Relation in set theory of math is flawed. It remains undetected and uncorrected even now. This 11 slide PPT point outs the errors with examples, corrects them, giving a better definition. It may be too elementary but how can math live with errors in fundamentals?
Framework for Online Software Evolution FOSE 04AUG22.pdfPutcha Narasimham
Framework for Online Software Evolution: FOSE
Abstract
Business Application Software BAS malfunctions often during early stages of development and deployment. They are inevitable and unavoidable. They are costly and time consuming to fix. There are two kinds of errors that cause BAS malfunction, (1) Errors in Business Policies, Rules, Information and Data (2) Software Errors of BAS. It is here proposed that some means of quick and safe correction and relaunching process be built into software design and operation. There are two separate proposals for (1) and (2). The second is discussed here.
ASIS (current) Process Map shows BAS running on its platform with its actors. The software development system (CI/CD Server) with BAS Developers is NOT connected to BAS or actors of BAS. The proposed Framework for Online Software Evolution FOSE is added to interconnect BAS Developer, CI/CD Server, and Platform of BAS online (while running).
Business Actor of BAS initiates Software Correction Request and online Business Authority (specially added actor of BAS) approves it for transmission to FOSE. Approved Software Correction Requests flow from BAS to FOSE and FOSE to BAS Developer. The BAS Developer then identifies the affected parts of BAS that need correction and works on the source code of BAS available in CI/CD Server. Then he or she corrects parts of BAS and tests them to generate a corrected trial version of BAS. The corrected trial version of BAS is available to the end users of BAS for evaluation of how their requests have been processed and met. The corrected and tested parts of BAS are then released to the Platform of BAS. The framework FOSE is notified of this for updating the status of approved software correction requests maintained in FOSE. Then FOSE allows launch of the new version of BAS. Making end users initiate “software correction requests”, approving them and passing them through FOSE to online BAS Developers in a closed loop, are the key factors for software evolution.
Thus, the BAS together with FOSE, becomes robust BAS continually. Here the software itself is Agile---not the software development. Incomplete software can safely be launched and run without frequent crashes. Unspecified user requirements get systemically captured from the business actors and met.
---III---
See examples and explanation in a separate word document
Normal Business Application Software BAS provides ONLY the business functionality, which is good enough if it works well. However that is never the case particularly for the new functionality offered for the first time. Invariably unforeseen business and software situations arise and the the BAS needs modifications often at design level of the business logic and or the BAS itself. All this has to be done off line. Here it is proposed that both Business Support and Software Development Support be brought ONLINE. Here the Application Software itself becomes AGILE in operation---NOT just the software development process.
This is facilitated by two radical design changes.
First, the BAS it self is restructured and designed to bring Business Authority ONLINE and set up a Business Policy and Rules Repository BPRR.
Second, an additional Framework for Online Software Evolution is provided to bring the BAS Developers and the software development system online.
See how the combination works in this and two supplementary PPTs.
Plan Anything personally or professionally. Planning is a preparation for the future with a GOAL for some one. I dentify all of them. There are two major branches: Resource Planning and Action Planning. Planning can be elaborate or simple. Select the factors for quick success of your mission. Drop what is not relevant but do not miss anything vital. Best wishes,
Machine mediated meaning for semantic interoperability pvn 120109 pdfPutcha Narasimham
Definition of meaning applicable in human and machine contexts is proposed. This points out that what is taken as meaning of an expression is an equivalent expression but NOT meaning. Meaning is the result of acting out what is implied in the expression or execution of the expression. This is valid for machines and humans interchangeably.
UseCase modeling is very diverse, often inconsistent and erroneous. This is due to imprecise and incomplete definition and specification of UML which does not have any glossary of terms and fails to formally define the terms--UseCase in particular. The very nature of UseCase is undefined and uncertain though all the versions of UML. I noticed these factors and discovered UseCase to be fundamentally a DIALOG of messages which in turn are composed of information and data in 2008. I have been uploading my analyses and proposals to SlideShare since 2010. Here is a new summary of my analyses and proposals in light of BPMN's definition of "conversation" which is essentially the same as my "dialog". The linked in discussions prompted model UseCase as an Association Class and remodel what is called UseCase Diagram as a new Class Diagram without the old misleading "UseCase Ovals" inside System under Consideration. I also recommend treating UML Actor as an External Entity playing multiple roles which is any done by default.
I welcome review and feedback. Thanks
Harmonizing use cases, dialogs or conversations, process maps, usecase diagra...Putcha Narasimham
UseCase concept is unique and profound concept to represent the needs of businesses and users from their view point. Based on UseCase and Actor identification, the System to be Developed can be specified and evolved systematically. This summary updates and integrates many proposals made earlier. It logically integrates all the concepts of the title.
How to study any publication deeply for analysis and research. The process and reporting format are presented with examples. This paves way for incremental discovery and innovation and validation / consolidation.
Framework for Online Software Evolution FOSE 04AUG22.pdfPutcha Narasimham
Framework for Online Software Evolution: FOSE
Abstract
Business Application Software BAS malfunctions often during early stages of development and deployment. They are inevitable and unavoidable. They are costly and time consuming to fix. There are two kinds of errors that cause BAS malfunction, (1) Errors in Business Policies, Rules, Information and Data (2) Software Errors of BAS. It is here proposed that some means of quick and safe correction and relaunching process be built into software design and operation. There are two separate proposals for (1) and (2). The second is discussed here.
ASIS (current) Process Map shows BAS running on its platform with its actors. The software development system (CI/CD Server) with BAS Developers is NOT connected to BAS or actors of BAS. The proposed Framework for Online Software Evolution FOSE is added to interconnect BAS Developer, CI/CD Server, and Platform of BAS online (while running).
Business Actor of BAS initiates Software Correction Request and online Business Authority (specially added actor of BAS) approves it for transmission to FOSE. Approved Software Correction Requests flow from BAS to FOSE and FOSE to BAS Developer. The BAS Developer then identifies the affected parts of BAS that need correction and works on the source code of BAS available in CI/CD Server. Then he or she corrects parts of BAS and tests them to generate a corrected trial version of BAS. The corrected trial version of BAS is available to the end users of BAS for evaluation of how their requests have been processed and met. The corrected and tested parts of BAS are then released to the Platform of BAS. The framework FOSE is notified of this for updating the status of approved software correction requests maintained in FOSE. Then FOSE allows launch of the new version of BAS. Making end users initiate “software correction requests”, approving them and passing them through FOSE to online BAS Developers in a closed loop, are the key factors for software evolution.
Thus, the BAS together with FOSE, becomes robust BAS continually. Here the software itself is Agile---not the software development. Incomplete software can safely be launched and run without frequent crashes. Unspecified user requirements get systemically captured from the business actors and met.
---III---
See examples and explanation in a separate word document
Normal Business Application Software BAS provides ONLY the business functionality, which is good enough if it works well. However that is never the case particularly for the new functionality offered for the first time. Invariably unforeseen business and software situations arise and the the BAS needs modifications often at design level of the business logic and or the BAS itself. All this has to be done off line. Here it is proposed that both Business Support and Software Development Support be brought ONLINE. Here the Application Software itself becomes AGILE in operation---NOT just the software development process.
This is facilitated by two radical design changes.
First, the BAS it self is restructured and designed to bring Business Authority ONLINE and set up a Business Policy and Rules Repository BPRR.
Second, an additional Framework for Online Software Evolution is provided to bring the BAS Developers and the software development system online.
See how the combination works in this and two supplementary PPTs.
Plan Anything personally or professionally. Planning is a preparation for the future with a GOAL for some one. I dentify all of them. There are two major branches: Resource Planning and Action Planning. Planning can be elaborate or simple. Select the factors for quick success of your mission. Drop what is not relevant but do not miss anything vital. Best wishes,
Machine mediated meaning for semantic interoperability pvn 120109 pdfPutcha Narasimham
Definition of meaning applicable in human and machine contexts is proposed. This points out that what is taken as meaning of an expression is an equivalent expression but NOT meaning. Meaning is the result of acting out what is implied in the expression or execution of the expression. This is valid for machines and humans interchangeably.
UseCase modeling is very diverse, often inconsistent and erroneous. This is due to imprecise and incomplete definition and specification of UML which does not have any glossary of terms and fails to formally define the terms--UseCase in particular. The very nature of UseCase is undefined and uncertain though all the versions of UML. I noticed these factors and discovered UseCase to be fundamentally a DIALOG of messages which in turn are composed of information and data in 2008. I have been uploading my analyses and proposals to SlideShare since 2010. Here is a new summary of my analyses and proposals in light of BPMN's definition of "conversation" which is essentially the same as my "dialog". The linked in discussions prompted model UseCase as an Association Class and remodel what is called UseCase Diagram as a new Class Diagram without the old misleading "UseCase Ovals" inside System under Consideration. I also recommend treating UML Actor as an External Entity playing multiple roles which is any done by default.
I welcome review and feedback. Thanks
Harmonizing use cases, dialogs or conversations, process maps, usecase diagra...Putcha Narasimham
UseCase concept is unique and profound concept to represent the needs of businesses and users from their view point. Based on UseCase and Actor identification, the System to be Developed can be specified and evolved systematically. This summary updates and integrates many proposals made earlier. It logically integrates all the concepts of the title.
How to study any publication deeply for analysis and research. The process and reporting format are presented with examples. This paves way for incremental discovery and innovation and validation / consolidation.
Allocation of resources to generate high value in services or designing most cost effective means for high customer satisfaction are NOT always done systematically or with quantification. But it is possible and worth doing.
Are there any generic tools to analyze and assess documents? Here are some suggestions including Procedure to Cluster Concepts & Check for their Coupling in a document.
I found it helpful. I suppose something like this or even better would be available.
Describing something new poses very serious problems. Dictionaries and encyclopedia have met this requirement fairly well but those methods and techniques are NOT within the reach of millions of us who have to "describe things or introduce things" for teaching, documenting, modeling for analysis and design etc.
Here is my proposal to do it with a simple table. Yes, it is derived from class definition and description of OOAD but it is very effective for use in general. See how it works and let's help millions of students and teachers who struggle to describe things. Here is a structure to it which solves 80% of the problem. Cheers!
Software is very special. I is grand, spectacular, regenerative and perpetual source of value---like nothing else we know.
Perhaps for this very reason it is misused and wasted. By cooperatively REUSING ALL ARTIFACTS of software, we can reap unheard of benefits repeatedly. Here is an outline of how we can do it. That is ReSAR. Let's start.
Multiple Actors DO interact with the SuC, which is why the SuC exists in the first place, but NO TWO of them can do so through a single UseCase. There can be NO Second Actor in a UseCase.
Each interaction, more appropriately the dialog, can only have two members actively involved in the dialog.
First is the SuC and the second is the associated Actor.
The nature of UseCase and its implications were well discussed in
http://www.slideshare.net/putchavn/usecase-case-is-a-dialog-not-a-process
http://www.slideshare.net/putchavn/use-casesingle-session
http://www.slideshare.net/putchavn/one-use-case-one-actor
Yet there are discussions and justifications for associating multiple actors with the same UseCase.
UseCase is a DIALOG involving only one SuC and One Actor per Session. There is NO scope for another actor to take part in that dialog. Here is an example ATM Cash withdrawal. It needs THREE separate UCs.
This is explained using Process Maps to show the separation and how to separate.
This should end the confusion and persistent misunderstanding and misrepresentation.
Combined UseCase Description, MockUp Screens & System Sequence DiagramPutcha Narasimham
There are different artifacts (documents) for Use Case Description, Mock-up Screens and System Sequence Diagram. That is because each UML diagram (or table or description, Use Case Description has no diagram) can accommodate only a few modeling elements.
Analysts often need a set of UML diagrams and descriptions to evolve and represent concepts. They have to be drawn quickly and iteratively to formulate and express the business concepts and requirements. They need to be created and edited together, not in isolation.
It is here claimed that the contents of these three UML artifacts can be combined into a single text-document with tables & without drawings.
This is a sequel to Pentagon of MEANING. Here we point out that what we generally accept as meaning of text is its most valid interpretation according to published grammar & vocabulary of the language.
Such meaning is arrived at by sharing and negotiation of the text and its interpretation / clarification etc.
The secret of reaching a common meaning is NOT long negotiation but it is: creating most unambiguous text. This is possible with the help of machine aided drafting of text.
This is the subject of full paper by the author "Machine Mediated Meaning for Semantic Interoperability" which will be uploaded shortly.
Please take a look and give your views.
Ogden and Richards published a full book "The Meaning of Meaning" in 1923. It is also a subject of a lot of research by a broad spectrum of scholars & scientists. But they have identified only 3 elements of meaning but we found FIVE. Hence, PENTAGON of Meaning moving from their TRIANGLE of Meaning.
The five elements are: Speaker S, Concept X in her mind, Text T to express X, Listener L, who creates Concept X' from T. Out of these only S, T and L are public, open for observation. The concepts X and X' are private separately to S and L and the meaning is X for S and X' for L. That is subject of this PPT. It is elaborated and discussed.
From here we need to arrive at common and open meaning of T. We have another PPT for that.
There is a full paper Machine Mediated Meaning for Semantic Interoperability, which you can find on slideshare soon.
Please leave a comment.
Concept Maps are very effective for language-free expression and communication of concepts visually. The fundamental structures, which are not all graphic, are also very elegant for encoding knowledge for machine processing.
The building blocks of knowledge (Nodes and Links) are NOT sufficiently "expressive & precise". HyperPlex fills this need. See the PPT by that name in https://www.slideshare.net/putchavn
Both the concepts are explained with examples.
Good for general use and a prerequisite for knowing what is knowledge and how to represent it. Leave a comment.
[1] A view that a UseCase (UC) is a "dialog" between the System under Consideration (SuC) and an Actor (for a specific UC) brings focus to what "messages need to be exchanged between the SuC and Actor to reach UC Goal".
[2] Agreeing on and specifying UC Goal is related to business or application. UC Goal would be the right first step of UC description.
[3] There are many "means" of generating "messages from SuC", through various internal activities within the SuC. They need not be (I would even say should not be) specified in UC Description.
[4] The concept of UseCase is profound and useful because it is a "dialog" but NOT a process. This distinction is not defined and clarified which is why, I think, the full benefits of UC modeling are not widely realized.
[5] This view of UC (as per 1, 2 & 3) clearly separates the "internal processes" of the SuC from UC. The "internal processes" can be hypothesized and evolved separately using UML Sequence Diagrams. All the business / user needs can be specified with sufficient precision and rigor through the “messages” of UC dialog. There are no external dependencies, though constraints may exist and have to be taken care of.
I have REVISED & uploaded the PPT with TWO Sections, Section 2 First.
[6] I would like to study applications and demonstrate how the "dialog" view of UseCase would simplify & clarify UseCase description for the business user as well as system developer without sacrificing precision and usefulness.
02 FEB 14
Returning part of output back to input is considered feedback but this is NOT valid in all cases. This identifies what is missing in a complete FEEDBACK model: The User or Customer of the output. The feedback must come from the User of the output based on using the output. What such user gives is TRUE feedback. Many cases in which feedback works effectively it is because the feedback is TRUE. Such cases are discussed to support this view.
Use this and let me know your cases and how you are using TRUE feedback.
BA and RE Coaching, Training, Teaching,through Quizzes, Assignments, Mini Projects. Learning by DOING with MINIMUM LECTURING
Short intense Single Module Courses....of 4 to 6 Sessions.
Most Process Models show ONLY 3 Basic out of 6 Elements
The THREE well known elements are: input, process and output. Here the PERFORMER of process or activity or task is ignored. This is a very serious lapse. The process runs because of the PERFORMER (human or machine or software agent) and must be modelled. By limiting modelling only to THREE BASIC ELEMENTS, the other vital and essential elements (Undesirable Inputs and outputs, Process Facilities and Consumables and FEEDBACK) are left out.
Furthermore, many Business Process models show “ONLY flow of control” but NOT the inputs which get processed and outputs that flow out to other processes. Such models are over simplified and remain incomplete (and so useless).
Here is a comprehensive model using all SIX elements with emphasis on PERFORMER and FEEDBACK. All the details are not given. This is just an outline.
I have revised it twice in the last few days. I have removed all the cross references to other PPTs and added PERFORMER. Hope this would be better. Have a look and leave a comment. I welcome FEEDBACK in process modelling and to my SIX element model.
It is essential to show what flows from process to process and distinguish the physical flows (People, Material, Signals and Energy) from logical flows (data and information).
The oversimplified models implicitly assume that ONLY desirable inputs flow in and desirable outputs flow out while in fact undesirable inputs and outputs come mixed with what is desired. They need to be separated out with special processes in real-world processes. Input filtering and separation and disposal of waste / byproducts are unavoidable.
All processes need process resources and consumables which are different from the "inputs". They are very crucial for proper modeling and design of processes.
FEEDBACK is another vital element of every practical and useful process but it is NOT modeled or modeled incorrectly.
These additional THREE elements are added and explained in the SIX ELEMENT Process Model proposed here. This is just an introduction to FOUR sub-modules (part of kenablersys Single Module Course of 4-6 Sessions).
See TRUE FEEDBACK Extended Abstract on SlideShare
Recommended for Business Analysis, Requirements Engineering and Software Engineering.
CONTEXT of Context of the System(s) to be DevelopedPutcha Narasimham
Context Diagram or Use Case Diagram are created directly without many principles or guidelines for the validity of them. Many implicit assumptions and informal designs come into play. There is a need for the CONTEXT of context. It is here pointed out that Explicit TO BE Process is very helpful to overcome the limitations to prepare and assure that CD or UCD is valid and reliable. Three examples are added in this revision. An 8 Process example is used to show the method. See how it helps. Let's discuss.
Relation.....too fundamental to be ill-defined but is it well defined? Is it useful? Not quite according to me. I have my questions and reasons to redefine relation radically. Here is the proposal.
These are TQM Quality Improvements Methods and Tools adapted for BA and RE. They are simple but potent if used with deep understanding and commitment.
All the tools are not discussed. End-Means Tree is excellent for planning and innovation.
I have added a PPT of 50 slides. It gives diagrams which I have not been able to add to text in this PDF.
See the PPT by the same name at www.slideshare.net/putchavn
What is normally called feedback may not be TRUE FEEDBACK. There are conditions to be applied. Only then can one realize the benefits of feedback. This understanding is necessary to design effective business processes that involve machines and humans.
This is an extended abstract for helping interaction. Feel free to email kenablersys@yahoo.com
Context
There are several commercial and open source drawing tools. Some of them are integrated into word processing and presentation tools. Some are very advanced and sophisticated drawing and picturing systems. However, none of them are as quick and convenient as sketching & writing on paper or whiteboard.
The Need
So, there is a need for a drawing tool that is fast, flexible and easy-to-use as sketching & writing and yet is capable of producing high quality diagrams.
Normally Use Case Diagrams are used but the pictorial information in it is so small that an MS Word Table is sufficient. What is more it can also provide space for "Use Case Goal" which is very important for Use Case Modeling.
Tables are quick and easy to create and edit. No need to waste time to draw and label diagrams. One can still do it if necessary after creating the Use Case TABLE. Try.
A Use Case Table can spill over into multiple pages but a diagram cannot!
UML 2.5 allows TABLES to be used for diagrams. So, there is no compulsion to create diagrams spending a lot of time.
Allocation of resources to generate high value in services or designing most cost effective means for high customer satisfaction are NOT always done systematically or with quantification. But it is possible and worth doing.
Are there any generic tools to analyze and assess documents? Here are some suggestions including Procedure to Cluster Concepts & Check for their Coupling in a document.
I found it helpful. I suppose something like this or even better would be available.
Describing something new poses very serious problems. Dictionaries and encyclopedia have met this requirement fairly well but those methods and techniques are NOT within the reach of millions of us who have to "describe things or introduce things" for teaching, documenting, modeling for analysis and design etc.
Here is my proposal to do it with a simple table. Yes, it is derived from class definition and description of OOAD but it is very effective for use in general. See how it works and let's help millions of students and teachers who struggle to describe things. Here is a structure to it which solves 80% of the problem. Cheers!
Software is very special. I is grand, spectacular, regenerative and perpetual source of value---like nothing else we know.
Perhaps for this very reason it is misused and wasted. By cooperatively REUSING ALL ARTIFACTS of software, we can reap unheard of benefits repeatedly. Here is an outline of how we can do it. That is ReSAR. Let's start.
Multiple Actors DO interact with the SuC, which is why the SuC exists in the first place, but NO TWO of them can do so through a single UseCase. There can be NO Second Actor in a UseCase.
Each interaction, more appropriately the dialog, can only have two members actively involved in the dialog.
First is the SuC and the second is the associated Actor.
The nature of UseCase and its implications were well discussed in
http://www.slideshare.net/putchavn/usecase-case-is-a-dialog-not-a-process
http://www.slideshare.net/putchavn/use-casesingle-session
http://www.slideshare.net/putchavn/one-use-case-one-actor
Yet there are discussions and justifications for associating multiple actors with the same UseCase.
UseCase is a DIALOG involving only one SuC and One Actor per Session. There is NO scope for another actor to take part in that dialog. Here is an example ATM Cash withdrawal. It needs THREE separate UCs.
This is explained using Process Maps to show the separation and how to separate.
This should end the confusion and persistent misunderstanding and misrepresentation.
Combined UseCase Description, MockUp Screens & System Sequence DiagramPutcha Narasimham
There are different artifacts (documents) for Use Case Description, Mock-up Screens and System Sequence Diagram. That is because each UML diagram (or table or description, Use Case Description has no diagram) can accommodate only a few modeling elements.
Analysts often need a set of UML diagrams and descriptions to evolve and represent concepts. They have to be drawn quickly and iteratively to formulate and express the business concepts and requirements. They need to be created and edited together, not in isolation.
It is here claimed that the contents of these three UML artifacts can be combined into a single text-document with tables & without drawings.
This is a sequel to Pentagon of MEANING. Here we point out that what we generally accept as meaning of text is its most valid interpretation according to published grammar & vocabulary of the language.
Such meaning is arrived at by sharing and negotiation of the text and its interpretation / clarification etc.
The secret of reaching a common meaning is NOT long negotiation but it is: creating most unambiguous text. This is possible with the help of machine aided drafting of text.
This is the subject of full paper by the author "Machine Mediated Meaning for Semantic Interoperability" which will be uploaded shortly.
Please take a look and give your views.
Ogden and Richards published a full book "The Meaning of Meaning" in 1923. It is also a subject of a lot of research by a broad spectrum of scholars & scientists. But they have identified only 3 elements of meaning but we found FIVE. Hence, PENTAGON of Meaning moving from their TRIANGLE of Meaning.
The five elements are: Speaker S, Concept X in her mind, Text T to express X, Listener L, who creates Concept X' from T. Out of these only S, T and L are public, open for observation. The concepts X and X' are private separately to S and L and the meaning is X for S and X' for L. That is subject of this PPT. It is elaborated and discussed.
From here we need to arrive at common and open meaning of T. We have another PPT for that.
There is a full paper Machine Mediated Meaning for Semantic Interoperability, which you can find on slideshare soon.
Please leave a comment.
Concept Maps are very effective for language-free expression and communication of concepts visually. The fundamental structures, which are not all graphic, are also very elegant for encoding knowledge for machine processing.
The building blocks of knowledge (Nodes and Links) are NOT sufficiently "expressive & precise". HyperPlex fills this need. See the PPT by that name in https://www.slideshare.net/putchavn
Both the concepts are explained with examples.
Good for general use and a prerequisite for knowing what is knowledge and how to represent it. Leave a comment.
[1] A view that a UseCase (UC) is a "dialog" between the System under Consideration (SuC) and an Actor (for a specific UC) brings focus to what "messages need to be exchanged between the SuC and Actor to reach UC Goal".
[2] Agreeing on and specifying UC Goal is related to business or application. UC Goal would be the right first step of UC description.
[3] There are many "means" of generating "messages from SuC", through various internal activities within the SuC. They need not be (I would even say should not be) specified in UC Description.
[4] The concept of UseCase is profound and useful because it is a "dialog" but NOT a process. This distinction is not defined and clarified which is why, I think, the full benefits of UC modeling are not widely realized.
[5] This view of UC (as per 1, 2 & 3) clearly separates the "internal processes" of the SuC from UC. The "internal processes" can be hypothesized and evolved separately using UML Sequence Diagrams. All the business / user needs can be specified with sufficient precision and rigor through the “messages” of UC dialog. There are no external dependencies, though constraints may exist and have to be taken care of.
I have REVISED & uploaded the PPT with TWO Sections, Section 2 First.
[6] I would like to study applications and demonstrate how the "dialog" view of UseCase would simplify & clarify UseCase description for the business user as well as system developer without sacrificing precision and usefulness.
02 FEB 14
Returning part of output back to input is considered feedback but this is NOT valid in all cases. This identifies what is missing in a complete FEEDBACK model: The User or Customer of the output. The feedback must come from the User of the output based on using the output. What such user gives is TRUE feedback. Many cases in which feedback works effectively it is because the feedback is TRUE. Such cases are discussed to support this view.
Use this and let me know your cases and how you are using TRUE feedback.
BA and RE Coaching, Training, Teaching,through Quizzes, Assignments, Mini Projects. Learning by DOING with MINIMUM LECTURING
Short intense Single Module Courses....of 4 to 6 Sessions.
Most Process Models show ONLY 3 Basic out of 6 Elements
The THREE well known elements are: input, process and output. Here the PERFORMER of process or activity or task is ignored. This is a very serious lapse. The process runs because of the PERFORMER (human or machine or software agent) and must be modelled. By limiting modelling only to THREE BASIC ELEMENTS, the other vital and essential elements (Undesirable Inputs and outputs, Process Facilities and Consumables and FEEDBACK) are left out.
Furthermore, many Business Process models show “ONLY flow of control” but NOT the inputs which get processed and outputs that flow out to other processes. Such models are over simplified and remain incomplete (and so useless).
Here is a comprehensive model using all SIX elements with emphasis on PERFORMER and FEEDBACK. All the details are not given. This is just an outline.
I have revised it twice in the last few days. I have removed all the cross references to other PPTs and added PERFORMER. Hope this would be better. Have a look and leave a comment. I welcome FEEDBACK in process modelling and to my SIX element model.
It is essential to show what flows from process to process and distinguish the physical flows (People, Material, Signals and Energy) from logical flows (data and information).
The oversimplified models implicitly assume that ONLY desirable inputs flow in and desirable outputs flow out while in fact undesirable inputs and outputs come mixed with what is desired. They need to be separated out with special processes in real-world processes. Input filtering and separation and disposal of waste / byproducts are unavoidable.
All processes need process resources and consumables which are different from the "inputs". They are very crucial for proper modeling and design of processes.
FEEDBACK is another vital element of every practical and useful process but it is NOT modeled or modeled incorrectly.
These additional THREE elements are added and explained in the SIX ELEMENT Process Model proposed here. This is just an introduction to FOUR sub-modules (part of kenablersys Single Module Course of 4-6 Sessions).
See TRUE FEEDBACK Extended Abstract on SlideShare
Recommended for Business Analysis, Requirements Engineering and Software Engineering.
CONTEXT of Context of the System(s) to be DevelopedPutcha Narasimham
Context Diagram or Use Case Diagram are created directly without many principles or guidelines for the validity of them. Many implicit assumptions and informal designs come into play. There is a need for the CONTEXT of context. It is here pointed out that Explicit TO BE Process is very helpful to overcome the limitations to prepare and assure that CD or UCD is valid and reliable. Three examples are added in this revision. An 8 Process example is used to show the method. See how it helps. Let's discuss.
Relation.....too fundamental to be ill-defined but is it well defined? Is it useful? Not quite according to me. I have my questions and reasons to redefine relation radically. Here is the proposal.
These are TQM Quality Improvements Methods and Tools adapted for BA and RE. They are simple but potent if used with deep understanding and commitment.
All the tools are not discussed. End-Means Tree is excellent for planning and innovation.
I have added a PPT of 50 slides. It gives diagrams which I have not been able to add to text in this PDF.
See the PPT by the same name at www.slideshare.net/putchavn
What is normally called feedback may not be TRUE FEEDBACK. There are conditions to be applied. Only then can one realize the benefits of feedback. This understanding is necessary to design effective business processes that involve machines and humans.
This is an extended abstract for helping interaction. Feel free to email kenablersys@yahoo.com
Context
There are several commercial and open source drawing tools. Some of them are integrated into word processing and presentation tools. Some are very advanced and sophisticated drawing and picturing systems. However, none of them are as quick and convenient as sketching & writing on paper or whiteboard.
The Need
So, there is a need for a drawing tool that is fast, flexible and easy-to-use as sketching & writing and yet is capable of producing high quality diagrams.
Normally Use Case Diagrams are used but the pictorial information in it is so small that an MS Word Table is sufficient. What is more it can also provide space for "Use Case Goal" which is very important for Use Case Modeling.
Tables are quick and easy to create and edit. No need to waste time to draw and label diagrams. One can still do it if necessary after creating the Use Case TABLE. Try.
A Use Case Table can spill over into multiple pages but a diagram cannot!
UML 2.5 allows TABLES to be used for diagrams. So, there is no compulsion to create diagrams spending a lot of time.
We all have good and bad thoughts from time to time and situation to situation. We are bombarded daily with spiraling thoughts(both negative and positive) creating all-consuming feel , making us difficult to manage with associated suffering. Good thoughts are like our Mob Signal (Positive thought) amidst noise(negative thought) in the atmosphere. Negative thoughts like noise outweigh positive thoughts. These thoughts often create unwanted confusion, trouble, stress and frustration in our mind as well as chaos in our physical world. Negative thoughts are also known as “distorted thinking”.
2024.06.01 Introducing a competency framework for languag learning materials ...Sandy Millin
http://sandymillin.wordpress.com/iateflwebinar2024
Published classroom materials form the basis of syllabuses, drive teacher professional development, and have a potentially huge influence on learners, teachers and education systems. All teachers also create their own materials, whether a few sentences on a blackboard, a highly-structured fully-realised online course, or anything in between. Despite this, the knowledge and skills needed to create effective language learning materials are rarely part of teacher training, and are mostly learnt by trial and error.
Knowledge and skills frameworks, generally called competency frameworks, for ELT teachers, trainers and managers have existed for a few years now. However, until I created one for my MA dissertation, there wasn’t one drawing together what we need to know and do to be able to effectively produce language learning materials.
This webinar will introduce you to my framework, highlighting the key competencies I identified from my research. It will also show how anybody involved in language teaching (any language, not just English!), teacher training, managing schools or developing language learning materials can benefit from using the framework.
Operation “Blue Star” is the only event in the history of Independent India where the state went into war with its own people. Even after about 40 years it is not clear if it was culmination of states anger over people of the region, a political game of power or start of dictatorial chapter in the democratic setup.
The people of Punjab felt alienated from main stream due to denial of their just demands during a long democratic struggle since independence. As it happen all over the word, it led to militant struggle with great loss of lives of military, police and civilian personnel. Killing of Indira Gandhi and massacre of innocent Sikhs in Delhi and other India cities was also associated with this movement.
The French Revolution, which began in 1789, was a period of radical social and political upheaval in France. It marked the decline of absolute monarchies, the rise of secular and democratic republics, and the eventual rise of Napoleon Bonaparte. This revolutionary period is crucial in understanding the transition from feudalism to modernity in Europe.
For more information, visit-www.vavaclasses.com
This is a presentation by Dada Robert in a Your Skill Boost masterclass organised by the Excellence Foundation for South Sudan (EFSS) on Saturday, the 25th and Sunday, the 26th of May 2024.
He discussed the concept of quality improvement, emphasizing its applicability to various aspects of life, including personal, project, and program improvements. He defined quality as doing the right thing at the right time in the right way to achieve the best possible results and discussed the concept of the "gap" between what we know and what we do, and how this gap represents the areas we need to improve. He explained the scientific approach to quality improvement, which involves systematic performance analysis, testing and learning, and implementing change ideas. He also highlighted the importance of client focus and a team approach to quality improvement.
Synthetic Fiber Construction in lab .pptxPavel ( NSTU)
Synthetic fiber production is a fascinating and complex field that blends chemistry, engineering, and environmental science. By understanding these aspects, students can gain a comprehensive view of synthetic fiber production, its impact on society and the environment, and the potential for future innovations. Synthetic fibers play a crucial role in modern society, impacting various aspects of daily life, industry, and the environment. ynthetic fibers are integral to modern life, offering a range of benefits from cost-effectiveness and versatility to innovative applications and performance characteristics. While they pose environmental challenges, ongoing research and development aim to create more sustainable and eco-friendly alternatives. Understanding the importance of synthetic fibers helps in appreciating their role in the economy, industry, and daily life, while also emphasizing the need for sustainable practices and innovation.
Read| The latest issue of The Challenger is here! We are thrilled to announce that our school paper has qualified for the NATIONAL SCHOOLS PRESS CONFERENCE (NSPC) 2024. Thank you for your unwavering support and trust. Dive into the stories that made us stand out!
2. ..asking questions is more valuable …..
In mathematics*, the art of asking questions is more
valuable than solving problems
Georg Cantor
* Well, not only in mathematics?
December 23, 2020Copyright (C) 2004-2020 Putcha V. Narasimaham
2
3. Relationship
A relationship is a connection among things
The UML User Guide, Too casual
There are many definitions but they seem to be flawed, See
https://www.slideshare.net/putchavn/relation-need-for-radical-redefinition
https://www.slideshare.net/putchavn/relation-need-for-radical-redefinition-pdf
See the definition from Wolfram Mathworld and
Criticism and redefinition of “relation” by PVN
Copyright (C) 2004-2020 Putcha V. Narasimaham
3
December 23, 2020
4. Relation Vs Relationship
While relation and relationship
refer to the connection between
two things, relation shades more
toward the way things are
connected,
while relationship refers to the
connection itself. The difference
is not spacious.
Relationship is social and
relation is technical !
Relationship is bonding and
relation is a connection !!
There are more and conflicting
explanations
In technical texts relation is
widely use (we do the same)
December 23, 2020Copyright (C) 2004-2020 Putcha V. Narasimaham
4
5. Definition of Relation--Two Flaws per PVN
A relation is any subset of a Cartesian product.
For instance, a subset of A X B , called a "binary
relation from A to B," is a collection of ordered
pairs (a, b) with first components from A and
second components from B, and, in particular, a
subset of AXA is called a "relation on A." For a
binary relation R, one often writes aRb to mean
that (a, b) is in RxR.
http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Relation.html
December 23, 2020Copyright (C) 2004-2020 Putcha V. Narasimaham
5
This is any subset of all
possible ordered pairs
but still not a definition
of what a relation is
This is a procedure of
forming a subset of all
possible ordered pairs
without any criteria for
selecting a’s and b’s for
a specific relation
6. A set of the related is NOT a Relation
Any ‘collection of
ordered pairs (a,b)’
is only a ‘set of related
elements’
but NOT relation
Copyright (C) 2004-2020 Putcha V. Narasimaham
6
December 23, 2020
7. Relation without Basis is NOT a relation
Any collection
of ordered pairs
cannot be a
relation
If there is no basis to form ordered
pairs, the relation becomes indefinite,
arbitrary & meaningless
The basis, even if it exists, cannot be
derived from a single set of ordered
pairs
The basis must be stated explicitly
Copyright (C) 2004-2020 Putcha V. Narasimaham
7
December 23, 2020
8. Proposed Correction by PVN
A relation must have
a meaningful name
with criteria for
forming the ordered
pairs of the relation
The relations “Brother & Sister” and
“Husband & Wife” are formed from
the same sets, Men and Women
Pairs alone do not reveal relation
Criteria of pairing are more crucial
for relation than pairs themselves
Copyright (C) 2004-2020 Putcha V. Narasimaham
8
December 23, 2020
9. Ill-defined relation, its flaws, and corrections
The ill-defined relation
Needs predefined sets
with existing members
to choose the
members of ordered
pairs from
Does not exist if there
is no set of ordered
pairs
Notion of relation arises by identifying sets to be
related and how to relate them
A relation is defined by a meaningful name and
criteria of forming ordered pairs from identified sets
Relation exists without actually forming ordered pairs
Relation applies to evolving sets also
Copyright (C) 2004-2020 Putcha V. Narasimaham
9
December 23, 2020
10. Non-existing members can be related
Children of the same parents
are related as “siblings”
This applies to the existing &
to-be-born children
The ill-defined relation
excludes them
The need to actually form and
enumerate all ordered pairs of a
relation, excludes the potentially-
relatable members when they
become valid members of
identified sets in the future
Copyright (C) 2004-2020 Putcha V. Narasimaham
10
December 23, 2020
11. Relation REDEFINED
A relation between a set A and Set B is a set
with a meaningful name, and
principles & criteria for forming ordered pairs from
A to B
• See the PDF and PPT on slideshare for examples and reasons
December 23, 2020Copyright (C) 2004-2020 Putcha V. Narasimaham
11
Nottheend;Makeabeginning