Content deleted Content added
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit Advanced mobile edit |
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit Advanced mobile edit |
||
Line 7:
Zwicky developed this approach to address seemingly non-reducible complexity: using the technique of [[cross-consistency assessment]] (CCA),<ref name="GMA" /> the system allows for reduction by identifying the possible solutions that actually exist, eliminating the illogical solution combinations in a grid box rather than reducing the number of variables involved.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Ritchey|first=T|date=July 2006|title=Problem structuring using computer-aided morphological analysis|journal=Journal of the Operational Research Society|volume=57|issue=7|pages=792–801|doi=10.1057/palgrave.jors.2602177|s2cid=19792496|issn=0160-5682}}</ref> General morphology has found use in fields including engineering design, [[Technology forecasting|technological forecasting]], organizational development and policy analysis.<ref>Álvarez, A. & Ritchey, T. (2015). [http://www.amg.swemorph.com/pdf/amg-4-1-2015.pdf "Applications of General Morphological Analysis: From Engineering Design to Policy Analysis", Acta Morphologica Generalis, Vol.4 No.1.]</ref>
==Decomposition
Problems that involve many governing factors, where most of them cannot be expressed numerically can be well suited for
The conventional approach is to break a complex system into parts, isolate the parts (dropping the 'trivial' elements) whose contributions are critical to the output and solve the simplified system for desired scenarios. The disadvantage of this method is that many real-world phenomena do not have obviously trivial elements and cannot be simplified.
| |||