39
个编辑
更改
→分析 Analysis
--[[用户:Stefanie|Stefanie]]（[[用户讨论:Stefanie |讨论]]） 【审校】"软体系统方法论"改为“软系统方法论”。
--[[用户:Stefanie|Stefanie]]（[[用户讨论:Stefanie |讨论]]） 【审校】"软体系统方法论"改为“软系统方法论”。
--[[用户:Stefanie|Stefanie]]（[[用户讨论:Stefanie |讨论]]） 【审校】“在硬系统可能被认为更“科学”的领域，两者的区别往往是暧昧的。”中“暧昧”改为“模糊”。
--[[用户:Stefanie|Stefanie]]（[[用户讨论:Stefanie |讨论]]） 【审校】“在硬系统可能被认为更“科学”的领域，两者的区别往往是暧昧的。”中“暧昧”改为“模糊”。
[[George J. Klir]]<ref>Klir, 1969, pp. 69–72</ref> maintained that no "classification is complete and perfect for all purposes", and defined systems as abstract, [[The Real|real]], and [[conceptual system|conceptual]] [[physical systems]], bounded and [[unbounded system]]s, discrete to continuous, pulse to [[hybrid system]]s, etc. The interactions between systems and their environments are categorized as relatively closed and [[open system (systems theory)|open systems]]. It seems most unlikely that an absolutely closed system can exist or, if it did, that it could be known by man. Important distinctions have also been made<ref>Checkland, 1997; Flood, 1999.</ref> between ''hard'' systems – technical in nature and amenable to methods such as [[systems engineering]], operations research, and quantitative systems analysis – and ''soft'' systems that involve people and organisations, commonly associated with concepts developed by [[Peter Checkland]] and [[Brian Wilson (systems scientist)|Brian Wilson]] through [[Soft systems methodology|Soft Systems Methodology]] (SSM) involving methods such as [[action research]] and emphasis of participatory designs. Where hard systems might be identified as more "scientific", the distinction between them is often elusive.
[[George J. Klir]]<ref>Klir, 1969, pp. 69–72</ref> maintained that no "classification is complete and perfect for all purposes", and defined systems as abstract, [[The Real|real]], and [[conceptual system|conceptual]] [[physical systems]], bounded and [[unbounded system]]s, discrete to continuous, pulse to [[hybrid system]]s, etc. The interactions between systems and their environments are categorized as relatively closed and [[open system (systems theory)|open systems]]. It seems most unlikely that an absolutely closed system can exist or, if it did, that it could be known by man. Important distinctions have also been made<ref>Checkland, 1997; Flood, 1999.</ref> between ''hard'' systems – technical in nature and amenable to methods such as [[systems engineering]], operations research, and quantitative systems analysis – and ''soft'' systems that involve people and organisations, commonly associated with concepts developed by [[Peter Checkland]] and [[Brian Wilson (systems scientist)|Brian Wilson]] through [[Soft systems methodology|Soft Systems Methodology]] (SSM) involving methods such as [[action research]] and emphasis of participatory designs. Where hard systems might be identified as more "scientific", the distinction between them is often elusive.