5.5.3 Enabling Systems Architecture Tradeoffs Using a Systems Integration Framework

2002 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 970-979
Author(s):  
Biju Kalathil ◽  
Douglas Moore ◽  
Coleste Huggins
OOIS’97 ◽  
1998 ◽  
pp. 131-141
Author(s):  
Simone Sédillot ◽  
Jian Liang

1998 ◽  
Vol 1618 (1) ◽  
pp. 172-179 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark Hickman ◽  
Sam Tabibnia ◽  
Theodore Day

The rationale behind the current research and development of interface standards for the public transit industry is explored. Recent efforts to define an information systems architecture for public transit have not sufficiently discussed the underlying need for information system standards and what impacts these standards might have on the transit industry as well as on vendors. Both advantages and disadvantages to the development of these standards are identified. For public transit agencies, there appears to be a well-reasoned yet unsupported belief that interface standards will be beneficial for systems integration. To explore the impacts for vendors, a survey was developed and fielded to learn about the characteristics of products and vendor attitudes toward interface standards. The results, though not conclusive, suggest that vendors are willing to consider standards; however, needed product customization and more comprehensive systems are important factors weighing against open interface standards. Also reported are three case studies of recent technology applications in the San Francisco Bay Area in which experiences with technical system design and systems integration are described. These case studies strongly suggest that key factors such as market timing, vendor-agency communication, and “learning by doing” affect the development of interface requirements and standards for the transit industry.


2008 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 209-223 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Jain ◽  
A. Chandrasekaran ◽  
G. Elias ◽  
R. Cloutier

Author(s):  
Amy Parker ◽  
Amy Rice ◽  
Tara Cohen ◽  
Nicole Berndsen ◽  
Robert Wong ◽  
...  

We developed an in-situ interprofessional simulation program to study system factors to establish a congenital cardiac arrest activation tree and test it using human factors engineering principles. We used the Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety (SEIPS) 2.0 model to understand the structure, processes, and outcomes related to the congenital cardiac arrest activation tree (CCCAT) and discuss the Promoting Excellence and Reflective Learning in Simulation (PEARLS) for systems integration framework for our systems focused debriefing (SFD).


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document