Upload
others
View
7
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Nina Rizun Yurii Taranenko
Alfred Nobel University, Dnipropetrovsk
SIMULATION MODELLING OF THE DECISION-MAKING ACTIVITY OF THE AUTOMATED CONTROL SYSTEMS OPERATORS USING NONLINEAR ELEMENTS Introduction
The development of modern automated control systems, the complication of systems and technology of hardware components, the extensive usage of computer technology in the organization and management of production process lead to an increased human’s role in management and restructuring of his activ-ity [Timo07, Pavl07].
Thus, on the one hand, the following is still typical for automated control systems operators: – efficient type of thinking, acquiring extended number of specific characteris-
tics (indicators), which describe the particular conditions for the implementa-tion of the thought process;
– methods that are involved in the process of thinking and interpretation of op-erator’s choice (the decision), the main of which are the following: the close, actually transforming into unity, connection between perception and compre-hension of the rapidly changing information and conditions of the situation; decision often merges with the process of its implementation;
– decision-making process is increasingly fraught with a stressful situation, characterized by unstructured, incomplete and at the same time congestive contradictory initial information coming;
– decision-making process is increasingly associated with rules of strictly lim-ited time.
Nina Rizun, Yurii Taranenko
158
On the other hand, primary modes of work of the automated control sys-tems operators are still the following [Stre01]: – normal conditions (the operator only monitors the technological process,
without interfering in it); – emergency conditions (operator works in semiautomatic or mechanized
mode, much depends on the accuracy of its sensorimotor actions and ability to assess the situation);
– boundary conditions – technological process still goes on within the pre-scribed limits, but is already close to its borders (problem statement – keep the process within required parameters of the technology);
– “free” conditions – the operator constructs new mode of working (task – the empowerment of operating system, saving of the material part, energy and own forces).
Balance and order in the above-mentioned provisions can make a modern decision-making theory, which divides the situations that require decisions into two categories: programmed and unprogrammed: 1. Programmed situations – are associated with the solving of routine, repeti-
tive and well-structured problems, based on pre-established rules, regula-tions, as well as on operator’s experience and technical knowledge.
2. Non-programmed situations – are associated with the occurrence of uncer-tainty. They are characterized by semi-structured and unstructured problems. Solutions, which have been received in the non-programmed situations, con-tain the risk. These solutions require specific personal and professional quali-ties and creativity.
In this case the automated control systems operator, depending on interpre-tation of the current situation, can prefer one of the following models of deci-sion-making: rational; bounded rationality; intuitive [Kahn94, StWe99].
Rational decision-making model defines the solution as a result of an or-dered thought process and based on the notion of discretionarity. Discretionary actions of a person are those [Kahn94] based on deliberation, which includes comparison of the available alternatives to these actions explicitly. In this case the selection’s criteria of the preferred embodiment are usually set in advance, and the solution (the chosen alternative) is the most competitive (optimal) for specific circumstances.
The bounded rationality decision-making model was proposed by Herbert Simon. Instead of discretionary it is presupposed to use the heuristics, which could be described as follows: a set of prescriptions connected with desired (for-bidden) patterns of behavior, that emerged as a result of personal professional
SIMULATION MODELLING OF THE DECISION-MAKING…
159
experience and practical skills of problems solving, and which have the similar initial conditions and prerequisites, and which are used in situations, when the rational decision-making model cannot be used as a „soft” option of rationality in a situation of individual choice.
Thus, bounded rationality is an information behavioral prerequisite for modeling for individual solutions. However, if the time selected for a decision-making is not enough to perform the comparison or none of the template situa-tions are suitable to describe the real situation, it is possible to use the intuitive decision-making model.
Intuitive decision-making model is based on the usage of “internal intui-tion”, common sense, associative and logical thinking, professional and emo-tional experience, impressions. The decision-making is equally (or differently) influenced by the knowledge, experience, motivational structure, purpose, life principles and values of the decision, and by the limited timeframe decision.
The taxonomy of the specific operational thinking, depending on the deci-sion-making models [Beac78, Chri09] and the main conditions of automated control systems operators, is formulated and presented by the author in Table 1.
Table 1 Indicators of Operational Thinking
Depending on Decision-Making Models
Indicators
Conditions of Operator’s Activity
Normal Conditions Boundary Conditions
Emergency Condi-tions
“Free” Conditions Decision-Making Models
Absolutely Rational Bounded
Rationality Intuitive
1 2 3 4 Capacities
Completeness of infor-mation
Complete Incomplete Arguable
Structuring of the prob-lem
Structured Semi-Structural Nonstructural
Speed Deliberate Rapid Instant Goal Clear Fuzzy Competing Indeterminacy Certainty Risk Uncertainty
Techniques Problem Processing Problem Solving Problem Resolution Problem Finding Accuracy High Sufficient Low Tools Value Heuristic Judgment Options Difference Weighted Acceptable Indistinguishable Situational Awareness Details Patterns, Clusters Big Picture
Nina Rizun, Yurii Taranenko
160
Table 1 cont.
1 2 3 4
Accountability Statistics, Analytical
Tools Pre-Formulated Rules
Perception, Mental simulations,
Feelings
Experience Not necessarily Embedded in Direct
Habit Embedded in Direct
Experience
Emotional Level Emotion Free Legitimate Role
for Emotions Emotionally Associative
Effort Requires Cognitive
Effort
Requires Developed a Range of Successful
Adaptive Strategies Appears Effortless
Choice Metrics Numerative Good enough Failure or Success Time Horizon Present The Near Future Future Level of Detail Detailed Grouped Aggregate Decisions Formulation Prescriptive Suggested Descriptive Nature Objective Subjective “Gut Feeling” Based Conscious Level Conscious Traditional Unconscious Creativity Creativity Free Creativity Free Creative Decisions Optimal Satisfied More Relevant
1. Problem Statement
High demands to the operator’s efficiency and reliability as elements of a closed loop of the automated control systems bring to the fore the problem of investigation of human intellectual activity with the purpose of enabling clarifi-cation of the main behavioral characteristics of an operator in the decision-making process and making recommendations on the classification and identifi-cation of operators based on degree of their compliance to certain required procedures/methods of decision-making.
It is obvious that the most objective results of evaluation of the human intel-lectual processes can be obtained on the basis of experimental studies of their ac-tivity directly at the workplace. However, such research is almost impossible due to high economic expenditures.
Development of analytical models of operator’s intellectual activity is often difficult due to the lack of adequate methods for formalized description (strict algorithm) of this processes and the inability to take into account all the factors influencing the process.
Authors [Pavl05, Zhab07, Pupk74, Youn79, Korm01, Rizu12, Rizu2013a, Rizu13] carried out a general analysis of human behavior as an element of in-formation and technical systems with the use of Automatic Control Theory:
SIMULATION MODELLING OF THE DECISION-MAKING…
161
The main tool for the study of operator’s behavior as a closed-loop subsys-tem is its description by means of the transfer function, described in the research results of the following scientists: L. Russell, 1960; J. Elkind, 1964; Anastin, 1960; D. Makruera, E. Krendel, 1959; M. Silvestrov, 1984 [Korm11]. The most widely used are the following quasilinear models: J. Henderson model
s22
1 es)Ts2sT(
)sT)s(W τ−
ξ++
=k(1
, D. Makruera and E. Krendel model
s
21
3 e)sT1)(sT1(
)sT)s(W τ−
+++
=k(1
, and also the extended and transformed model
of the automated control systems’ operator, based on the previous models. However, from the author’s point of view, unresolved problems in parts of
these models are as follows: 1. During the development of these models authors take the preconditions of
good structuring and definition of human-machine systems as the basis and tend to ignore the leading role of a human in situations of uncertainty, as well as the elements of subjectivity, which are added to output and input of sys-tem.
2. The object of operator’s activity analysis, which is taken into account during mathematical modeling, is the dynamics of operator’s behavior as a closed-loop subsystem: the average time of free-error operation, failure frequency, mean time to repair, availability factor, the probability of timely fulfillment of tasks (in the stages of input perception and decision-making) as well as the inertia of its neuromuscular mechanism (in the stages of his activity). But the emphasis on the specificity of the operator’s intellectual activity processes is in different situations absent, leading to the making and implementation of concrete solutions for transforming the input information signal.
In order to analyze the possibility of using the mentioned quasilinear mod-els of operator’s behavior for interpreting the features of his intellectual activity processes, a simulation model was developed by authors with the use of the MathCad. For these purposes it was suggested that: the simulation of Rational Decision-Making Model as a process of performing a certain number of stages of logical analysis of the problem by decomposing the original problem into simpler components and gradual approximation to the desired solution could be accomplished by using harmonic exponentially damped cosine signal
)tcos(eA)t(x t ⋅λ⋅⋅= ⋅γ−.
1
tsic
1
bpT
kξ
τ
F
162
tionstagintocou
1.1.
behprocT1 a
k – ξ –
τ –
W
HH. φA
x(
Fig.
λ
Fonal ges o siuld b
. Si
Dhavices
and
the– the
ciethema
W2 s( )
H(t)=(t-2mpl
t) :=
1. S
λ:=
or tDeof
impbe a
mu
urinior s opT –
e leve leent)
e abakin
) :=
=W.0).elitud
A=
Simu
T
0.05
ω
thesecisi
logpleracco
ulati
ng moper– th
naco
vel eve);
bilityng (
T
k⋅
1 +(
2(t)
e20-10
de :=
mpl
ulati
T1 :=
5
ω:=
se pion-gicar coomp
ion
simodelator
he tiativorreof pl of
y to(del
T1 :=
1 +(⋅
T1+.W
0.0 t+10=
litud
ion m
1= T
1
purp-Ma
al aompplis
of
mulal (Fr, cime
ve sespoprof de
o pelay)
1= T3+
1 s⋅ ) ⋅
W1(s)+0.99
de e−⋅
mod
T2 :
τ :=
posMakin
nalyponshed
the
atioFiguoul
e-cosoluondbleeve
erce).
T2
3 s⋅ )⋅
1 +(⋅
) . 9999
λ− t⋅
del o
0.=
2= a
ses ng ysis
nentd by
e J.
on euresld bonstutiondingm d
elop
eive
0:=
e τ−⋅
T2+
invl9 . φ
cos⋅
of J.
.1 T
a)
k:=
N
theMos ots ay u
He
exps 1,be intantns
gly; dompme
e th
0.1 Tτ s⋅
2 s⋅ )
laplaφ(t-2
s ω⋅(
Hen
T3 :=
1=
Nina
e auodelf thandsing
end
perim, 2)nterts, wpro
mainent
he ra
T3 :
ace, 2.0).e
t)
nder
1= 10
a Ri
uthol ashe pd grg h
ders
men), frrprewhioces
n awof
ate
1=
W1
se0.1-0
son
izun
ors s a probraduarm
son
nt trometedich ssin
warana
of c
s( ) :
90.05 t
ω:
n, Y
havproblemual
mon
n Op
the m thd incha
ng a
renealyt
cha
ω:=
9.949.sin(
ω:=
urii
ve socesm b
apnic e
per
pahe pn autaracand
ess tical
angi
τs
ω2 +
9751(t-2.
1
Tar
sugss oby dpproexp
ato
arampointhocterthe
(gal th
ing
τ :=s λ+
s +(
12 .0)
T
rane
ggesof pdecoximpone
or’s
metnt o
or’s rizee d
ain)hink
the
2 λ
λ+ ). φ(
T1 :
τ :=
enk
stedperfcommatenti
Be
ers of vedi
e thedecis
); king
e inp
2
(t-2.
1=
2=
k:=
o
d thform
mpostionially
ehav
of viewitione opsion
g sk
put
0).e0
T2
10
k:=
hat: minsing
n toy da
vio
f J. w on aspern m
kills
t inf
0.1-0.
2 :=
0
1=
theng ag tho thamp
r M
Heof ths foratomak
s (t
form
05t
1
b)
10
e sia cehe ohe ped
Mod
endhe ollowr’s
king
the
mat
. co
T3
)
imuertaorigdes
d co
el
ersodecws:act
g/im
dam
tion
os(t-
1:=
ulatiain nginasiredosin
on cisio: tivit
mple
mpi
n for
-2.0)
1 ω
ion numal pd s
ne si
opeon-m
ty oeme
ing
r de
)-9.9
ω:=
of mbeprobsoluign
eratmak
of aenta
co
ecis
9497
1
f Raer oblemutioal.
tor’kin
alteratio
oeffi
sion
7512
a-of m n
’s ng
r-on
fi-
n-
2
F
1
Etfia
F
F
Fig.
1.2.
E. Kthe follity alte
λ1
W
H(– 1
Fig.
Fig.
2. T
. SiBe
DKredecow
oferna
1 :=
W3 s( )
(t)=W1396
3. S
4. Tp
T
Tran
mueha
urinendecisis: Tf aative
0.1
) :=
W3(66.1
Simu
Tranput p
ωT1 :=
nsien
ulatiavio
ng el oon-
T1, altees a
T1
k (⋅
T2((t)
3564
ulati
T
nsienpara
ω:=
S
1= T
nt re
ionor M
theoper-maT3
ernaand
4:=
1 T+
s2⋅ +.W44.co
ion m
T1:=
nt reamet
1
SIM
T2 :
τ :=
cspon
of Mod
e sratoakin
andatived the
40 A
T1 s⋅
2 ξ⋅+
4(s)
os(5.
mod
=100
esponters
MULA
1=
2= c) nses
thedel
imuor’s ng pd Te e de
Amp
s) e−⋅
ξ T⋅. i
0 . t
del o
0 T= a)
nses
ATIO
T
s (a-d
e D
ulatbeh
procT2 –
solecis
plituτ− s⋅
s) s⋅
invl– 5.
of D.
=0.0
s (a,
k:=
ON M
T3 :=
d) o
. Ma
tionhavcess
– timlutiosion
ude1
apla0) .e
. Ma
01
b)
1=
MOD
0.=
of J.
akr
n exviors opme-onsn m
:=
W4(
ace, e0.05-
akru
of D
10
DEL
.1
Hen
ruer
xper moperacon paki
0.5⋅
s( ) :=
s0.05.t
uera
D. M
LLIN
nder
ra a
erimodeatornstaprocng/
105
ω=
φt + 5
and
Makr
NG O
son
and
menel’s r, cantscess/imp
s
ω2 +
φ(t-1205
E. K
ruera
ω:
OF T
T
τ
mod
d E.
nt th(Fioul
s, wsingplem
λ+
s +(
1.0) .832
Kren
a an
=
THE
1 :=
τ :=
del f
Kr
he igurld b
whicg, men
τ
λ
λ+ )2
.
28 . s
ndel
nd E
5
DE
1= T0.1 for d
rend
parres
be inch c
logntat
:=
2
(9.9sin(5
l
. Kr
CISI
T2 :
diffe
del
ram3, 4nter
chargication
1
x t(
99995.0 .
rend
k:=
k
ION
1=
erent
Op
mete4), rpreractal n co
t) :=
9. t t –
T
el m
1=
k:=
N-MA
T
d) t val
pera
ers froetedterizpro
orre
ξ
Am=
t +5.0)
1:=4
mode
10
1
AKIN
T3 :=
lues
ato
of m td inze toceespo
ξ :=
mpli
+ 13) . e0.
40 T b)
el fo
NG…
1.9=
s of i
r’s
D.the n authe ssinond
0.01
tude
337.05-0.
T=0.) or di
…
9
inpu
. Mpoi
uthoope
ng/ading
1 T
e1 e⋅
1.2305.t +
01
iffer
ω
ut pa
Makint ors’eratana
gly.
0:=
e λ− t⋅
3513+ 58
rent
ω:=
aram
krueof ved
tor’alysi
0.01
t co⋅
3.e2.0
84.90
valu
1
meter
era view
ditio’s acing
s ω(0-2.0.t
0151
ues o
16
rs
anw o
on activ
g o
t⋅ ) t – 13)
of in
63
nd of as v-of
n-
Nina Rizun, Yurii Taranenko
164
In the view of the analysis of the subjective influence of the operator to in-put signals the main results are expressed in the phase and amplitude of the sig-nal shift (delay). It may correspond to different degrees of decision-making suc-cess from the given (optimal) time as well as from the degree of processing (analyzing) of the possible alternatives.
The advantage of J. Henderson operator’s behavior model with relation to con-trol quality is the presence of an ideal integrator term. Due to this fact with minimal lag (instant response to an input signal) and with certain values of the time-constants it is possible to provide the fairly accurate reproduction of input cosine signal.
1.3. Simulation of the Operator’s Making-Decision Activity as a PID Controller
Basic operator’s behavior model as an element of a closed-loop system is the so-called accompanying tracking, in which he sees an input signal and a sig-nal about the current condition of a managed object. The operator’s purpose in this situation is to keep the difference between these signals close to zero.
The authors suggest the concept of interpretation of “automated control sys-tems operator’s intellectual activity within the decision-making as a process of correspondence (maintenance) to the adjusted (required) setpoint level of the set problem solving (optimal, sufficient solution”) [Rizu13, p. 13-15].
In this view the authors propose the hypothesis that: basic processes of the operator’s decision-making activity could be adequately simulated and identified by the transient processes of the proportional-integral-derivative (PID) controller.
Mathematical form of the PID-algorithm is:
⎟⎟⎠
⎞⎜⎜⎝
⎛+⋅+⋅= ∫ dt
)t(deKdt)t(eK1)t(eK)t(u d
t
oIP
(1)
Authors propose the following interpretation of the PID-controller transfer function coefficients: Kp – the level of operator’s personal characteristics, which are necessary for solving this type of problem (confidence, endurance, stamina, ability to control the situation, persistence); KI – the problem domain awareness level; Kd – speed of logical operations performance.
Taking into account the main purpose of PID-controller – operator’s activities for keeping the setpoint measured parameter – these analogies similarly allow us to identify the main stages of decision-making in accordance with the given instruc-tions and algorithms in the standard (programmed) conditions with a clearly defined only one correct (optimal) solution. This concept corresponds to the inter-pretation of the automated control systems operator’s intellectual activity as a PID-controller in the conditions of using the rational decision-making model.
tp
F
F
mp−
−
tualpon
W5
H(t. t) +
Fig.
Fig.
makpare− a
fo
− pbttdgst
λ:
Rl acnent
5 s( )
t)=W+0.0
5. S
6. Td
Thkinged waccfectof rpresble terstivedecgorsienthe
=
esuctivitiall
:=
W5(t0015
Simu
Trandiffe
he g prwithount, brecesenand
s, we (pcisiorithmnt csig
0.05
ults ity ly d
Td
Kp
t) .W5615
ulati
T
nsienferen
advroch prntinbut aeiptnce d g
whicprofon),m ochargnal
5
S
of as a
dam
d :=
T+
W6(s)52 ion m
Td:=
nt chnt va
vanessrev
ng thalsot of of
gradch cfess, buof dractl to
SIM
thea PI
mped
1= T
Td s⋅
) . in
mod
=1 T
haracalues
ntages oiouhe ao prthesop
dualcousionut ndeciterithe
MULA
e simID-d co
Ti :=
(+
nvlap
del o
Ti:=3 a)
cteris of
ges of t
us maddre-ee iniphisl reld b
nal) not isiostic
e giv
ATIO
mul-conosin
8= 1
Ti⋅(
plac
of op
3 Kp
isticinpu
of the
modditioempitiasticaactibe i
apsim
on-mc foven
ON M
latintrone s
Kp
s)
ce, s
perat
p:=5
cs (aut pa
thiope
dels onapt thal inatedioninteppromplimakormn so
MOD
on ollesign
5:=
W
Δ
tor’s
5
, b) aram
s merat(Fi
al phe
nford ca
n of erproachisticking
m it oluti
DEL
of r tr
nal
5 ω
W6(
Δ(t)
s int
of omete
modtor igurossdec
rmaapa
f thereteh toc atg wis ion
LLIN
autransis s
2:=
s) :=
+ 4.
telle
operers
del, andressibilcisioationabilie oud ao dttem
with exp.
NG O
tomsienshow
2 x(
ω=
.948
ctua
ator
cod P1-4lityon-n; itiesutpu
as andecimpts
mipres
OF T
matent chwn
t( ) :=s
ω2 +
843 .
al ac
r’s in
onduID-
4), aof ma
s ofut sn imsions ofinimssed
THE
ed charain F
K=s λ+
s +(. e-0.
ctivit
ntell
ucti-conare the
akin
f msignmitan-mf aumal d in
DE
contacteFig
Kp e−⋅λ
λ+ )05t .
ty m
lectu
ing ntrothe
e prg p
modenal atio
makutom
den th
CISI
troleris
gureλ− t⋅
)2
cos(
mode
T
ual a
anollee folreseproc
el mon
on okingmatelayhe a
ION
l systic es 5t cos⋅
Δ
(2.0
el as
d:=1
activ
n aner trllow
encecess
manthe
of ag (htic ry; frasym
N-MA
ystemusi, 6.
s ω(
Δ t( ). t)
s PID
1 Ti
vity
naloranswine nos w
nage cha hihavireperommpt
AKIN
ms ing
t⋅ )
:=
– 1.
D-co
:=8 b)
mod
ogy sienng:ot o
with
emhangheing etit
m thtoti
NG…
opinp
0 .937
ontro
Kp:
del a
bent’s
onlyres
ent nginer d
theion
he vc a
…
eraput
7539
oller
:=5
as PI
etwepro
y ofspec
anng odegreir
n of viewappr
torhar
9.e-0.
r
ID-c
eenoce
f thect t
nd mof itree ow
f thew oroxi
’s inrmo
5 t .
cont
n desse
e deto th
morts pof
wn se gi
of thima
nteonic
sin(
trolle
eciss, c
elayhe t
re flparasubstylivenhe tatio
16
llecc ex
2.0
er fo
sioncom
y eftim
flexiamebjecle on altran
on o
65
c-x-
.
or
n-m-
f-me
i-e-c-of l-n-of
Nina Rizun, Yurii Taranenko
166
However, the unresolved part of the problem in this solution is the absence of interpretation and analysis of the divergent PID-controller transient process, which could be interpreted as a lack of ability to make a decision using well-known logic algorithms – as a result of a high degree of uncertainty of the prob-lem and/or lack of information, time constraints.
According to the above-mentioned analysis results (Table 1), decision-making in non-programmed situations requires form the operator the nonstan-dard decision-making methods, based not only on logic, but on intuition, profes-sional experience and “gut feeling”.
Thus, the problem of identifying the decision-making process and studying the dynamic behavior of the automated control systems operator in the conditions of uncertainty and risk is a topical scientific problem, allowing, on the one hand, to as-sess the reliability and stability of the management system, on the other – to formal-ize a set of qualitative and quantitative requirements for professional operator skills.
Continuing the analogy between human intellectual activity and the Auto-matic Control Theory, the authors proposed the following required analysis and verification of the preconditions and hypothesis:
Precondition:
On the one hand, from the Automatic Control Theory it is well-known that the signal passing through the nonlinear elements, is “enriched” by additional harmonic components defined by the parameters of this elements.
On the other hand, operators, using their own experience and intuition (sub-jective vision, feeling of the current and future situation) for decision-making in non-programmed, precarious and often stressful situation, alter input informa-tion, “enrich” it by new subjectively formed components (decision) on the basis of their own knowledge, professional experience (skills) of the decisions adop-tion and implementation and the current state of psycho-physical activity.
Hypothesis:
Basic conditions, methods and results of the operative type of operator’s think-ing in non-programmed situations (boundary, emergency, “free”) can be adequately simulated and identified by the transient processes of the nonlinear elements.
Thus, the purpose of this paper is to develop a simulation model to perform the identification and classification of automated control systems operators by the charac-teristics of nonlinear elements’ behavior, using the criteria the different decision-making models, which operators apply in the conditions of uncertainty and risk.
SIMULATION MODELLING OF THE DECISION-MAKING…
167
2. Identification of the Operator’s Decision-Making Activity Models Using Nonlinear Elements
The main result, obtained by authors during the simulation experiment, is
the Nonlinear Element’s Taxonomy in terms of the decision-making models used by the operator under conditions of uncertainty and risk (Table 2).
Table 2
The Taxonomy of the Nonlinear Elements Depending on the Decision-Making Models
Nonlinear Element’s Type and There Transient
Characteristics
Decision-Making Models Absolutely Rational
Bounded Rationality Intuitive
The Conditions of Operator’s Activity
Normal Conditions
Boundary Conditions
Emergency Conditions
“Free” Conditions 1 2 3 4 5
Two-
posi
tion
re-
lay
- x(t) > 0, b x(t) < 0, −b -
Satu
ratio
n
−a < x(t) < a
x(t) < −a x(t) > a
-
Bac
klas
h
−a < x(t) < a x (t) < ⏐a⏐
Dea
dban
d
- x(t) < −a x(t) > a −a < x(t) < a
Dea
dban
d w
ith
satu
ratio
n
−b < x(t) < −a a < x(t) < b
x(t) < −b x(t) > b −a < x(t) < a
Nina Rizun, Yurii Taranenko
168
Table 2 cont.
1 2 3 4 5 Th
ree-
posi
tion
rela
y w
ithou
t dea
dban
d
- x(t) < −a x(t) > a −a < x(t) < a
Two-
posi
tion
rela
y w
ith d
eadb
and
- x(t) > 0, b x(t) < 0, −b x (t) < ⏐a⏐
Aut
hor’
s non
linea
r el
emen
t
−b < x(t) < b - x(t) < −b x(t) > b
Authors’ interpretation of the main characteristics of nonlinear elements,
presented in Table 2, allows to perform qualitative identification of the specifics of the operator’s decision-making activity under conditions of uncertainty and risk, as follows:
1. The simplest nonlinear elements perform static (instantaneous) nonlin-earity. Their output variable y(t) depends only on the input value x(t), and this dependence is strictly unambiguous.
1.1. Nonlinear element “Saturation” − in terms of basic characteristics (its amplitude and phase) of a signal being input – accu-rately tracks the phase change, limiting the amplitude at the output beyond value ⏐−a⏐ (Figure 7). This type of nonlinearity is proposed by the authors to interpret (at a certain ratio of the amplitude values of the pa-rameters A and parameters value – b and c) as a follow-ing type of operator’s decision-making activity: – using the bounded rationality model with limited amplitude in situations,
where conditions do not meet (greater than x(t) < ⏐a⏐) the conditions of ap-plication of the rational decision-making model;
– transition to the rational decision-making model with decreasing (in terms of the operator) degree of non-programmed (uncertainty) tasks.
F
l
tnhpm
ttcatcb–
–
Fig.
lutio
the nonheuprobmen
teriztudecouampthorcertb an– u
rmrpat
– id
7. Tt
Aon b
Thfol
n-couristblemnts
1.zede of
unt pliturs ptainnd cusinrulemakreplparaabilthe intudec
The tiall
At a bechusllowomptics m. dis2. N
d byf ththeude
propn ratc) ang es/hkinglaciamelitiecon
uitivcisio
formy da
cercams, thwingplia
areDecretNon
y trahe in de
e wposetio
as a the
heurg ring eteres/cnditve pon,
S
ms oamp
rtainme che ag: oncee u
ecisitionnlinackinpueadb
whene toof tfol
e boristiesuthe
rs acapationpre-wh
SIM
of oed c
n raclosauthon e cousedionnarynearingut sbann go inthe llowounics,
ults)e raare abilns o-term
hich
MULA
a
outpucosin
atioe tohorthe
ondd asn-may (rr el theign
ndedgoinnterp
amwingnded, de) anatiodetlitieof thm (
h is
ATIO
a)
ut sine si
o ofo thr’s ie stditios a akinratioleme ch
nal (d bng bpret
mplig tyd refinnd ronalerm
es tohe t(do also
ON M
ignaigna
f bahe ointetageons
“frng ona
menthang(at , anbeyt thitudype ratined redul de
mineo mtasknot
o de
MOD
als oal
asic ptim
erpres a
of rampro
alityt “dges⏐x(nd
yondhis tde v
of onaby
uctecised b
makk to t meter
DEL
of no
sysmumretaand
themewocesy).deas in (t)⏐alsd thtypevaluope
alityy thionsionby t
ke athe
meet rmi
LLIN
onlin
stemm (
ationlev
e tawork
ss a
adbathe > o hhe e ofues eraty m
he ln in ns othe
a dee rathe
ined
NG O
near
m’s(Fign ovelsask k” fas a
ande pha)
has val
f noof ttor'smodleve
amonto
sizecisatione opd by
OF T
r ele
pagureof ths, wto
for a w
d” −hasetaka r
lue onlithe s dedel el omplio thze osionnal ptimy th
THE
emen
arame 7ahe nwhi
thelim
whol
− ise ankingredu⏐−
neapar
eciswi
of oitud
he rof thn in
decmal he d
DE
nt “S
metea annonch e ra
mitinle h
s chnd ag inucti−a⏐arityramsionth
operde (rulehe d
n a pcisitim
dead
CISI
Satu
ers nd 7nlinwe
ationg has
haraampnto aion . A
y (ameten-mdelrato(simes/hdeaparon-
me) dban
ION
urati
the7b).nearere onalthe a t
ac-pli-ac-in
Au-at a ers A
makilay or’smplheuradbarticu-mamand
N-MA
ion”
e ob
r eleide
l dede
tend
A aing
(tis coificristiandularakinakinsize
AKIN
b
on
btain
emeentifecisepthden
and act
imeonficatioics)
d (opr levng mng the.
NG…
b)
the
ned
ent fiedsionh ofncy
partivite fofidenon ); thpervel modhe m
…
har
d “s
“sad byn-mf anan
ramty:or snceof he vrato
of del)mos
rmon
suff
atuy o
makinalyd r
mete
seare indecvalur’s
f mi); st a
nic e
ficie
uratopering ysisetai
ers
rchin decisiuesind
ism
appr
expo
ent”
tionratomo
s ofins
val
ing ecisons of
divimatch
ropr
16
onen
” so
n” ior aodef thele
ue
thsions vif thiiduahin
riat
69
n-
o-
is as l,
he e-
–
he n-ia is al
ng
te
1
F
ce
coi
trtw
sf
(
avdapiv
170
Fig.
cisierat
conopeintu
the ristitionwhi
situfied
(rat
actevaludoeandpreting vari
8. Tt
Inon-tor)
Mnditieratouitiv
Thfol
ics ns oich
Inuatiod ru
Dion
1.erizue es nd 9bted the
ian
The tiall
ncre-ma) (Fi
Maxiionsor) velyhusllow(re
of reare
n caon,
ule feci
nalit3. N
zed of
not b). T
as e abt w
formy da
easeakiniguimus ofdoe
y obs, thwingstrieal e thease it i
for isionty), Nonby thedepThia t
bsowith
ms oamp
e ofng pure 8um f a ces nbtaihe ag: ictiv(rece reif n
is pit. n-mwh
nlintra
e oupenis tytype
oluteres
of oed c
f theproc8a).macertnot inedauthin dve rcogesulnonoss
makhichnearackiutpud oypee ofe bspec
a)
outpucosin
e deces.
atchtainpro
d inhordecirulegnizlt ofne osible
kingh is r eling ut son ce off opounct to
)
ut sine si
eads (t
hingn coovidn a frs’ iisioes, szablf acof te to
g prtypemthe
signchanf noperndeo di
N
ignaigna
dbanthe
g wiombde oforcinte
on-msimle) sccumthe o cr
rocepicaent e phnal ngeonliatord riffer
Nina
als oal
nd smi
ith binaoptced erprmak
mplifsitumultem
reat
ess al fo
“twhasam
es oinear’s atioren
a Ri
of no
sizeinim
desatioimalim
retakingfica
uatiolatemplte a
retor awo-e w
mpliof taritydec
onant ci
izun
onlin
e lemum
siredon oal smiteationg pratioon –ed talate
ne
aina de-powithtudhe y iscisilityircu
n, Y
near
adsm n
d (iof tholu
ed tin oroce
ons)– macitsit
w t
s elecisisiti
h thde (y
inps prion-y mums
urii
r ele
s to num
ideahe butionime
of thess ) is
matct optuattem
lemionion he c(y(t)put rop-ma
modestan
Tar
emen
a smber
al) rbasin, be pehe theimp
chinperation
mpla
mentn-ma
relcons) =val
poseakine, in
nces
rane
nt “D
subsr of
ratiic tabut erionone seplemng watorns aate a
ts oakinlay”stan ⏐c
lue ed tng an ws of
enk
Dea
stanf he
onaask“god (Fnlinelecmenwithr’s kare and
of tng w” − nt (c⏐)(Fi
to bacti
whicf tim
o
adba
ntiaeuri
al d’s poodFigu
nearctiontedh a knosui
d fo
the witis c
(lim), wigurbe iivitych
me a
and”
al siistic
deciparad enurer el
on od bset
owletabrmu
simthincha
mitedwhicre 9intey uopeand
b)
on
impcs a
sionamenouge 8blemof thby id
of edgle tulat
mplin thear-d) ch 9a er-us-erat
d pla
the
plifiava
n-metergh”
b). ment
he dentem
ge.to dte a
ifiee lim
tor’ace
har
icatilab
makrs an” so
t “dapp
ntifympla
desca ne
d dmit
s d.
rmon
ionble
kingnd t
oluti
deadpropyingate
cribew o
discted t
deci
nic e
n of to
g mothe ion
dbapriag thsitu
be tor a
cretitim
sion
expo
f thethe
odetyp
n ca
andate hhe suati
the a m
ioname.
n is
onen
e dee op
el (ipe on b
d” iheusoluions
reamodi
arit
s in
n-
e-p-
in of be
is u-u-s,
al i-
ty
n-
las
a
F
tmsww
ost–
–
–
lay”andsitu
are
Fig.
tionmodsignwhewhe
of bstration– u
wt
– cd
–
Th” is
d beuatio
Inabs
9. Tp
1.n” −delsnal en gen g
Thbouategnal musinwastionchadegthe
huss thehavons n thsent
The pone
4. − its: c(y(goingoinhis
undegies,memng s idnal angigreee int
s, thhe fvioride
he dt.
formenti
Not is char(t) =ng bng btyp
ed r, wmorthe
dentdecing e of tuit
S
he afollor, wentideci
ms oally
onlina c
ract= ⏐cbeybeype oratihicry a autifiecisiothe
f comtive
SIM
authowiwhiifiedision
of oudam
neacomteric⏐)yondyondof nionah aandutomed bon-me strmp pre
MULA
horsingch d asn-m
a
utpumped
ar embinized), asd thd th
nonlality
are rd “bmatby omakrateliane-te
ATIO
s’ in: thleas te
mak
a)
ut sigd co
elemnatid bs whe vhe vliney wresueha
tic (opekin
egy nce erm
ON M
nterhe rads mp
king
gnalosine
menion
by twell valuvaluearitwithult avio(irr
eratong m
intto
m ma
MOD
rpreresuto
plateg pr
ls ofe sig
nt “n oftracas
uesues ty i
h thof t
oralatioor a
modto utheakin
DEL
etatiult othee (tyroce
f nongnal
“deaf sevckina re⏐−from
is prhe cthe l biaonaas adel cusin ratng o
LLIN
ionof f
e reypiess
nline
adbver
ng pestr−b⏐m ⏐rop
consim
as”,l) d
an icong thtionof t
NG O
n of form
eprocal)the
ear e
banral dpharicti an−b
posesist
mpac, nadecincr
nditihe hnal dthe
OF T
f themedoduc). e el
elem
nd wdecase ion
nd itb⏐ ted tent ct oameisioreasionheudecmo
THE
e nod auctio
em
ment
witcisio
of in
ts retill ⏐to b
usof aely:on-msed s; rist
cisioost a
DE
onliutoon o
ent
t “tw
th son-m
theamedu⏐−a
be iningccu
maklev
ticson-mappr
CISI
ineamaof o
s o
wo-p
satumake in
mplituctioa⏐.nterg ofumu
kingvel o
s at makrop
ION
ar eatismone
f di
posit
urakingnputudon –
rpref inulat
g mof n
theking
priat
N-MA
elemm oe po
iscr
tion
a-g
ut de –
eteddiv
ted
modnon
e neg mte d
AKIN
menof possi
retio
b)
rela
d asvidutac
del n-co
ext smoddeci
NG…
nt “tpercible
ona
)
ay”
s folual it k
at tomp
stagdel cisio
…
twocepte so
arity
on t
llowdec
know
the plia
ges conon.
o-potionolut
y (r
the h
ws: cisiowle
staance
witnditi
ositn, thtion
ratio
harm
theon-medge
age,e to
th aions
tionhink
n in
ona
moni
e mmake, e
, wo the
a his;
17
n rekin
n th
ality
ic ex
modekin
emo
whice ra
ghe
71
e-ng he
y)
x-
el ng o-
ch a-
er
1
F
a
pmtdtf
od
a
F
172
Fig.
ary
propmakthe difftimefirst
of adec
are
Fig.
10.
D(ra1.
poskingsol
feree dt ac
Thautoay o
Inabs
11.
Themo
eciation5. N
sed g aclutioent pdelaccephis omaof p
n thsent
Theon
e foronic
sionnaliNoto
ctivon, plac
ay wptabtyp
aticproc
he dt. It
e forn the
rms c exp
n-mity)nlinbe
vityrec
ceswithble pe oc deces
decit is
rms e har
of pone
mak, acnea
inty usceiv an
h susolu
of necissingisionacc
of ormon
a)
outpentia
kingccepr elterpsingved nd cubseutio
nonsiong inn-m
cept
a)
outpnic e
put sally
g prptablempretg a
bycircuequon (line
n-mntenmaktabl
)
put sexpo
N
signdam
roceble
mentted bou
y opum
uent(Figeariakinnsitykingle fo
signaonen
Nina
nals omped
ess in tt “tas
undpera
mstant prgureity ing y an
g prfor d
als ontial
a Ri
of nd cos
retthe threa t
ded atorncere-te 11is oactnd wrocedeci
of nolly d
izun
nonlisine
aindecee-ptyperat
r, ises atime1).one tivitwitess isio
onlindamp
n, Y
ineae sign
s thcisipose otion inv
and e d
of ty ith pthe
on-m
nearped
urii
ar elenal
he eion sitioof onalivaritakecis
thein c
pre-te elmak
r elecosi
Tar
eme
elemwiton operity miantken sion
e poconjtimemking
emenine s
rane
ent “
menthinrelratomodt wwi
n-m
ossijun
me dentg in
nt “tsign
enk
“dea
nts n thay
or’sdel,
with ith
maki
iblectio
decis o
n a l
threeal
o
adba
of e liwit de, inresincring
e vaon wsionf dilim
e-po
and w
themittho
ecisn whspecrea
g of
arianwithn-miscrited
ositio
b)
with
e simted out sionhichct tosing
f th
nts h th
makretiod tim
b)
on r
)
h sat
mpltimde
n-h o g e
of he g
kingoname
relay
turat
lifieme.
adb
usigra
g. arityfra
y wi
tion”
ed d
ban
ing adua
y (rme
thou
” on
disc
nd”
theal in
ratio.
ut de
n the
cret
−
e mntu
ona
eadb
e har
tion
it i
modeitiv
ality
band
r-
n-
is
el ve
y)
d”
v
io
mawr
a
F
toa
dupt
rmu
valu
izedof th
menautwithrect
are
Fig.
terizon tamp
decundprobtion
rammakund
2.ue x
2.d byhe i
Innt “omh sut) so
Inabs
12.
2.zedthe plitu
Thisio
der blem
ns. M
metekingder t
Inx(t)1. Ny a inpu
n th“bac
matiubsolutn thsent
Thetia
2. Nd by
amudehis on-mthem a
Maxiers g mtim
n dy, anNonphut s
he acklc d
seqution
he dt. It
e foally d
Nony tramplie wityp
make timana
imaand
modme co
S
ynand fnlinasesignauthashdecuenns fdecit is
ormsdam
nlinackitudith pe okingme alys
al cd th
del wons
SIM
amifromneare shnal hor
h” icisiot in
for aisionacc
s of mped
nearkingde otak
of ng alimis,
comhe wit
strai
MULA
ic nm itr el
hift, and
rs’ s: oon-mntuia lon-m
cept
a)
outpd cos
r elg theof t
kingnonlctiv
mit cand
mpliop
th mints
ATIO
nonts deemwh
d thinte
one maktive
ong maktabl
put sine
eme phthe g intlinevitycond pr
iancerat
mins an
ON M
nlineerivent hichhe verprof
kinge mper
kingle fo
signsign
ent hasinpto aeariy, asnditre-t
ce (tor
nimand w
MOD
earivati“b
h dealuretatheg a
makiriodg prfor u
nals nal
“twe ch
put accoity is fotionterm
(par’s tal pwith
DEL
itieive.
backepee o
atioe poactiing d ofroceurge
of n
wo-hansig
ounis pollons, um d
rtictypeprech th
LLIN
s th
klasndsf ±n t
ossiivitype
f timess ent
nonl
-pongesnal
nt thpropowsusindeci
culae) cisi
he p
NG O
he
sh”s on
± а (the ibley irma
me.thedec
linea
sitis fran
he vpose: apng hisio
ar cto on rese
OF T
out
” − in thFigno
e vain ane
e elcisi
ar e
ion romnd thvalued tpplyheu
on-m
comthealloenc
THE
tput
is che agureonlinarian
conent (
emion-
lem
relm a g
he ue bto byinurismak
mbine deows
ce o
DE
t va
charampe 12neants njun(on
ent-ma
ent
lay gradval
b (Fbe ig thsticking
natiesirs to
of di
CISI
alue
ractplitu2). ar eof ncti
ne c
s oakin
“bac
witdualue iguintehe s, w
g of
on rablo miscr
ION
e y
ter-ude
ele-theion
cor-
f ding.
ckla
th dal phof
ure 1erprbouwhif th
of le (
makeretio
N-MA
y(t)
n
iscr
ash”
deahas± а13)retedundich he m
the(idee thona
AKIN
dep
retio
b)
on
adbse shа, r. d adedlim
mos
e beal)he aarity
NG…
pen
ona
)
the
andhift
redu
s a d ramit st a
basi) raaccy el
…
nds
arity
har
d” −t, wuces
typatiothe
appr
c patioceptlem
on
y (r
rmon
− itwhics in
pe oonal derop
probnal tabl
ment
n th
ratio
nic e
t is ch dnput
of olity
epthriat
blemde
le dts.
he in
ona
expo
chadepet si
opery mh ofte s
m’secisdeci
17
npu
ality
onen
aracendigna
ratomode
f thsolu
pasionisio
73
ut
y)
n-
c-ds al
or el he u-
a-n-on
1
F
n–
F
–
F
174
Fig.
non– i
b
Fig.
– i
Fig.1
13.
2.nlinein Mbloc
14.
in M
15. S
Thethe
3. ear Matcks
Sim
Mat
Sim
e foe ha
Auele
tLas of
mulat
thC
ulat
rmsarmo
uthoemeab, uf con
tion
Cad,
tion
of onic
or’sent cusinnsta
n mo
wi
mod
a)
outpexp
s ncanng tants
odel
ith t
del o
)
put spone
nonn betwos fo
of a
the
of au
N
signntia
linee imo loor th
autho
hel
utho
Nina
nals ally d
earmpleogiche p
or’s
lp o
ors’ n
a Ri
of ndam
r elemecal spara
non
of th
nonl
izun
nonlimped
lementeswiame
nline
he f
linea
n, Y
inead cos
mented: itcheter
ear e
follo
ar el
urii
ar elsine
t [T
h tyrs b
elem
owi
leme
Tar
emesign
Tara
ype ,-b
ment
ing
ent i
rane
ent “nal
a08
>=and
in M
cod
in M
enk
“two
8] −
, amd m
MatL
de (
Math
o
o-po
− s
mplmulti
Lab
(Fig
hCad
ositio
simu
lifieipli
gure
d
b)
on re
ulat
er wier b
e 15
elay
tion
withbloc
5):
y wit
n m
h cocks
th d
mod
oeff (Fi
deadb
del
ficieigur
band
of
ent re 1
d” o
thi
с/b14);
on
is
b, ;
ti
dc−
−
F
rmc
C
rtg
poor
the inpu
deccisi− u
asd
− woa
Fig.
rammodcon
Co
racythingram
penorigof threqu
Thinput s
Thisioon-usinandstagdecwithof tality
16.
Mmete
del nstra
nc
Thy tonkinmm
Sindinginahe uire
his put signhe on-m-mang td noges cisioh a the y m
Theda
Maxiers awit
aint
lus
he ao dng (
med imu
ng oal tyinteeme
typsign
nal wauthmakakinthe onli
anon-ma gra
curmod
e forampe
imaandth mts an
sio
authdesc(setsitu
ulaton typeerprents
S
pe onal withhorkingng m
intinead lemakadurren
del,
rms ed co
al cd thminnd
ns
horcribt of uatiionthe
e ofretas to
SIM
of nphah tars pg acmodtuitar eevekingual tnt pwh
of oosin
come o
nimawit
rs cobe tf coion
n motyp
f noation
the
MULA
nonase akinpropctivdelsive
elemels og mtranrob
hich
a)
outpne si
mpliperal pth p
onfthe ndis (bodepe onlin ane pr
ATIO
nlineup
ng iposevity,s (F
momenof n
modnsitblemh is
put sgnal
iancratoprecpres
firmsp
itionbouels aof ineand rofe
ON M
ear to
intoe to, wh
Figuode
nt’s non
del; tionms dcrit
signal
ce (or’s cisioenc
med ecifns, ndaanddecar eform
essi
MOD
eleful
o aco inhich
ure el w
parn-co
n (atdegtica
als o
(partyp
on ace o
theficime
ary,d taxcisioelemmalona
DEL
emel atcou
nterph is16)
withramomp
t legreeally
of A
rticpe) alloof d
e hyity etho emxonon-
menlizaal op
LLIN
ent ttenunt prets ch:
h inmeteplia
east e to clo
Autho
culato t
owsdiscr
ypotof
ods mergnommak
nt watioper
NG O
is cnuat
thet th
hara
verers)ance
simthe
ose t
ors’
ar cthe
s to reti
thetheand
genmy o
kinwas n o
rato
OF T
chatione vahis nacte
rsio ame of
mple idto t
non
comdema
iona
sis e aud re
ncy, of t
ng mpro
of quor’s
THE
aracn analuenoneriz
n/remplif th
lifyideal the
nline
mbinsire
ake arity
aboutoesul“fr
the modopoualiski
DE
cterind re b.
nlined b
epeitud
he t
ingconrati
ear e
natied (they el
out malts ree”non
delsoseditatills.
CISI
izededu
nearby
etitiode otask
anndiiona
elem
on (idee aclem
posted of d
”) unlins wd, wtive
ION
d byuctio
r elea c
on on tk’s c
nd imtional m
ment
of eal) ccepment
ssibco
decusinnear
werewhic an
N-MA
y tron o
emeom
(dethe con
mpns) mod
t on
therat
ptabts.
bilitontrcisiog nr ele dech ed q
AKIN
rackof t
ent mbin
epenide
ndit
rovto t
del.
b)
the
e btionble d
ty wrol on-m
nonlem
evelexte
quan
NG…
kingthe
as natio
ndinentition
vingthe
harm
basinal dec
withsysmaklineentlopeendntita
…
g tham
typon o
ng ifiedns to
g thbo
mon
c pdec
cisio
h sustemkin
ear es (oed.
ds thativ
he cmplit
pe oof s
on d bo th
he cund
nic e
probcisioon u
ufficms g) ielemopeTh
he ve c
chatud
of oseve
opey ohe r
comded
expo
blemon-mund
cienopein nmenrato
he apos
com
angee of
opereral
eratoperrati
mpliad rat
onen
m’smak
der t
nt aeratnonnts.ors)authssib
mple
17
es if th
ratol de
tor’ratoiona
anction
ntiall
pakintim
accutor’
npro ) dehorsbilitex o
75
in he
or e-
’s or al
ce n-
ly
a-ng me
u-’s o-
e-s’ ty of
Nina Rizun, Yurii Taranenko
176
References [Beac78] Beach L.R. et al.: A Contingency Model for the Selection of Decision
Strategies. „Academy of Management Review” 1978, No. 3, pp. 439-449. [Chri09] Christopher L.: Intuitive and Rational Approaches to Decision Making in
Education. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Hull by, BEd, MA, 2009. [Khan94] Kahneman D.: New Challenges to the Rationality Assumption. „Journal
of Institutional and Theoretical Economics” 1994, No. 150, pp. 18-36. [Korm11] Kormyshev V.M.: Definition of Competence in Information Systems.
2011, p. 147. [Pavl07] Pavlenko M.A. et al.: The Method of Analysis of the Automated Control
Systems of Air Traffic Operator. „Information Processing Systems” 2007, No. 1 (59), pp. 78-81.
[Pavl05] Pavlovskaia O.O.: Methods for Determining the Parameters of a Linear Mathematical Model of the Operator. „Computer Technology, Manage-ment, Electronics” 2005, Iss. 5, No. 7 (79), pp. 41-44.
[Pupk74] Pupkoff K.: The Optimization of Connection between Human and Tech-niques in Man-Machine Systems. Preprints of JFAC-JFORS Symposium 1974, pp. 419-426.
[Rizu13] Rizun N.O.: Computer Modelling of Cognitive Processes. Proc. of the Federated Conference on Computer Science and Information Systems (FedCSIS), Krakow 2013, Poland, 8-11 September, pp. 747-750.
[Rizu12] Rizun N.O.: The Questions of the Testee Identification as PID-Controller in the Automated System of Professional Certification. „Vimіryuvalna obchis-lyuvalna tehnіka tehnologіchnih in process” 2012, No. 3 (41), pp. 133-141.
[Rizu13a] Rizun N.O. et al.: The Model of Identification of Testee’s Cognitive Proc-esses as Transient Characteristics of the Adaptive PID-Controller. Interna-tional Scientific Conference SAIT 2013, pp. 176-178.
[StWe99] Stanovich K.E., West R.F.: Discrepancies between Normative and De-scriptive Models of Decision Making and the Understanding/Acceptance Principle. „Cognitive Psychology” 1999, No. 38, pp. 349-385.
[Stre01] Strelkov Yu.K.: Engineering and Professional Psychology. Akademiya, 2001, p. 360.
[Timo07] Timochko A.I.: Modeling of the Decision Maker Activities in the Man-agement Systems Networks. „Radiotekhnika” 2007, No. 151, pp. 85-91.
[Tara08] Taranenko Yu.K.: Formation of the Optimal Characteristics for Oscillating Systems Vibro-frequently Data Densitometers. „Math. Electronics Univer-sities” 2008, Iss. 51, Vol. 7, pp. 47-58.
[Youn79] Young J.F.: Robotics. „Mechanical Engineering” 1979, p. 300. [Zhab07] Zhabreev V.S. et al.: Models and Evaluation of Human Factors in the
Large Systems: A Tutorial. Chelyab int putej Soobshcheniya, Chelyabinsk 2007, p. 219.
SIMULATION MODELLING OF THE DECISION-MAKING…
177
MODELOWANIE SYMULACJI DZIAŁANIA PODEJMOWANIA DECYZJI OPERATORÓW SYSTEMÓW AUTOMATYCZNEJ KONTROLI
Z UŻYCIEM NIELINIOWYCH ELEMENTÓW
Streszczenie
W artykule została zaproponowana nowa koncepcja modelowania działań podej-mowania decyzji przez operatorów z użyciem analogii do teorii kontroli automatycznej. Autorzy potwierdzili hipotezę dotyczącą możliwości opisu specyfiki myślenia operato-rów systemów kontroli automatycznej (zbiór warunków, metody i wyniki podejmowania decyzji) w nieprogramowych sytuacjach (ograniczenia, zagrożenia, swoboda działania) z dostateczną dokładnością z użyciem nieliniowych elementów.
Zostało udowodnione, że główną cechą wyróżniającą Model Heurystycz-ny/Intuicyjny w porównaniu do modelu Racjonalnego Podejmowania Decyzji jest obec-ność tak zwanego zjawiska „wzbogacenia” („enrichment”) informacji wejściowej o ludzkie preferencje, hobbies, tendencje, oczekiwania, aksjomaty, osądy, uprzedzenia i ich uzasadnienie.
W artykule rozwinięto modele symulacji i taksonomię nieliniowych elementów (operatorów) zależnych od rodzaju modelu podejmowania decyzji. Został zaproponowa-ny autorski, oryginalny rodzaj nieliniowego elementu, który rozszerza możliwości inter-pretacji i formalizacji jakościowych i ilościowych wymagań dla wzbogacenia umiejętno-ści decydenta.