Published in Proceedings of InterSymp-2011: Baden-Baden, Germany, August 1, 2011, pages 21-36.
Publisher's website: http://www.iias.edu.
CADRC and KML present an urgent need for analyzing the enormous volume of digital data in people centered applications. Adaptive knowledge-based collaborative agents were suggested. Amatrix for collaborative control, monitoring and management was outlined (Halldane Aug 2006) based on inline and crossline management principles. This introduced channels describing the technology and context, nodes of common parameters or attributes to link with other channels through secure analytical gates, then parallel tracks of meaningful criteria from performance, specifications, monitoring, to priorities. This is now applied in analytical scenarios to compare channels and tracks for assessing technology against meaningful infocyber tracks (Figure 1).
Technology assessment, TA, sets science-based overlays of scenarios for each meaningful parameter to be compared. Conclusions are drawn from each scenario according to the context and priority for the linked parameters in the technology assessment. Meaningful TA has been a tradition in management, especially for the US astronaut moon landing in 1969 spurred by the sputnik dogs in 1959, the creation of an “impact statement” culture in the 1970’s and the energy scenarios for the Project Independence Evaluation System, PIES, presented to Congress in 1974. Unfortunately TA has degraded from the 1990’s with fake pseudoscientific public-mediapolitical agendas, particularly by environmentalists and green movements. Those assessments ignore the analysis of basic economic considerations, lifecycle costing, maintenance, performance efficiency and tangible impacts. There are further confusing features in their future agendas (US Green Building Council, USGBC) with a more focused approach to “social equity” and an increasing activity in government subsidies, tax credits, control, regulations, litigious solutions and conflicting design criteria.
Thus this paper outlines the development of meaningful scenarios, methods of assessment and tangible priorities for today’s technology assessment based on viable science and responsible management. An example of an inefficient, costly, poor investment solar photovoltaic system for a classroom is used to illustrate the principles and to highlight the issues with alternative solutions.