Dealing with Dynamic Systems:
SINUS_________ |
Blockl__________________ | ||||
Week............ |
1 I |
_2__ |
ΓΓT |
4 I |
5____ |
State: | |||||
Gaseln..... |
16∞ |
1700 |
1800 |
1900 |
2000 |
Schmorken.. |
900 |
957 |
1013 |
1055 |
1096 |
Sisen...... |
300 |
293 |
286 |
281 |
306 |
Intervention: | |||||
OIschen.... |
10 |
10 |
10 |
10 |
_? |
Mukem..... |
12 |
11 |
13 |
28 |
? |
Raskeln.... |
-1 |
-1 |
-5 |
-5 |
? |
Press "space bar" Io select an intervention, choose a value
and then press "return”
29
Figure 2. Screen display of DYNAMIS when presenting system SINUS after 4 weeks (=
trials) on the first block. The upper part shows the state of the three endogenous variables, the
lower part shows past interventions.
Each block consists of a certain number of trials (referred to as “weeks”
in the cover story) which all depend on each other. From one block to another
the system is reset to the same starting values. From time to time we measure
the knowledge that has been acquired so far by asking the subjects for a
graphical representation of their structural knowledge (“causal diagrams”). In
the second phase, called “knowledge application phase," the subject has to
reach a defined system state and try to maintain the variable values as close
as possible to the values defined as goal states. In this phase, we measure the
quality of the operator’s control by assessing the distance between the current
and the goal values for all endogenous variables. Some comments on meas-
uring structural knowledge and system performance seem necessary at this
point because this is central to our studies. A review on techniques for
knowledge assessment can be found in Kluwe (1988). Also, Rouse and
Morris (1986) discuss some of the diagnostic problems in more detail.
2.3 Measuring Structural Knowledge and System Performance^
Starting with control performance quality, the goal is to determine how well
a given goal state is approximated by the operator’s interventions. The
classical approach requires the measurement of the deviation from the target
system state in terms of the root mean squares criterion (RMS). This indicator
reflects the mean deviation, independent of sign. The weights of individual
3 This section follows the presentation as given in Funke (1991).
More intriguing information
1. The Effects of Attendance on Academic Performance: Panel Data Evidence for Introductory Microeconomics2. The Evolution
3. The mental map of Dutch entrepreneurs. Changes in the subjective rating of locations in the Netherlands, 1983-1993-2003
4. The name is absent
5. A Rational Analysis of Alternating Search and Reflection Strategies in Problem Solving
6. Examining the Regional Aspect of Foreign Direct Investment to Developing Countries
7. Deprivation Analysis in Declining Inner City Residential Areas: A Case Study From Izmir, Turkey.
8. THE UNCERTAIN FUTURE OF THE MEXICAN MARKET FOR U.S. COTTON: IMPACT OF THE ELIMINATION OF TEXTILE AND CLOTHING QUOTAS
9. The name is absent
10. THE WAEA -- WHICH NICHE IN THE PROFESSION?