使用贝叶斯网络方法预测个人系统思维能力

IF 4.2 3区 计算机科学 Q2 COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS IEEE Access Pub Date : 2025-01-27 DOI:10.1109/ACCESS.2025.3534632
Niamat Ullah Ibne Hossain;Raed Jaradat;Morteza Nagahi;Alex Gorod
{"title":"使用贝叶斯网络方法预测个人系统思维能力","authors":"Niamat Ullah Ibne Hossain;Raed Jaradat;Morteza Nagahi;Alex Gorod","doi":"10.1109/ACCESS.2025.3534632","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Emergence in complex systems is often compounded by diverse information and rapid technological acceleration. The problems and behaviors of increasingly complex systems continue confining practitioners’ systems engineering capabilities to maintain performance consistency. While systems engineering provides a process for integrating various engineering disciplines to deliver desired end results, systems thinking (ST) provides the mechanism for drawing broad perspectives on the configuration, patterns, and cycles of complex systems, with a view to analyzing and improving system performance. ST can, therefore, be construed as an essential skill for designing and managing complex systems that need to sustain desired specifications. Although several methods exist in the extant literature to appraise the ST skills of practitioners, none has been recommended for prediction and diagnostic purposes. To fill this void, this research study aims to develop and validate a Bayesian network tool that incorporates seven main factors and the corresponding underpinning sub-factors that influence individual ST skills, as identified by Jaradat and Keating. The study seeks to answer whether differences in systems thinking skills are evident between practitioners in two sectors, namely defense and industry/business. The results indicate that all the main ST factors are imperative to predicting overall individual ST skills for defense and industry/business practitioners. However, defense practitioners scored higher along six dimensions, resulting in a higher overall individual ST score than industry practitioners. Although industry practitioners scored higher than defense practitioners on the independence (autonomy) dimension, this dimension alone was insufficient to strengthen the overall ST skills above that of defense practitioners.","PeriodicalId":13079,"journal":{"name":"IEEE Access","volume":"13 ","pages":"20133-20148"},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=10854422","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Predicting Individual Systems Thinking Skills Using Bayesian Network Approach\",\"authors\":\"Niamat Ullah Ibne Hossain;Raed Jaradat;Morteza Nagahi;Alex Gorod\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/ACCESS.2025.3534632\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Emergence in complex systems is often compounded by diverse information and rapid technological acceleration. The problems and behaviors of increasingly complex systems continue confining practitioners’ systems engineering capabilities to maintain performance consistency. While systems engineering provides a process for integrating various engineering disciplines to deliver desired end results, systems thinking (ST) provides the mechanism for drawing broad perspectives on the configuration, patterns, and cycles of complex systems, with a view to analyzing and improving system performance. ST can, therefore, be construed as an essential skill for designing and managing complex systems that need to sustain desired specifications. Although several methods exist in the extant literature to appraise the ST skills of practitioners, none has been recommended for prediction and diagnostic purposes. To fill this void, this research study aims to develop and validate a Bayesian network tool that incorporates seven main factors and the corresponding underpinning sub-factors that influence individual ST skills, as identified by Jaradat and Keating. The study seeks to answer whether differences in systems thinking skills are evident between practitioners in two sectors, namely defense and industry/business. The results indicate that all the main ST factors are imperative to predicting overall individual ST skills for defense and industry/business practitioners. However, defense practitioners scored higher along six dimensions, resulting in a higher overall individual ST score than industry practitioners. Although industry practitioners scored higher than defense practitioners on the independence (autonomy) dimension, this dimension alone was insufficient to strengthen the overall ST skills above that of defense practitioners.\",\"PeriodicalId\":13079,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"IEEE Access\",\"volume\":\"13 \",\"pages\":\"20133-20148\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=10854422\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"IEEE Access\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"94\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/10854422/\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"计算机科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"IEEE Access","FirstCategoryId":"94","ListUrlMain":"https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/10854422/","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"计算机科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

复杂系统的出现往往伴随着多样化的信息和快速的技术加速。日益复杂的系统的问题和行为继续限制实践者维持性能一致性的系统工程能力。当系统工程提供了一个集成各种工程学科的过程,以交付期望的最终结果时,系统思考(ST)提供了一种机制,用于在复杂系统的配置、模式和周期上绘制广泛的透视图,以分析和改进系统性能。因此,ST可以被解释为设计和管理需要维持所需规格的复杂系统的基本技能。虽然现有文献中存在几种方法来评估从业人员的ST技能,但没有一种方法被推荐用于预测和诊断目的。为了填补这一空白,本研究旨在开发并验证一个贝叶斯网络工具,该工具包含了七个影响个人科技技能的主要因素和相应的基础子因素,如Jaradat和Keating所确定的。该研究试图回答两个部门(即国防和工业/商业)的从业者在系统思维技能方面的差异是否明显。结果表明,所有主要的ST因素对于预测国防和工业/商业从业者的整体个人ST技能都是必不可少的。然而,国防从业者在六个维度上得分更高,导致整体个人ST得分高于行业从业者。虽然工业从业者在独立性(自主性)维度上的得分高于国防从业者,但仅凭这一维度不足以强化国防从业者的整体科技技能。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Predicting Individual Systems Thinking Skills Using Bayesian Network Approach
Emergence in complex systems is often compounded by diverse information and rapid technological acceleration. The problems and behaviors of increasingly complex systems continue confining practitioners’ systems engineering capabilities to maintain performance consistency. While systems engineering provides a process for integrating various engineering disciplines to deliver desired end results, systems thinking (ST) provides the mechanism for drawing broad perspectives on the configuration, patterns, and cycles of complex systems, with a view to analyzing and improving system performance. ST can, therefore, be construed as an essential skill for designing and managing complex systems that need to sustain desired specifications. Although several methods exist in the extant literature to appraise the ST skills of practitioners, none has been recommended for prediction and diagnostic purposes. To fill this void, this research study aims to develop and validate a Bayesian network tool that incorporates seven main factors and the corresponding underpinning sub-factors that influence individual ST skills, as identified by Jaradat and Keating. The study seeks to answer whether differences in systems thinking skills are evident between practitioners in two sectors, namely defense and industry/business. The results indicate that all the main ST factors are imperative to predicting overall individual ST skills for defense and industry/business practitioners. However, defense practitioners scored higher along six dimensions, resulting in a higher overall individual ST score than industry practitioners. Although industry practitioners scored higher than defense practitioners on the independence (autonomy) dimension, this dimension alone was insufficient to strengthen the overall ST skills above that of defense practitioners.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
IEEE Access
IEEE Access COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMSENGIN-ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC
CiteScore
9.80
自引率
7.70%
发文量
6673
审稿时长
6 weeks
期刊介绍: IEEE Access® is a multidisciplinary, open access (OA), applications-oriented, all-electronic archival journal that continuously presents the results of original research or development across all of IEEE''s fields of interest. IEEE Access will publish articles that are of high interest to readers, original, technically correct, and clearly presented. Supported by author publication charges (APC), its hallmarks are a rapid peer review and publication process with open access to all readers. Unlike IEEE''s traditional Transactions or Journals, reviews are "binary", in that reviewers will either Accept or Reject an article in the form it is submitted in order to achieve rapid turnaround. Especially encouraged are submissions on: Multidisciplinary topics, or applications-oriented articles and negative results that do not fit within the scope of IEEE''s traditional journals. Practical articles discussing new experiments or measurement techniques, interesting solutions to engineering. Development of new or improved fabrication or manufacturing techniques. Reviews or survey articles of new or evolving fields oriented to assist others in understanding the new area.
期刊最新文献
A Translational Platform for Polyimide Neural Interfaces: Polyimide Synthesis and in Vivo Evaluation in Epileptic Mice. Named Entity Recognition With Clue-Word Tags From Patent Documents in Materials Science Development of a Neural Network-Based Model to Generate an Absolute Luminance Map of an Interior Using a Camera Raw Image File Reinforcement Learning-Based Fuzzer for 5G RRC Security Evaluation Cite and Seek: Automated Literary Reference Mining at Corpus Scale
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1