Vulnerability of Human Organizations ENEAs Research The presentation is an Intellectual Property of the author. Adam Maria Gadomski

Vulnerability of Vulnerability of Human OrganizationsHuman Organizations

ENEA’s Research

The presentation is an Intellectual Property of the author.

Adam Maria Gadomskihttp://erg4146.casaccia.enea.it

Research Center Casaccia, 05 June 2006

ENTE PER LE NUOVE TECNOLOGIE, L’ENERGIA E L’AMBIENTE

Unità di Calcolo e Modellistica

High-Intelligence & Decision Research Group

The CAMO Workshop on Complex Networks and Infrastructure Protection, 2006

http://erg4146.casaccia.enea.it/HID/index.html

CONTENS

EXPERIMENTS Real Case Study

Modeling Results

Simulation Experiments

CONCLUSIONS

Adam M. Gadomski, CAMO – ENEA – Casaccia – ed. C59 sala conferenze – 05 June 2006

INTRODUCTION

ENEA’s Research Objectives

Context & Application Domains THEORETICAL BASES

Basic Strategy

TOGA Meta-Theory

Vulnerability of Human Organizations: ENEA’s Research

© 2006, A.M.Gadomski ENEA.. All stuff may be freely distributed in its full original format, if selected ideas are to be published in another format, a reference to the original source and to the author must be evidenced, Intellectual Rights reserved. No permission is granted to download and save professional images or any other material from these pages other than for citation purposes. These material is representing the opinions of the contributor, but not necessarily of ENEA.


Adam M. Gadomski, CAMO – ENEA – RC Casaccia – ed. C59 sala conferenze – 05 June 2006


ENEA’s Research & Technology Development

Objectives

Long term research objectives (since 1990)

Development of the Modeling Framework of

a Cognitive Synthetic/Abstract Intelligence by

the theory development and simulation experiments

Middle and short term RTD objectives (2001- 2009)

- Development of Intelligent Organization Cognitive Models

- Identification of Vulnerabilities of Human Organizations

- Simulation & Validation Experiments, test cases based

(in frame of IRRIIS and CRESCO Projects).




Three Layers Model of an Critical Infrastructure

ENEA’s R&T Development Objectives

CyberCyberLayerLayer

Organisational Organisational LayerLayer

Intra-dependency

Inter-dependencyPhysical Physical LayerLayer

[Bologna, Balducelli, 2002]


ENEA’s R&T Development Objectives



PROBLEMS

Identification and Improvement of human & artificial organizations:

Functions

Processes

Structures &

their Computationability [ Gadomski]

…

Hierarchical Decomposition (?)

CyberCyberLayerLayer

Physical Physical LayerLayer

Organisational Organisational LayerLayer




Context & Application Domains: Socio-Cognitive Engineering

Cognitive ---> Socio-Cognitive Modeling ---> Technological Contexts

Intelligence ---> Decision-Making Modeling ---> in High-Risk Contexts

Development platform: Intelligent Agents Technologies + Systemics Design Methodology

Expected Application Domains: Organizational Layer (IRRIIS)

What-if Simulations (CRESCO)

IDSSs and Intelligent Networks

Reinforcement of Organizational Intelligence.

Especially for Large Complex Critical Infrastructures Protection.

involving




Complexity of Human Organization Layer

Multi-dimensional attributes space

Complex network of interactions

Continuous & Discrete Dynamics

Interactions with dynamic physical & social environment

Intelligent knowledge-based and interest-based human nodes

Autonomy of nodes

Emotional and Body contribution components

Cognitive factors: ill measurable, observable and monitored

It requires a new complex computational systemic methodology for the modeling.

Physics based statist. models (primitive intelligence)

New modeling paradigms (high intelligence)




THEORETICAL BASES: Specification Strategy

Generic Research Strategy

hypothesis: Top-down

Layered

and

Goal- driven

Knowledge Acquisition Modeling Implementation Case-Based

Validation

Objectives

…

Required:

Completeness,

Congruence &

Trust

Partial Results

Final Results




THEORETICAL BASES

TOGA (Top-down Object-based Goal-oriented Approach) is a formal goal-oriented knowledge ordering meta-theory, its objective is to enable identification and design of complex systems & their computer simulation. It has three basic components:- Theory of Abstract Objects (TAO) is a first level and a basic domain independent conceptualization system and a consensus building platform;-Knowledge Conceptualization System (KNOCS), It includes the TOGA’s ontology, i.e. axiomatic assumptions and basic conceptualization frameworks for the definition and decompositions of the real-world problem into an intelligent agent (IA) and domains of IA goal-oriented activities, i.e. the triple:

(Intelligent Entity, Environment, Interactions) Methodological Rules System (MRUS) for the specification (if not existing yet) or identification (if existing) of complex systems and problems; it indicates how TAO and KNOCS have to be used during the conceptual identification, specification and solution of real word problems.




Essential Paradigms for Organization Modeling

URP (Universal Reasoning Paradigm) is based on the application of the data processing scheme to the human goal-oriented reasoning. It defines “elementary mind cell” and its components: Information, Preferences and Knowledge.Data – are everything what is/can be processed.Information, I - data which represent a specific property of the domain of human or artificial agent's activity .Preferences, P - Preference is an ordered relation among two properties of a real or abstract domain of activity of a cognitive agent. It indicates a property with higher utility or subjective importance.Knowledge, K - every abstract property of a human or artificial agent which has ability to process/transform a (quantitatively/qualitatively) information into other information.

Every new Information is processed by Knowledge:

In’ = K jn( In ), j=1, …J, for the domain ,

where choice of K j depends on max.preferred state:

max{ P (In)} == Goal_state,

and n indicates a conceptualization point-of-view.

Fig. The IPK cell it is an elementary mind cell in TOGA .

I

KPgoal

Domain of Activity

n




Essential Paradigms for Organization ModelingUMP (Universal Management Paradigm) defines necessary components of the management process and their main interrelations according to. It includes a cooperating-manager environment from the subjective perspective of a pre-selected decision-making manager. The figure is also a definition of characteristic property of a management role.

MANAGER

INFORMER EXECUTOR

information tasks

ADVISOR

expertisesCOOPERATING

MANAGER

cooperation

tasks information

Knowledge Preferences The same

structure

SUPERVISOR

Domain of management (Domain of activities)

ROLE def.IPK based definitions of the relative roles and their main interrelations: role (competences, responsibility, privileges).Competence – professional knowledgeResponsibility –preferences resulting from: tasks, duties in a preselected domainPrivileges - access to the information and executive power.

Every element of the UMP structure is functional, subjective, incremental and recursive.




Identification of Vulnerability and Trust The presented modeling frames enable identification of different types of organizational vulnerability: on individual levels, for group d-m, and cooperative intra-organizational types.

Using IPK

I

KPgoal

Domain of Activity

n

We may distinguish:

- Not sufficient information

- Not proper preferences

-Not adequate competences (knowledge).

- Improper communication

Using UMP

MANAGER

INFORMER EXECUTOR

information tasks

ADVISOR

expertisesCOOPERATING

MANAGER

cooperation

tasks information

Knowledge Preferences

The same structure

SUPERVISOR

Domain of management (Domain of activities)

Vulnerabilities




Integrated TOGA Modeling Framework

DOMAIN OF ACTIVITY/INTERVENTIONS

A B

C

Executors, informers

Experts

Supervisor

Manager Manager

Coordinator




EXPERIMENTS

• Real Cases Study

• Modeling Results

• Simulation experiments

Social Consequences

Human Errors

Human Factors

Modeling for Simulation

Identification sequence:




Analyzed Test Cases

1. Blackout Italy/Suisse , 28 september 2003

2. Chernobyl disaster

3. Katrina hurricane

4. Airport Linate accident

5. Tsunami: international scale catastrophe –Indian

Ocean




Modeling of Vulnerabilities Path

Identification of the Organizations Involved (object-based)

Identif. of Roles:

- Information acquisition and execution capacities

- Responsability and competences (IPK)

Cause - Consequence Tables Building

Identification of vulnerabilities in terms of UMP and

organizational IPK.

User trust evaluation/assessment




Test Case: Application of UMP

ITALIAN ELECTRIC SISTEMInvolved organizations

GRTN

tasks

Ministero dell’Economia

information

Aceaelectrabel

CommissioniTecniche ENEL

Disaster domain

observations actions

Requets/expertises

Requets/expertises




TSUNAMI

PTWC, USGS,ITIC

tasks

information

IOC, ITIC, CCR

ONU

information

tasks

MD, SMC

NOAA PTWS

Disaster domain

observations actions

Requets/expertises

Requets/expertises

1. Supervisor “Onu” : la sua supervisione si realizza mediante lo IOC;

2. Manager “Ptws” : coordinatore dell’attività dei centri operativi;

3. Advisor “Noaa” : centro specializzato che si occupa della rilevazione degli tsunami nell’Oceano Pacifico;

4. Cooperating manager “Ioc, Itic, Ccr” : centri di monitoraggio che assistono il Ptws nella fase di coordinamento delle attività;

5. Informer “Ptwc, Usgs, Itic” : si occupa di informare i paesi e le popolazioni che affacciano sull'Oceano Pacifico, sul rischio tsunami

6. Executor “Md, Smc” : dipartimenti locali responsabili della gestione dell’allarme.




Blackout Italy/Suisse

I

KP

IPK ETRANS

Objects and relations vulnerable

I

KP

IPK GRTN

We observe different conflicts of points of view between cooperating organizations

- A common tasks/roles platform is required.

I

KP

IPK PTWS

IPK PTWC, USGS, ITIC

IPK MD, SMC

IPK ITIC

I

KP

I

KP

I

KP

Examples: Interactions between organizations


Ruoli

Casi

Supervisor

Manager CooperatingManager

Advisor Informer Executor

ItalianBlackout

Chernobyl

Linate

Katrina

Tsunami

Identification of vulnerability on the IPK level and according to the UMP roles.

RISULTS

Legenda:

Il problema si è verificato sul livello delle Informazioni Nessun valore dominante

Il problema si è verificato sul livello delle Preferenze

Il problema si è verificato sul livello delle Conoscenze




RISULTSQualitative synthesis of the causes of losses during the Emergency Management

of analyzed cases.

Legenda: 0 – Non evitabili

1 – Evitabili

Non essenziale per lo scenario della Risposta

Essenziale per lo scenario della Risposta

Cause:

Casi

Naturale Tecnologico IPK di managers

Strutture Organizzative

Comunicazione Interna

Comunicazione tra organizzazioni

Blackout it. 0 1 1 1 1

Chernobyl 1 1 1 1

Linate 1 1 1 1

Katrina 0 1 1 1

Tsunami 0 1 1 1






IInn

KKPP

II11

KKPP

II22

KKPP

II33

KKPP

Infrastructure NetworkInfrastructure NetworkReal Emergency Domain

- -- - --

II

KKPPAgent ManagerAgent Manager

Agent 1Agent 1 Agent 2Agent 2 Agent 3Agent 3 Agent nAgent n

I : InformationI : Information

P : PreferencesP : Preferences

K : KnowledgeK : Knowledge

Simulation Approach: Agent-Based Architecture

Agents with different roles




Incremental Simulation: Top-down design

Incremental design experiment (2004)

Top-down Specializations

Environ. Activity Domain Org. Body IPK Decision-Making Acting




Simulation: illustrative Working Test Case: Emergence Propagation Map

Explosion in Chemical Factory

Vulnerable Node




Simple Simulation: PROPAGATION OF EMERGENCY WITHOUT INTERVENTION




D1 D2 … DN

IB1 IB2 … IBN

PB1 PB2 … PBN

KB1 KB2 … KBN

Domains of support (activity)

Meta-Scenario: Tasks Actions IPK BasesProcedures

Software : Computational Codes Software : Data Bases & Rule Bases

Method

Method

MethodReasoningModels

Information

Preferences

Knowledge…

Simulator: IPK Bases for Organizational Decision Making




Support for Emergency Management

Possible main generic functions of an Intelligent Cognitive Advisor:

• Monitoring,

• Detection of Abnormalities/Erroneous States

• Diagnostics

• “What-if” evaluation

• Decision suggestions

• Expansion ability (new decision-support properties)




Possible Full-Scale Simulator Architecture

User-Tasks Manager (agent) Intell. Support & Cognitive Interfaces

MIT Interface

Simulation Agent

A-Tool Spec. Agent

Functions Base

Core Scenario Simulator

Function Factory

Event Factory

A-Tools Factory

OL CL PL

Configuration Agent

F.Specialization Agent

E.Specialization Agent

Interpretation-Tools Factory

I-Tool Application Agent

OL CL PL

(TOGA based proposal)Functions activated in the Event-Action Scenario (EAS)

A function & tool under development

Tools used in an action in EAS

Org.LayerOL

CogLayerCL

Emot.LayerPL

Org.LayerOL

CogLayerCL

Emot.LayerPL

I -tool: a tool for the interpretation of SYNTEXT simulation results.



Conclusions

Nowadays Socio-Cognitive Engineering is an emerging systemic response on the dramatically growing risk of negative consequences of Human Errors, it is inevitable tool of the XXI century.

- Complexity of problems requires new 3rd Generation Integration Approaches such as the TOGA multi-factor problem representation and parallel modeling, and Intelligent Decision Support Systems/(Intelligent Advisors Network) development.

- Key problems are referred to the individual understanding and common transparency of decision-making processes for their intelligent human actors-contributors.

- Socio-Cognitive Engineering requires new specialists on organizational, national and international levels.



CONCLUSIONS

The presented works have provided important modeling frameworks.

The future short-term activity will be focused on:

1. Cognitive Modeling of Managerial Decision-Making under high-risk

2. Socio-technological Modeling of LCCIs collaboration

3. Development of the demo Simulation of high-risk management in human Organization

The activity have been done in ENEA. It included several student theses of:

1. University “La Sapienza” :

– Systems and Informatics Dep.

– Sociology Dep.

– Psychology Dep.

– Faculty of Communication Sciences (Cognitive Ergonomics)

2. University of Rome “Tor Vergata”:

- Faculty of Industrial Management

Some References

Copyright High-Intelligence & Decision Research Group, CAMO, ENEA , http://erg4146.casaccia.enea.it Adam M. Gadomski, 23/06/2005

1. A.M. Gadomski. Information about System-Process-Goal Approach to diagnostics and supervisory of nuclear reactor system. Materials of 19th Informal Meeting on Reactor Noises, Rome, June 1986.

2. A.M. Gadomski. Application of System-Process-Goal Approach for description of TRIGA RC1 System. Proceedings of " 9th. European TRIGA Users Conference ", Oct., 1986, Roma. Printed by GA

Technologies, TOC-19, USA. 1987, also the ENEA Report RT TIB/88/2, 1988. http://hid.casaccia.enea.it/TOto/pdf/(1)an%20application%20of%20spg%20approach%20to%20the%20triga%20rc1.pdf

2. A.M. Gadomski .TOGA: A methodological and Conceptual Pattern for modelling of Abstract Intelligent Agent . In Proc. of the ‘First International Round-Table on Abstract Intelligent Agent’,25-27 Jan 1993, The ENEA print (1994).

3. A..M.Gadomski. Patterns for Conceptualization of Knowledge on Technological Systems Organizations and Human (invited paper). 9th Polish-Italian-Finnish Conference on Systems Analysis and Decision Support in Economics and Technology, Radziejowice, Poland. 25-28 October 1993.

4. A.M. Gadomski, Meta-Knowledge Engineering & Management Server (since 1997), http://erg4146.casaccia.enea.it

5. A.M.Gadomski, S. Bologna, G.DiCostanzo, A.Perini, M. Schaerf. Towards Intelligent Decision Support Systems for Emergency Managers: The IDA Approach. International Journal of Risk Assessment and Management, IJRAM, 2001, Vol 2, No 3/4.

6. A.M. Gadomski, TOGA Systemic Approach to the Global Specification - EUREKA Sophocles Project Report, ENEA,

2002. http://hid.casaccia.enea.it/RepSoph-v10.pdf

7. A.M. Gadomski, Modeling of Socio-Cognitive Vulnerability of Human Organizations: TOGA Meta-Theory Approach , Proc. of International Workshop on Complex Network and Infrastructure Protection, CNIP 2006 , 28- 29 March 2006, Rome, Italy.

For more references see: http://hid.casaccia.enea.it/gad/gad-pape.html



Thank Thank you !you !

CRESCO SOC-COG

CRESCO SOC-COG

New research CRESCO subproject (2006-2009):

“Modellistica delle Reti Complesse viste come Aggregati Socio-Tecnologici “ – Aspetto di loro Vulnerabilità Umana.

Documents

Vulnerability of Human Organizations ENEAs Research The presentation is an Intellectual Property of the author. Adam Maria Gadomski