effect or can illustrate sequence and flow in a complex system. Third, a diagram can result in a less ambiguous description than a verbal description because it forces one to come up with a more structured description." (Robbie T Nakatsu, "Diagrammatic Reasoning in AI", 2010)
"Complex systems defy intuitive solutions. Even a third-order, linear differential equation is unsolvable by inspection. Yet, important situations in management, economics, medicine, and social behavior usually lose reality if simplified to less than fifth-order nonlinear dynamic systems. Attempts to deal with nonlinear dynamic systems using ordinary processes of description and debate lead to internal inconsistencies. Underlying assumptions may have been left unclear and contradictory, and mental models are often logically incomplete. Resulting behavior is likely to be contrary to that implied by the assumptions being made about' underlying system structure and governing policies." (Jay W Forrester, "Modeling for What Purpose?", The Systems Thinker Vol. 24 (2), 2013)
No comments:
Post a Comment