Publications

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

As system of systems (SoS) models become increasingly complex and interconnected a new approach is needed to capture the effects of humans within the SoS. Many real-life events have shown the detrimental outcomes of failing to account for humans in the loop. This research introduces a novel and cross-disciplinary methodology for modeling humans interacting with technologies to perform tasks within an SoS specifically within a layered physical security system use case. Metrics and formulations developed for this new way of looking at SoS termed sociotechnical SoS allow for the quantification of the interplay of effectiveness and efficiency seen in detection theory to measure the ability of a physical security system to detect and respond to threats. This methodology has been applied to a notional representation of a small military Forward Operating Base (FOB) as a proof-of-concept.

As system of systems (SoS) models become increasingly complex and interconnected a new approach is needed to capture the effects of humans within the SoS. Many real-life events have shown the detrimental outcomes of failing to account for humans in the loop. This research introduces a novel and cross-disciplinary methodology for modeling humans interacting with technologies to perform tasks within an SoS specifically within a layered physical security system use case. Metrics and formulations developed for this new way of looking at SoS termed sociotechnical SoS allow for the quantification of the interplay of effectiveness and efficiency seen in detection theory to measure the ability of a physical security system to detect and respond to threats. This methodology has been applied to a notional representation of a small military Forward Operating Base (FOB) as a proof-of-concept.

The ecological risk assessment process in its ideal form is an unbiased approach for assessing the probability of harm to the environment as a consequence of a given action. This information can then be combined with other societal values and biases in the management of such risks. However, as the process currently is understood, decision makers often are accused of manipulating information in order to generate decisions or achieve buy in from the public in support of a particular political agenda. A clear understanding of the nature of the risk management process can help define areas where information should be free from social or personal bias, and areas where values and judgments are critical. The authors do not propose to discuss the individual`s decision-making process, but rather to address the social process of risk communication and environmentally-related decision-making, identifying which parts of that process require bias-free, scientifically generated information about the consequences of various actions and which parts need an understanding of the social values which underlie the informed choices among those possible actions.

This document describes a panel discussion held on March 18, 1992 as part of a conference entitled Market Hub Technology'' . The purpose of the conference was to stimulate dialogue among various segments of the natural gas industry on the technology limits of an economic policy issue that has the potential to significantly alter the structure and functioning of the natural gas industry. Attendees included key US gas industry representatives, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) commissioners, and others. The conference explored the concept of market centers, or hubs, and related technologies. It covered the technology currently available for the establishment of an integrated system of physical market hubs, and explored technology requirements for the further development of useful and efficient hubs. The discussion identified two primary barriers to the acceptance and implementation of a market center distribution system for natural gas. The first barrier is the potential change in the configuration of the market such a system would introduce and the resistance various industry segments would mount to such change. The second is the lack of industry standardization in the physical and business infrastructures.