Stu Frerking, Gordon Hunt, Marcell Padilla, Anthony Edwards, Bryan Mesmer, Alejandro Salado
{"title":"A Metamodel for ilities","authors":"Stu Frerking, Gordon Hunt, Marcell Padilla, Anthony Edwards, Bryan Mesmer, Alejandro Salado","doi":"10.1002/iis2.70088","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/iis2.70088","url":null,"abstract":"<p>This paper addresses the transformation of systems architecture from intuition-driven to scientifically grounded practices, highlighting the importance of structured frameworks due to increasing complexity in technology systems. It advocates for a “scientification” of architecture, using quantifiable methods to enhance system ilities. To achieve this, we present a metamodel for use in Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE). It serves as a standardized framework to represent architectural elements, support interdisciplinary collaboration, and ensure alignment with stakeholder needs. Principal objectives include enabling rigorous validation, early architectural assessments, and systematic knowledge repositories for predictable design outcomes. The metamodel standardizes architectural concepts and their relationships and promotes a universal understanding and collaborative development of them. It provides a conceptual framework that enables embedding structured scientifically grounded bodies of knowledge and approaches into the systems engineering process, facilitating data-driven decisions, improving transparency, and reducing risks associated with late-stage design decisions. It enables continuous enhancement of bodies of knowledge to support dynamic, scalable, and repeatable engineering processes that keep pace with evolving system demands.</p>","PeriodicalId":100663,"journal":{"name":"INCOSE International Symposium","volume":"35 1","pages":"1658-1672"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145248685","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Faulted Agent Resilience in Multi-Agent Systems: An Exploration of Two Ant Inspired Strategies","authors":"James Hand, Bryan Watson","doi":"10.1002/iis2.70069","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/iis2.70069","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Resilience is one of the key focal points of systems engineering research, especially in relation to multi-agent systems. This need for system resiliency is outlined by many sources, including the INCOSE Systems Vision 2035 document, as a part of the future of systems engineering and engineering in general. Finding solutions to improve systems resiliency, however, is often easier said than done. In the case of faulted and malicious agents the solutions in current literature lean towards consensus or identifying the source of a problem before it can become a problem. In this work we propose an approach that uses the behaviors identified in ant species to increase system resilience in spite of the presence of faults. The hypothesis is thus: “<i>If insect inspired communication and spatial heterogeneity strategies are applied to a searching swarm, then the system's overall resiliency to spreading faults will improve, because these strategies reduce the likelihood of communication between faulted agents and those agents prone to encountering sources of faults.</i>” In this work we present a simulated unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) swarm that is tasked with randomly searching the simulation space with the goal of reaching 100% search success. Within the simulated space are Threat vectors that can induce a fault in agents within their connection range. Upon receiving a faulted message, an analog for malware, a receiving agent may become infected. If so, they will begin spreading the infection themselves, thus propagating the infection. Our findings suggest the two tested strategies greatly improves fault resilience, when both strategies are implemented no tests ended with full fault propagation. This is a large improvement over the control group's 85.6% of scenarios resulting in full fault propagation and loss of the swarm.</p>","PeriodicalId":100663,"journal":{"name":"INCOSE International Symposium","volume":"35 1","pages":"1406-1417"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145248626","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Bifurcation Analysis for System Resilience: A Case Study on Power Infrastructure","authors":"Rogelio Gracia Otalvaro, Bryan C. Watson","doi":"10.1002/iis2.70091","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/iis2.70091","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Modern cyber-physical systems are becoming increasingly complex, as they integrate digital and physical components to achieve higher levels of efficiency and connectivity. This complexity introduces new vulnerabilities and operational threats to the systems that are hard to predict or deal with. Resilience Engineering (RE) has emerged as a field that focuses on the ability of systems to withstand, adapt to, or recover from disruption or unexpected events, as opposed to traditional risk management methods that rely on reducing variability and uncertainty. However, RE approaches are very diverse and lack consistency, hindering the chances for more adoption, which ultimately impacts the ability to manage complex systems efficiently. This paper explores the use of Bifurcation Analysis to identify resilience capabilities in critical infrastructures. We apply a Bifurcation Analysis for resilience framework to the IEEE 9-Bus power system to analyze its resilience and operational condition under different levels of loading stress. Eigenvalue and continuation analysis are performed to address system stability and to measure absorptive, adaptive, and recovery capabilities. The contributions are the demonstration of the application of the framework to a power system, identifying critical points, and an expansion of the framework by recommending different metrics for different resilient capabilities. The results confirm the utility of the framework to understand and enhance resiliency in critical infrastructure. Future work can be done to address the scalability to larger systems, add operations, and increase simulation complexity.</p>","PeriodicalId":100663,"journal":{"name":"INCOSE International Symposium","volume":"35 1","pages":"1845-1859"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145248690","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Explaining Model-Based Systems Engineering – Towards a Semiotic Perspective","authors":"Eduard Kamburjan, Johan Cederbladh","doi":"10.1002/iis2.70070","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/iis2.70070","url":null,"abstract":"<p>While the benefits of Model-Based System Engineering (MBSE) are recognized, its adoption is hampered by seemingly pragmatic problems, such as a harsh learning curve and lack of mature tooling and integration. While these perceived drawbacks are often described, they are only rarely explained – it is unclear what exactly about MBSE is challenging to use and learn, and how to determine whether new approaches mitigate this challenge. It this work, we propose a theory for explanation for three observations: (1) MBSE is more appreciated by non-system engineers, than by those that create the models, (2) system models, particularly in the early stage, are used for communication and rarely for automation, and (3) graphical notation is seen as both the major advantage of MBSE and a big drawback when learning it. We use a cognitive framework based on semiotics, conceptual spaces and naturalness and provide a first explanation of these observations: A graphical model can be interpreted either in terms of the domain it models, or in terms of the language it is expressed in. These two interpretations are in parallel when a user interprets a model and can interfere, which leads to problems in understanding.</p>","PeriodicalId":100663,"journal":{"name":"INCOSE International Symposium","volume":"35 1","pages":"337-347"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145248717","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"A Double-Helix Model for the V&V of Physical and Digital Twins","authors":"Samuel Cornejo, Suk hwan Jung, Alejandro Salado","doi":"10.1002/iis2.70114","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/iis2.70114","url":null,"abstract":"<p>The term digital twin has frequently been misused, often reduced to merely representing a model of a system, thereby diluting its intended meaning and potential. This conflation has led to misconceptions about the role of digital twins in systems engineering, particularly in the context of verification and validation (V&V). Some argue that a digital twin can verify a system, yet this view fails to recognize the bidirectional nature of the digital twin's relationship with its physical counterpart. In this paper, we introduce the Double-Helix Model for V&V of Physical and Digital Twins, a framework that emphasizes the mutual V&V process, where each twin must be inherently used to V&V the other. By clarifying the proper role and definition of digital twins, this paper aims to advance their application in systems engineering practices.</p>","PeriodicalId":100663,"journal":{"name":"INCOSE International Symposium","volume":"35 1","pages":"794-803"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145248719","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"AI Overview and Caveats for the Systems Engineer","authors":"Sarah Sheard","doi":"10.1002/iis2.70037","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/iis2.70037","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Artificial intelligence (AI), and in particular, generative AI, burst abruptly onto the systems engineering scene. The first generative AI was made available to the general public just four years ago, yet McKinsey estimates that almost three-quarters of all companies use it in at least one of their business units. Engineers are adjusting to this phenomenal rate of change while trying to get their already fast-paced work done. This paper is intended to provide a brief introduction as to how AI can help within the systems engineering life cycle and what cautions and caveats apply, as well as the results of an experiment with submitting three SE-related questions to three popular AI models. The paper concludes with recommendations for practitioners, managers, and INCOSE regarding AI adoption.</p>","PeriodicalId":100663,"journal":{"name":"INCOSE International Symposium","volume":"35 1","pages":"826-854"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145248721","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Authoritative Broker of Truth (ABoT): Synchronizing Model-Based System Engineering (MBSE) with Cross-Disciplinary Simulation to Create Digital Twins","authors":"Patrick Meharg, Dr. Scott James, Andrew Dudash","doi":"10.1002/iis2.70062","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/iis2.70062","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Building digital twins is a cross-disciplinary endeavor, combining the efforts of modelers, system engineers, data analysts, UX designers and domain experts. For digital twins to be able to evolve with their paired, real-world system, the artifacts associated with these various disciplines must remain synchronized and coherent throughout the digital twin lifecycle. We provide a paradigm for harmonizing this multi-disciplinary effort using an Authoritative Broker of Truth (ABoT) process and apply this paradigm to a real-world case study: Can I ‘cut the cord’ on my cable provider and receive free over-the-air television?</p>","PeriodicalId":100663,"journal":{"name":"INCOSE International Symposium","volume":"35 1","pages":"1221-1239"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145248768","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Kyle Blond DEng, Steven Conrad PhD, Nathaniel Thompson, Thomas Bradley PhD
{"title":"Enterprise Architecting to Advance Reliability and Maintainability Decision-Making","authors":"Kyle Blond DEng, Steven Conrad PhD, Nathaniel Thompson, Thomas Bradley PhD","doi":"10.1002/iis2.70001","DOIUrl":"10.1002/iis2.70001","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Aircraft maintenance strategy, execution, and improvement decisions (i.e., solutions) are critical enterprise responses impacting a fleet's sustainment performance. Enterprise maintenance solutions are a key product support activity in the United States Department of Defense that must balance safety, economics, and operations. To guide and regulate enterprise reliability and maintainability decisions, several programs, policies, and standards govern various aspects of a system's product support and sustainment domain. While this body of enterprise knowledge prescribes <i>what</i> to do, it intentionally enables organizations to decide how they want to collaborate and organize to make enterprise-level reliability and maintainability decisions. In contrast, much of the academic literature focuses on how to make closed form organization-level reliability and maintainability decisions, but does not address the complexities and implications of involving multiple heterogeneous organizations.</p><p>To this end, this research seeks to develop enterprise architecture viewpoints and views to characterize the interdependencies, interactions, and integration of reliability and maintainability solutions across organizations. These architectures provide improved traceability and domain understanding of enterprise reliability and maintainability decisions to advance product support and sustainment outcomes. A notional United States Air Force commercial derivative aircraft serves as an exemplar of how these enterprise architectures identify enterprise actors and their exchanges to develop a reliability and maintainability decision-making framework. Together, this framework and its enterprise context guide the design of a decision support tool for enterprise reliability and maintainability solutions. Finally, applications of enterprise reliability and maintainability architectures are discussed to enable novel Digital Product Support strategies in the United States Department of Defense.</p>","PeriodicalId":100663,"journal":{"name":"INCOSE International Symposium","volume":"35 1","pages":"169-187"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145248762","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"A3 Overviews for Communication in Development Projects – a Study from a Small Norwegian Company","authors":"Alexander Bergtun, Siv Engen","doi":"10.1002/iis2.70082","DOIUrl":"10.1002/iis2.70082","url":null,"abstract":"<p>The German Navy's current Mine Countermeasures (MCM) systems are reaching the end of design life, and new systems are to be developed. WTD 71, the German Navy's Research Institute, is to do this development and is investigating possibilities for unmanned systems. In this process, H. Henriksen AS has been chosen as the industrial partner to develop and manufacture the physical system. In this paper, we explore how the A3 Architecture Overview (A3AO) method can be used for communication in developing a new unmanned minesweeping system. Through interviews and observations in a small Norwegian company in the marine and naval industry, we found challenges related to system and project overviews. These were mostly caused by communication challenges and a lack of common understanding among stakeholders. We also identified a knowledge gap in the subject of minesweeping. To support the challenge of not having an overview of the system, we developed and tested A3AOs. Further, we altered the traditional A3AO to communicate the subject of minesweeping and an overview of the project. The industry resources appreciated the overviews and reported that they believed such methods would create value in projects.</p>","PeriodicalId":100663,"journal":{"name":"INCOSE International Symposium","volume":"35 1","pages":"135-151"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145248725","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Systems Engineering – A Matter of Perspectives","authors":"Ian Gibson","doi":"10.1002/iis2.70072","DOIUrl":"10.1002/iis2.70072","url":null,"abstract":"<p>This paper presents an “8 degrees of Systems Engineering” framework, encouraging readers to think beyond simply thinking of “nested” systems and consider the wider environment in its fullest sense. It draws upon the work of Meadows, Martin, Sillitto and Salado, amongst others, to create a simple framework with potentially far-reaching exploitation.</p><p>The aim of the framework is to break out of traditional mindsets that seek to understand the wider system context by simply drawing a boundary around the contracted for system and treating everything as either inside or outside. It is also a rebuttal to models which perpetuate the single system boundary myth and then seek to surround it with further layers of delivery and development “systems” rather than properly separating the concerns.</p><p>It has been used in several “awareness” level courses on Systems Thinking, where it has proved to be easily digestible by students and gives a much richer point of departure for exploring Systems Engineering techniques than simply using a “poached egg” type model. In particular, the ability to use the framework to focus discussion into specific areas of concern enables students to more thoroughly explore the techniques that can be used to understand options, uncertainties and issues.</p>","PeriodicalId":100663,"journal":{"name":"INCOSE International Symposium","volume":"35 1","pages":"53-67"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145248591","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}