scholarly journals Lessons from a large‐scale systems dynamics modeling project: the example of the biomass scenario model

2019 ◽  
Vol 35 (1) ◽  
pp. 55-69 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steve Peterson ◽  
Brian Bush ◽  
Daniel Inman ◽  
Emily Newes ◽  
Amy Schwab ◽  
...  
Author(s):  
Donald R. Drew ◽  
Antonio A. Trani ◽  
Lev A. Malakhoff

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. eaav6019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Abouzar Kaboudian ◽  
Elizabeth M. Cherry ◽  
Flavio H. Fenton

Cardiac dynamics modeling has been useful for studying and treating arrhythmias. However, it is a multiscale problem requiring the solution of billions of differential equations describing the complex electrophysiology of interconnected cells. Therefore, large-scale cardiac modeling has been limited to groups with access to supercomputers and clusters. Many areas of computational science face similar problems where computational costs are too high for personal computers so that supercomputers or clusters currently are necessary. Here, we introduce a new approach that makes high-performance simulation of cardiac dynamics and other large-scale systems like fluid flow and crystal growth accessible to virtually anyone with a modest computer. For cardiac dynamics, this approach will allow not only scientists and students but also physicians to use physiologically accurate modeling and simulation tools that are interactive in real time, thereby making diagnostics, research, and education available to a broader audience and pushing the boundaries of cardiac science.


Author(s):  
Richard A. Burgess ◽  
Mario G. Beruvides

In their paper “Combining Systems Dynamics and Ethics: Towards More Science?” Erik Pruyt and Jan Kwakkel argue that ethics ought to play a larger role in systems dynamics and vice versa (2007). Including ethics, they contend, will add sensitivity to current systems models as well as provide guidance on how to achieve best outcomes; with respect to both efficiency and flourishing (Pruyt & Kwakkel, 2007). At first blush, such a cross pollination promises to add much needed depth of analysis to systems modeling and a higher degree of precision in ethical analyses. Not surprisingly, however, achieving such outcomes is more complex than it initially appears. Indeed, the quest for additional precision in ethical analysis is not a new one to philosophers and ethicists. The problem remains, in many ways, intractable. In Part I of this paper, the authors expand on Pruyt and Kwakkel’s thesis by examining specific insights and tools that can and should be incorporated into systems dynamics modeling. Emphasis will be placed on the mechanics of this inclusion and the resultant implications. Part II, then, focuses on how systems dynamics tools like causal loop modeling and behavior-over-time graphs can be incorporated into ethical analyses in a non-arbitrary manner. Finally, in Part III of the paper, the authors briefly discuss the ramifications of Parts I and II for engineering education; both among students and practicing engineers. The authors argue that both directions of the cross pollination have merit (especially the inclusion of ethical considerations in systems dynamics modeling) and ought to be developed further.


2002 ◽  
Vol 01 (02) ◽  
pp. 269-292 ◽  
Author(s):  
HUY V. VO ◽  
BONGSUG CHAE ◽  
DAVID L. OLSON

Many societal decisions involve complexity and conflicting objectives. Preferences in such environments can be expected to change as situations evolve. In this paper, we propose a procedure that incorporates Multiple Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) into system dynamics modeling to handle dynamic multiple criteria situations, which we name dynamic MCDM. A case of urban infrastructure is presented to illustrate the procedure. Dynamic MCDM can handle different lags in economic, social, economic and technical effects of large scale systems. Thus, it may help decision makers avoid selecting alternatives apparently effective in the short term, but detrimental in the long term.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document