Means and ends of control

Morten Lind

doi:10.1109/ICSMC.2004.1398406

Means and ends of control

Morten Lind (Invited author)

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Article in proceedings › Research › peer-review

477 Downloads (Orbit)

Abstract

Means-end analysis plays a significant role in cognitive engineering and has been successfully applied in several work domains, usually in the form of Rasmussens abstraction hierarchy. However, work domains with embedded controls create problems and modifications of the abstraction hierarchy has been proposed to circumvent the problems. But embedded controls is a deep problem for means-end analysis in general and not only for instances like the abstraction hierarchy. It is pointed out that means-end analysis is currently not used in control engineering but should be used to clarify modelling assumptions. Means-end analysis also lacks a proper definition of the control concept. It is proposed that control is defined as a binary relation that assign functional roles to subsystems. This control concept leads to distinct but entangled process and control hierarchies. It is argued that the problems of embedded control can be resolved by an analysis of the relations between the two types of hierarchy. Illustrative modelling examples are included.

Original language	English
Title of host publication	IEEE Conf. Systems Man and Cybernetics
Volume	1
Publisher	IEEE
Publication date	2004
ISBN (Print)	0-7803-8566-7
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSMC.2004.1398406
Publication status	Published - 2004
Event	2004 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics - The Hague, Netherlands Duration: 10 Oct 2004 → 13 Oct 2004 https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/conhome/9622/proceeding

Conference

Conference	2004 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics
Country/Territory	Netherlands
City	The Hague
Period	10/10/2004 → 13/10/2004
Internet address	https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/conhome/9622/proceeding

Bibliographical note

Copyright: 2004 IEEE. Personal use of this material is permitted. However, permission to reprint/republish this material for advertising or promotional purposes or for creating new collective works for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or to reuse any copyrighted component of this work in other works must be obtained from the IEEE

Access to Document

10.1109/ICSMC.2004.1398406

LindFinal published version, 585 KB

OpenUrl availability

Full text

Cite this

@inproceedings{98313277767d40e29f84e9926b98df7c,

title = "Means and ends of control",

abstract = "Means-end analysis plays a significant role in cognitive engineering and has been successfully applied in several work domains, usually in the form of Rasmussens abstraction hierarchy. However, work domains with embedded controls create problems and modifications of the abstraction hierarchy has been proposed to circumvent the problems. But embedded controls is a deep problem for means-end analysis in general and not only for instances like the abstraction hierarchy. It is pointed out that means-end analysis is currently not used in control engineering but should be used to clarify modelling assumptions. Means-end analysis also lacks a proper definition of the control concept. It is proposed that control is defined as a binary relation that assign functional roles to subsystems. This control concept leads to distinct but entangled process and control hierarchies. It is argued that the problems of embedded control can be resolved by an analysis of the relations between the two types of hierarchy. Illustrative modelling examples are included.",

author = "Morten Lind",

note = "Copyright: 2004 IEEE. Personal use of this material is permitted. However, permission to reprint/republish this material for advertising or promotional purposes or for creating new collective works for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or to reuse any copyrighted component of this work in other works must be obtained from the IEEE; 2004 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics ; Conference date: 10-10-2004 Through 13-10-2004",

year = "2004",

doi = "10.1109/ICSMC.2004.1398406",

language = "English",

isbn = "0-7803-8566-7",

volume = "1",

booktitle = "IEEE Conf. Systems Man and Cybernetics",

publisher = "IEEE",

address = "United States",

url = "https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/conhome/9622/proceeding",

}

TY - GEN

T1 - Means and ends of control

AU - Lind, Morten

N1 - Copyright: 2004 IEEE. Personal use of this material is permitted. However, permission to reprint/republish this material for advertising or promotional purposes or for creating new collective works for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or to reuse any copyrighted component of this work in other works must be obtained from the IEEE

PY - 2004

Y1 - 2004

N2 - Means-end analysis plays a significant role in cognitive engineering and has been successfully applied in several work domains, usually in the form of Rasmussens abstraction hierarchy. However, work domains with embedded controls create problems and modifications of the abstraction hierarchy has been proposed to circumvent the problems. But embedded controls is a deep problem for means-end analysis in general and not only for instances like the abstraction hierarchy. It is pointed out that means-end analysis is currently not used in control engineering but should be used to clarify modelling assumptions. Means-end analysis also lacks a proper definition of the control concept. It is proposed that control is defined as a binary relation that assign functional roles to subsystems. This control concept leads to distinct but entangled process and control hierarchies. It is argued that the problems of embedded control can be resolved by an analysis of the relations between the two types of hierarchy. Illustrative modelling examples are included.

AB - Means-end analysis plays a significant role in cognitive engineering and has been successfully applied in several work domains, usually in the form of Rasmussens abstraction hierarchy. However, work domains with embedded controls create problems and modifications of the abstraction hierarchy has been proposed to circumvent the problems. But embedded controls is a deep problem for means-end analysis in general and not only for instances like the abstraction hierarchy. It is pointed out that means-end analysis is currently not used in control engineering but should be used to clarify modelling assumptions. Means-end analysis also lacks a proper definition of the control concept. It is proposed that control is defined as a binary relation that assign functional roles to subsystems. This control concept leads to distinct but entangled process and control hierarchies. It is argued that the problems of embedded control can be resolved by an analysis of the relations between the two types of hierarchy. Illustrative modelling examples are included.

U2 - 10.1109/ICSMC.2004.1398406

DO - 10.1109/ICSMC.2004.1398406

M3 - Article in proceedings

SN - 0-7803-8566-7

VL - 1

BT - IEEE Conf. Systems Man and Cybernetics

PB - IEEE

T2 - 2004 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics

Y2 - 10 October 2004 through 13 October 2004

ER -

Means and ends of control

Abstract

Conference

Bibliographical note

Access to Document

OpenUrl availability

Fingerprint

Cite this