A Problem Model for
Decision Support Systems
Mark A. Cameron
November 8, 2000
Declaration
I declare that this thesis contains my own original research conducted during this course. This work has not been submitted in any form for any degree at another university. Information derived from published and unpublished work has been referenced and acknowledged in the body of the text and listed in the bibliography.
Work describing a problem model and linking it with a real-world problem has already appeared in a refereed conference paper co-authored with Dr Abel (Cameron and Abel 1996). The problem model is my own work, as well as application of this problem model to the Tasmanian Regional Forest Agreement.
The Integration Workbench software reported in this thesis was developed and implemented jointly by myself and Mr Colin Reed from Tasmanian Parks and Wildlife Service. In particular, Mr Colin Reed contributed the design and implementation of the forest community scoreboard. Dr Abel contributed the atomic planning unit concept. The problem model design and implementation is my own work.
Mark A. Cameron
November 8, 2000
iii
Acknowledgements
This research has been made possible through the kind and generous support of a number of individuals and organisations.
I would like to acknowledge the role of CSIRO Mathematics and Information Sciences in providing both a scholarship and extended periods of leave with which I embarked on this wondrous and lengthy journey.
Dr Dave Abel, in particular, has guided me through difficult times during the course of this investigation. More significantly, Dave has always imparted advice and wisdom in a nurturing manner. Dave’s supervision has strengthened my confidence and professional abilities. This research owes much to Dave’s patience, thought provoking questioning and insights on the writing process.
I would like to thank Dr Dave Peters and Mr Colin Reed from the Tasmanian Parks and Wildlife Service, and the Tasmanian Department of Environment and Land Management for providing me with an opportunity to apply and develop my research in the context of a complex real-world problem. The six months I spent in Hobart will be fondly remembered.
Dr Kerry L. Taylor has provided editorial comments and presentation insights on innumerable drafts of this thesis.
Dr Jeffrey X. Yu, my ANU supervisor and Ms Mandy Metcalf for keeping me out of trouble with the processes and details of my candidature.
I thank Dr John L. Smith for guiding me into the path of opportunity in developing the UML model of an evolutionary support system architecture.
Abstract
Contents
TABLE OF FIGURES...IX
LIST OF TABLES...XII
CHAPTER ONE ... 13
1. INTRODUCTION... 13
1.1 THESIS STRUCTURE... 15
CHAPTER TWO ... 19
2. ILL-DEFINED PROBLEMS... 19
2.1 PROBLEM CLASSIFICATION... 19
2.1.1 A Problem Solving Perspective ... 20
2.1.2 A Policy and Planning Perspective ... 21
2.2 KEY ASPECTS OF ILL-DEFINED PROBLEMS... 23
2.3 THE REGIONAL FORESTS AGREEMENT... 24
2.3.1 Many Stakeholders, Many Perspectives, Different Value Systems... 25
2.3.2 Policy Process ... 26
2.3.3 Extensive Interrelationships... 27
2.3.4 No Optimal Solution ... 28
2.3.5 No Clear Boundary ... 28
2.3.6 Inability to Specify Problem at Outset... 29
2.4 SUMMARY... 29
CHAPTER THREE ... 31
3. SUPPORT FOR DECISION-MAKING AND PROBLEM SOLVING... 31
3.1 ABOVE THE HUMAN-COMPUTER BOUNDARY... 33
3.1.1 Decision-Making ... 34
3.1.2 Problem Solving ... 38
3.1.3 Summary Above the Boundary... 40
3.2 BELOW THE HUMAN-COMPUTER BOUNDARY... 41
3.2.1 System Frameworks... 41
3.2.2 Model Management ... 45
3.2.3 Spatial Information System Model Management ... 46
3.2.4 Problem Formulation Systems... 48
3.2.5 Summary Below the boundary... 49
3.3 ON THE HUMAN-COMPUTER BOUNDARY... 50
3.3.1 Summary On the Boundary ... 52
3.4 CONCLUSION... 52
CHAPTER FOUR... 55
4. 6-COMPONENT PROBLEM DEFINITION MODEL... 55
4.2 PROBLEM DEFINITION REQUIREMENTS MODEL... 59
4.2.1 Actors... 59
4.2.2 Problems and Problem Solving... 61
4.2.3 Decisions and Decision-Making... 62
4.2.4 Problem Definition ... 63
4.2.5 Preliminary Model of Problem Definition... 63
4.3 6-COMPONENT MODEL... 64
4.3.1 Informal Statement of the Model... 65
4.4 AN INFORMAL EXAMPLE... 68
4.5 SUMMARY... 71
CHAPTER FIVE ... 73
5. EVOLUTIONARY DECISION SUPPORT... 73
5.1 EVOLUTIONARY SUPPORT SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS... 75
5.1.1 Actors... 76
5.1.2 Preliminary Use Case Models ... 78
5.1.3 Evolutionary Support System Use Case Model... 81
5.1.4 Summary... 84
5.2 REFINE REQUIREMENTS... 84
5.2.1 Prioritising Use Cases... 84
5.2.2 Expanded Use Case Model ... 85
5.2.3 A Summary Of The Expanded Use Case Model ... 89
5.3 REQUIREMENTS ANALYSIS... 90
5.3.1 Analysis Framework ... 91
5.3.2 Representation Domain... 93
5.3.3 Problem Definition ... 103
5.3.4 Solution Design and Development ... 118
5.3.5 Decision Methodology Support ... 121
5.3.6 Authorisation ... 123
5.3.7 Implementation support ... 124
5.3.8 Problem Recognition ... 125
5.4 USING THE 6-COMPONENT PROBLEM DEFINITION MODEL... 125
5.4.1 Problem Representation... 126
5.4.2 Problem Definition ... 127
5.4.3 Solution Design and Development ... 128
5.4.4 Decision Methodology Support ... 129
5.4.5 Authorisation ... 129
5.4.6 Implementation Support ... 130
5.4.7 Problem Recognition ... 130
5.5 6-COMPONENT PROBLEM DEFINITION MODEL... 130
5.5.1 System Conceptual Model ... 131
5.5.2 System Sequence Diagram ... 132
5.5.3 System Architecture... 140
5.6 SUMMARY... 141
CHAPTER SIX ... 143
vii
6.1 THE PROBLEM... 143
6.1.1 Environmental Policy Framework ... 144
6.1.2 Co-operative Policy Formulation... 145
6.1.3 National Forest Policy Statement, CRA and RFA... 146
6.1.4 Tasmanian Context ... 146
6.2 A SUMMARY OF THE PROBLEM... 147
6.3 THE RFA PROBLEM IN 6-COMPONENT MODEL TERMS... 148
6.3.1 Current ... 148
6.3.2 Target ... 155
6.3.3 Gap... 159
6.3.4 Actions ... 160
6.3.5 Outcome... 161
6.3.6 Evaluation ... 162
6.4 CONCLUSION... 163
CHAPTER SEVEN... 165
7. USING THE 6-COMPONENT PROBLEM MODEL DEFINITION... 165
7.1 IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES... 165
7.2 ARCHITECTURE OVERVIEW... 166
7.3 MAPBASE MODULE... 168
7.4 DATABASE MODULE... 170
7.5 MODELBASE MODULE... 171
7.6 6-COMPONENT PROBLEM DEFINITION MODULE... 172
7.7 IWB CURRENT... 173
7.7.1 Scenario Management Sub-system ... 173
7.8 IWB ACTIONS... 175
7.9 IWB TARGET... 177
7.10 IWB GAP... 178
7.11 IWB OUTCOME... 179
7.12 IWB EVALUATION... 179
7.13 CONCLUSION... 183
CHAPTER EIGHT... 185
8. CONTRIBUTION AND CONCLUSION... 185
8.1 OBJECTIVES... 185
8.2 CONTRIBUTION... 186
8.2.1 Current Research... 188
8.2.2 Opportunities for Further Research ... 189
8.3 CONCLUSION... 192
BIBLIOGRAPHY ... 193
9. BIBLIOGRAPHY... 193
APPENDIX A ... 199
10. SUPPORTING TABLES... 199
11. EVOLUTIONARY SUPPORT SYSTEM UML MODEL... 203
11.1 USE CASE MODEL... 203
11.1.1 Identify... 205
11.1.2 Develop... 223
11.1.3 Select... 228
11.1.4 Authorise... 230
11.1.5 Implement Solution... 230
11.2 COLLABORATION DIAGRAMS... 232
11.3 CONCEPTUAL MODEL... 232
11.4 USE CASE ANALYSIS TEMPLATE... 243
11.4.1 Characteristic Information ... 243
11.4.2 Main Success Scenario ... 243
11.4.3 Scenario Extensions... 243
11.4.4 Scenario Variations... 244
11.4.5 Related Information ... 244
11.4.6 Open Issues ... 244
APPENDIX C... 245
12. UML TUTORIAL... 245
12.1 UNIFIED SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS... 245
ix
TABLE OF FIGURES
FIGURE 3-1 HUMAN/COMPUTER DECISION-MAKING AND PROBLEM SOLVING... 32
FIGURE 3-2 THE SIMON (1977) DECISION-MAKING PROCESS MODEL... 36
FIGURE 3-3 THE MINTZBERG, RAISINGHANI AND THEORET (1976) DECISION-MAKING PROCESS MODEL... 37
FIGURE 3-4 THE VAN GUNDY (1988) CREATIVE PROBLEM SOLVING MODEL... 39
FIGURE 3-5 BONCZEK, HOLSAPPLE AND WHINSTON (1981) FRAMEWORK... 43
FIGURE 3-6 CONCEPTS OF MODEL... 45
FIGURE 3-7 DOS-SANTOS AND HOLSAPPLE (1989) FRAMEWORK... 51
FIGURE 4-1 THE ENVIRONMENT AND PHYSICAL SYSTEM AS ACTORS... 60
FIGURE 4-2 PROBLEM STAKEHOLDER AND RELATED ACTORS... 61
FIGURE 4-3 A PRELIMINARY MODEL OF ENVIRONMENT, PROBLEM STAKEHOLDER AND PROBLEM DEFINITION... 64
FIGURE 4-4 6-COMPONENT PROBLEM DEFINITION MODEL... 65
FIGURE 5-1 THE ENVIRONMENT AND PHYSICAL SYSTEM AS ACTORS... 76
FIGURE 5-2 PROBLEM STAKEHOLDER AND RELATED ACTORS... 77
FIGURE 5-3 A USE CASE DIAGRAM OF THE SIMON (1977) MODEL... 79
FIGURE 5-4 A USE CASE DIAGRAM OF THE VAN GUNDY (1988) MODEL... 79
FIGURE 5-5 A USE CASE DIAGRAM OF THE MINTZBERG, RAISINGHANI AND THEORET (1976) MODEL... 81
FIGURE 5-6 A USE CASE DIAGRAM OF EVOLUTIONARY SUPPORT SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS82 FIGURE 5-7 DETERMINE CAUSE-EFFECT RELATIONSHIPS EXPANDED USE CASE... 86
FIGURE 5-8 DEFINE A PROBLEM EXPANDED USE CASE... 87
FIGURE 5-9 ESTABLISH WHAT IS EXPANDED USE CASE... 88
FIGURE 5-10 ESTABLISH WHAT MIGHT BE EXPANDED USE CASE... 88
FIGURE 5-11 ESTABLISH PERCEIVED TENSION EXPANDED USE CASE... 89
FIGURE 5-12 EXPANDED USE CASE MODEL... 90
FIGURE 5-13 ANALYSIS PACKAGES... 92
FIGURE 5-14 THE REPRESENTATION SPECIFICATION ANALYSIS PACKAGE... 94
FIGURE 5-15 CAUSE-EFFECT CONCEPTUAL MODEL... 96
FIGURE 5-16 REPRESENTATION DOMAIN CONCEPTUAL MODEL... 97
FIGURE 5-17 EXPLORE EXISTING CAUSE-EFFECT RELATIONSHIPS COLLABORATION DIAGRAM... 98
FIGURE 5-18 PROPOSE NEW CAUSE-EFFECT HYPOTHESIS COLLABORATION DIAGRAM.. 99
FIGURE 5-19 REPRESENT CAUSE-EFFECT RELATIONSHIP COLLABORATION DIAGRAM. 100 FIGURE 5-20 RESOLVE CAUSE-EFFECT HYPOTHESIS COLLABORATION DIAGRAM... 101
FIGURE 5-21 CONVERT CAUSE-EFFECT PROPOSAL TO CAUSE-EFFECT MODEL... 102
FIGURE 5-22 THE PROBLEM SPECIFICATION ANALYSIS PACKAGE... 103
FIGURE 5-23 THE 6-COMPONENT PROBLEM DEFINITION MODEL CLASSIFICATION FRAMEWORK... 104
FIGURE 5-24 6-COMPONENT PROBLEM DEFINITION CONCEPTUAL MODEL... 107
FIGURE 5-25 PROBLEM DEFINITION CONCEPTUAL MODEL... 108
FIGURE 5-26 CONSTRUCT A PROBLEM DEFINITION COLLABORATION DIAGRAM... 109
FIGURE 5-28 PROPOSE NEW CAUSE-EFFECT HYPOTHESIS FOR PROBLEM DEFINITION
COLLABORATION DIAGRAM... 111
FIGURE 5-29 IDENTIFY TARGET VARIABLES FROM PROBLEM VARIABLES COLLABORATION DIAGRAM... 112
FIGURE 5-30 UPDATE TARGETS OR CONSTRAINTS FOR TARGET VARIABLES COLLABORATION DIAGRAM... 113
FIGURE 5-31 SPECIFY GAP FUNCTIONS FOR PROBLEM VARIABLES COLLABORATION DIAGRAM... 114
FIGURE 5-32 IDENTIFY EVALUATION VARIABLES FROM TARGET VARIABLES COLLABORATION DIAGRAM... 115
FIGURE 5-33 SPECIFY RANKING FUNCTION COLLABORATION DIAGRAM... 116
FIGURE 5-34 CONSTRUCT A SCENARIO COLLABORATION DIAGRAM... 117
FIGURE 5-35 SOLUTION DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT ANALYSIS PACKAGE... 118
FIGURE 5-36 CONSTRUCT AN ACTION PLAN COLLABORATION DIAGRAM... 119
FIGURE 5-37 GENERATE SOLUTION OUTCOME COLLABORATION DIAGRAM... 120
FIGURE 5-38 DECISION METHODOLOGY SUPPORT ANALYSIS PACKAGE... 121
FIGURE 5-39 SCREEN A SCENARIO ACTION OUTCOME COLLABORATION DIAGRAM... 122
FIGURE 5-40 RANK FEASIBLE SCENARIO ACTION OUTCOME COLLABORATION DIAGRAM123 FIGURE 5-41 AUTHORISATION ANALYSIS PACKAGE... 124
FIGURE 5-42 IMPLEMENTATION SUPPORT ANALYSIS PACKAGE... 124
FIGURE 5-43 PROBLEM RECOGNITION ANALYSIS PACKAGE... 125
FIGURE 5-44 SYSTEM BOUNDARY... 131
FIGURE 5-45 ACTOR AND SYSTEM COLLABORATION DIAGRAM... 133
FIGURE 5-46 CONSTRUCTING THE PROBLEM REPRESENTATION... 134
FIGURE 5-47 PROBLEM DEFINITION... 135
FIGURE 5-48 PROBLEM SOLVING... 139
FIGURE 5-49 EVOLUTIONARY SUPPORT SYSTEM INTERNAL ARCHITECTURE... 141
FIGURE 7-1 IWB ARCHITECTURE OVERVIEW... 167
FIGURE 7-2 LAYER LIBRARY BROWSING TOOL... 169
FIGURE 7-3 6-COMPONENT MODULE LOGICAL ORGANISATION DIAGRAM... 172
FIGURE 7-4 SCENARIO MANAGEMENT ACTIONS... 174
FIGURE 7-5 SCENARIO AND CHANGE LOG STRUCTURE (PARTIAL) ... 174
FIGURE 7-6 SCENARIO MANAGEMENT WITH STATE TRANSITIONS... 176
FIGURE 7-7 THE VEGETATION COMMUNITY SCOREBOARD... 178
FIGURE 7-8 OUTCOME... 179
FIGURE 7-9 SCORE PLOT OF OPTION 68 ... 181
FIGURE 7-10 SCORE PLOT OF OPTION 84 ... 182
FIGURE 7-11 SOCIAL CONSEQUENCES OPTION 84 ... 183
FIGURE 7-12 SOCIAL CONSEQUENCES OPTION 68 ... 183
FIGURE 11-1 HIGH-LEVEL AND EXPANDED USE CASE DIAGRAM... 205
FIGURE 11-2 EXPANDED USE CASES FOR RECOGNISE A PROBLEM... 207
FIGURE 11-3 EXPANDED USE CASES FOR DETERMINE CAUSE-EFFECT RELATIONSHIPS211 FIGURE 11-4 DEFINE A PROBLEM EXPANSION... 215
FIGURE 11-5 EXPANDED USE CASES FOR ESTABLISH WHAT IS... 217
FIGURE 11-6 EXPANDED USE CASES FOR ESTABLISH WHAT MIGHT BE... 219
FIGURE 11-7 EXPANDED USE CASES FOR ESTABLISH PERCEIVED TENSION... 222
xi
FIGURE 11-9 PACKAGED ENTITY CONCEPTUAL MODEL... 233
FIGURE 11-10 ACTION PACKAGE CONCEPTUAL MODEL... 234
FIGURE 11-11 CURRENT PACKAGE CONCEPTUAL MODEL... 235
FIGURE 11-12 CURRENT PACKAGE CONTEXTUAL VIEW... 235
FIGURE 11-13 TARGET PACKAGE CONCEPTUAL MODEL... 236
FIGURE 11-14 EVALUATION PACKAGE CONCEPTUAL MODEL... 236
FIGURE 11-15 GAP PACKAGE CONCEPTUAL MODEL... 237
FIGURE 11-16 OUTCOME PACKAGE CONCEPTUAL MODEL... 238
FIGURE 11-17 STATE PACKAGES CONTEXTUAL VIEW... 238
FIGURE 11-18 REPRESENTATION SPECIFICATION ENTITY CONCEPTUAL MODEL... 239
FIGURE 11-19 REPRESENTATION DOMAIN CONCEPTUAL MODEL... 240
FIGURE 11-20 6-COMPONENT ENTITY CONCEPTUAL MODEL... 241
FIGURE 11-21 6-COMPONENT PROBLEM DEFINITION MODEL CONTEXTUAL ENTITY VIEW OF THE PROBLEMSPECIFICATION PACKAGE... 242
FIGURE 11-22 PROBLEM SPECIFICATION PACKAGE CONCEPTUAL MODEL... 242
FIGURE 12-1 UNIFIED PROCESS MODELS USED IN THIS PRESENTATION... 246
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE 5-1 USE CASE PRIORITIES... 85
TABLE 6-1 INDICATIVE RESERVATION PROPORTIONS ESTIMATED FROM EXTENT OF DEPLETION... 156
TABLE 7-1 OPTION 68 SCENARIOS... 175
TABLE 10-1 VEGETATION TYPES... 199
TABLE 10-2 TENURE TYPES... 200
TABLE 10-3 WILDERNESS TYPES... 200
TABLE 10-4 OLD GROWTH TYPES... 200
TABLE 10-5 RESERVATION TARGETS... 200
TABLE 10-6 CONTRACTORS AFFECTED OPTION 68... 202
TABLE 10-7 CONTRACTORS AFFECTED OPTION 84... 202
