Systems and methods for complexity management

• US 20050004823A1
• Filed: 10/28/2003
• Published: 01/06/2005
• Est. Priority Date: 10/28/2002
• Status: Abandoned Application

• Current Assignee: George Washington University
• Original Assignee: George Washington University
• Inventors: Hnatio, John H.
• Application Number:
  US10/694,024
• Publication Number:
  US 20050004823A1
• Time in Patent Office: Days
• US Class Current: 705/7
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 10/10 Office automation; Time management

Abstract

A method and system for assisting in the prediction, detection, deterrence, prevention and mitigation of potential terrorist attacks. In one embodiment, various scenarios are designed to simulate possible terrorist attacks or other crises. These scenarios are presented to a decision maker operating, for example, under an organizational policy. The scenarios may be presented, for example, in an immersion environment in multimedia format, and the responses of the decision maker are evaluated. The results are then used, for example, to evaluate the effectiveness of the policy, or to evaluate the decision maker for training purposes. The results are also used, for example, in an analogous events library, which a decision maker refers to in an actual crisis.

Claims

1. A method for providing analysis information for a decision, the method comprising:

developing a story line;

identifying at least one critical decision point within the story line;

characterizing each of the at least one critical decision point;

developing knowledge about each of the at least one critical decision point;

identifying each of the at least one critical decision point of relevance to the decision; and

providing the knowledge corresponding to each identified critical decision point.

2. The method of claim 1, wherein developing a story line includes:

developing storyboard segments.

3. The method of claim 2, wherein the storyboard segments are developed around story line events.

4. The method of claim 2, further comprising:

validating aspects of the story line.

5. The method of claim 1, wherein the story line is developed using subject matter expertise.

6. The method of claim 1, wherein the story line is developed using historical precedent.

7. The method of claim 1, wherein the story line is developed using at least one selected from a group consisting of selecting a geographic location, scanning strategic environment, determining response resources, determining policies, and determining past incidents.

8. The method of claim 1, wherein each of the at least one critical decision point is identified using subject matter expertise.

9. The method of claim 1, wherein characterizing each of the at least one critical decision point includes:

using commercial software to map at least one potential decision path.

10. The method of claim 1, wherein characterizing each of the at least one critical decision point further includes:

for each of the at least one potential decision path, mapping potential extended order effects.

11. The method of claim 1, further comprising:

integrating the story line with computer enterprise architecture.

12. The method of claim 1, wherein the story line includes a plurality of story line segments, the method further comprising:

preparing a movie presentation that portrays at least one of the plurality of story line segments.

13. The method of claim 1, further comprising:

integrating extended order visualization maps around each of the at least one decision point.

14. The method of claim 1, wherein developing knowledge about each of the at least one critical decision point includes:

identifying at least one decision maker.

15. The method of claim 14, wherein developing knowledge about each of the at least one critical decision point includes:

identifying at least one domain expert.

16. The method of claim 15, further comprising:

assessing each of the at least one decision maker and each of the at least one domain expert.

17. A method for providing assistance for a decision, the method comprising:

developing a generic scenario analogous to the decision;

developing an automated enterprise architecture;

integrating the developed generic scenario and the developed automated enterprise architecture;

identifying at least one decision option for the decision;

prioritizing each of the at least one decision option; and

identifying at least one mitigating strategy for each of the at least one decision option.

18. The method of claim 17, wherein the generic scenario is developed based on science and expert input.

19. The method of claim 17, further comprising:

identifying an extended order effect for each of the at least one decision option.

20. The method of claim 17, further comprising:

creating an analogous event library based on the identified at least one decision option and the identified at least one mitigating strategy.

21. A system for providing assistance for a decision, the system comprising:

means for developing a generic scenario analogous to the decision;

means for developing an automated enterprise architecture;

means for integrating the developed generic scenario and the developed automated enterprise architecture;

means for identifying at least one decision option for the decision;

means for prioritizing each of the at least one decision option; and

means for identifying at least one mitigating strategy for each of the at least one decision option.

22. A system for providing assistance for a decision, the system comprising:

a processor; and

a repository accessible by the processor;

wherein a generic scenario analogous to the decision is developed;

wherein an automated enterprise architecture is developed via the processor;

wherein the developed generic scenario and the developed automated enterprise architecture is integrated;

wherein at least one decision option for the decision is identified;

wherein each of the at least one decision option is prioritized; and

wherein at least one mitigating strategy for each of the at least one decision option is identified.

23. A method for validating an epistemological logic block, the method comprising:

identifying at least one epistemology and at least one scientific theory;

determining a degree of applicability of a plurality of cognitive frames for each of the at least one epistemology and each of the at least one scientific theory using a bipolar instrument; and

producing a output for the plurality of cognitive frames compared to the one epistemology and the at least one scientific theory.

24. The method of claim 23, wherein the bipolar instrument is a Lichert scale.

25. The method of claim 23, wherein the output comprises a chart.