of human systems by the method of equations of state
(Both Gaussian and Paretian paradigms adequately represent the behavior of human systems in various situations)
FEATURED PAPER
By Pavel Barseghyan
Texas and Armenia
Abstract
From the point of view of mathematical modeling, the qualitative adequacy and quantitative accuracy of the methodology for describing human activities are directly based on the qualitative adequacy and quantitative accuracy of the deterministic patterns of their behavior and the probability distributions of the parameters contained in them.
If we consider the output parameters representing human activity from this point of view, such as, say, the duration of activities performed by people, then it should be said that there are many uncertainties in the choice of the probability distributions of these quantities, which directly affect the quality of simulations.
In particular, this issue is of particular interest from the point of view of the transition from the Gaussian paradigm to the Paretian paradigm.
This work is devoted to the analytical substantiation of the probability distributions of the output parameters of human activity using the method of equations of state of human systems.
Introduction
To ensure progress in various spheres of people’s lives, methods of planning their activities, forecasting the future and assessing various associated risks are needed.
In each specific case of any human activity, it is assumed that certain results will be obtained in such conditions when the necessary resources are influenced by random factors, and people, acting in random environments, in turn, have random characteristics.
In such conditions, the organization of human activity and the analysis of its feasibility involves the use of expert systems, which should be based on the basic quantitative laws of human life, behavior and activity of a deterministic nature and the probability distributions of system parameters included in these laws.
Based on this analysis, decisions are made about what needs to be done at the moment, and the future is predicted based on tactical and far-reaching strategic considerations.
It is also clear that tactical goals, decisions and corresponding actions naturally follow from general strategic considerations.
From the point of view of mathematical modeling, the qualitative adequacy and quantitative accuracy of the description of human activity are directly based on the qualitative adequacy and quantitative accuracy of the above-mentioned deterministic relationships and probability distributions of system level parameters of human activity.
If we consider the input and output parameters of the activity of human systems from this point of view, then it should be noted that at present there are many fundamental and practical uncertainties in the choice and substantiation of the probability distributions of these quantities.
First of all, these uncertainties are associated with the current transition from the Gaussian paradigm of the analysis of human activity to the Paretian paradigm, the choice of probability distributions of the parameters of human activity for this analysis and the manipulations performed on them.
Despite the fact that many important studies have been carried out in this direction [1,2,3,4], there are still fundamental and practical difficulties in this area.
Moreover, there are fundamental difficulties both in the field of representing the deterministic laws of human activity, and in the field of choosing the probability distributions of system parameters that characterize their activities, which will be presented below.
As for the difficulties of an applied nature in this direction, they inherently have both objective and subjective features, of which the following three can be distinguished:
- The limited capabilities of methodologies and the underlying mathematical models, because of which human intuition plays an important role in them, which, in turn, carries the risk of people making arbitrary decisions.
- These methods do not have a full scientific justification, they mainly have a business focus, which can become a possible reason for the loss of a business in the future.
- Subjectively, the Gaussian paradigm is more easily understood by people, on the other hand, understanding the Paretian paradigm requires deeper scientific training.
Despite these difficulties, there is a gradual transition from the Gaussian paradigm to the Pareto paradigm, which is dictated by the limited possibilities of the Gaussian approach and is carried out under the pressure of business practice.
However, both of these approaches and the models based on them take place in real life as adequate reflections of the life, behavior and activities of people in various situations.
More…
To read entire paper, click here
How to cite this paper: Barseghyan, P. (2021). Analysis of probabilistic distributions of the output parameters of human systems by the method of equations of state (Both Gaussian and Paretian paradigms adequately represent the behavior of human systems in various situations); PM World Journal, Vol. X, Issue II, February. Available online at https://pmworldlibrary.net/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/pmwj102-Feb2021-Barseghyan-analysis-of-probabilistic-distributions-of-ouput-parameters-of-human-systems.pdf
About the Author
Pavel Barseghyan, PhD
Yerevan, Armenia
Plano, Texas, USA
Dr. Pavel Barseghyan is a consultant in the field of quantitative project management, project data mining and organizational science. Has over 45 years’ experience in academia, the electronics industry, the EDA industry and Project Management Research and tools development. During the period of 1999-2010 he was the Vice President of Research for Numetrics Management Systems. Prior to joining Numetrics, Dr. Barseghyan worked as an R&D manager at Infinite Technology Corp. in Texas. He was also a founder and the president of an EDA start-up company, DAN Technologies, Ltd. that focused on high-level chip design planning and RTL structural floor planning technologies. Before joining ITC, Dr. Barseghyan was head of the Electronic Design and CAD department at the State Engineering University of Armenia, focusing on development of the Theory of Massively Interconnected Systems and its applications to electronic design. During the period of 1975-1990, he was also a member of the University Educational Policy Commission for Electronic Design and CAD Direction in the Higher Education Ministry of the former USSR. Earlier in his career he was a senior researcher in Yerevan Research and Development Institute of Mathematical Machines (Armenia). He is an author of nine monographs and textbooks and more than 100 scientific articles in the area of quantitative project management, mathematical theory of human work, electronic design and EDA methodologies, and tools development. More than 10 Ph.D. degrees have been awarded under his supervision. Dr. Barseghyan holds an MS in Electrical Engineering (1967) and Ph.D. (1972) and Doctor of Technical Sciences (1990) in Computer Engineering from Yerevan Polytechnic Institute (Armenia).
Pavel’s publications can be found here: http://www.scribd.com/pbarseghyan and here: http://pavelbarseghyan.wordpress.com/. Pavel can be contacted at terbpl@gmail.com
To view other works by Dr. Barseghyan that have been published in the PM World Journal, visit his author showcase in the PM World Library at https://pmworldlibrary.net/authors/dr-pavel-barseghyan/
