Dataset Information

Enhancing semantic belief function to handle decision conflicts in SoS using k-means clustering.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The endeavouring to offer complex special functions from individual systems gave rise to what is known as the System of Systems (SoS). SoS co-integrating systems together while allowing for absorbing more systems in the future. SoS as an integrated system simplifies operations, reduces costs, and ensures efficiency. However, conflict may result while co-integrating systems, violating the main benefits of SoS. This paper is concerned with enhancing the time required to detect and solve such conflicts.

Methods

We adopted the k-means clustering technique to enhance the detection and solving of conflict resulting while co-integrating new systems into an existing SoS. Instead of dealing with SoS as a single entity, we partition it into clusters. Each cluster contains nearby systems according to pre-specified criteria. We can consider each cluster a Sub SoS (S-SoS). By doing so, the conflict that may arise while co-integrating new systems can be detected and solved in a shorter time. We propose the Smart Semantic Belief Function Clustered System of Systems (SSBFCSoS), which is an enhancement of the Ontology Belief Function System of Systems (OBFSoS).

Results

The proposed method proved the ability to rapidly detect and resolve conflicts. It showed the ability to accommodate more systems as well, therefore achieving the objectives of SoS. In order to test the applicability of the SSBFCSoS and compare its performance with other approaches, two datasets were employed. They are (Glest & StarCraft Brood War). With each dataset, 15 test cases were examined. We achieved, on average, 89% in solving the conflict compared to 77% for other approaches. Moreover, it showed an acceleration of up to proportionality over previous approaches for about 16% in solving conflicts as well. Besides, it reduced the frequency of the same conflicts by approximately 23% better than the other method, not only in the same cluster but even while combining different clusters.

SUBMITTER: Elsayed EK

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8049125 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:(1) Background: Uncertainty is typical for a pandemic or similar healthcare crisis. This affects patients with resulting decisional conflicts and disturbed shared decision making during their treatment occurring to a very different extent. Sociodemographic factors and the individual perception of pandemic-related problems likely determine this decisional dilemma for patients and can characterize vulnerable groups with special susceptibility for decisional problems and related consequences. (2) Methods: Cross-sectional data from the OnCoVID questionnaire study were used involving 540 patients from 11 participating institutions covering all major regions in Germany. Participants were actively involved in clinical treatment in oncology or psychiatry during the COVID-19 pandemic. Questionnaires covered five decision dimensions (conflicts and uncertainty, resources, risk perception, perception of consequences for clinical processes, perception of consequences for patients) and very basic demographic data (age, gender, stage of treatment and educational background). Decision uncertainties and distress were operationalized using equidistant five-point scales. Data analysis was performed using descriptive and various multivariate approaches. (3) Results: A total of 11.5% of all patients described intensive uncertainty in their clinical decisions that was significantly correlated with anxiety, depression, loneliness and stress. Younger and female patients and those of higher educational status and treatment stage had the highest values for these stressors (p < 0.001). Only 15.3% of the patients (14.9% oncology, 16.2% psychiatry; p = 0.021) considered the additional risk of COVID-19 infections as very important for their disease-related decisions. Regression analysis identified determinants for patients at risk of a decisional dilemma, including information availability, educational level, age group and requirement of treatment decision making. (4) Conclusions: In patients, the COVID-19 pandemic induced specific decisional uncertainty and distress accompanied by intensified stress and psychological disturbances. Determinants of specific vulnerability were related to female sex, younger age, education level, disease stages and perception of pandemic-related treatment modifications, whereas availability of sufficient pandemic-related information prevented these problems. The most important decisional criteria for patients under these conditions were expected side effects/complications and treatment responses.