Problem Solving Systems (Work in Progress)

Irreducible complexity (a.k.a. essential complexity) is a term used to describe a characteristic of complex systems whereby the complex system needs all of its individual component systems in order to effectively function. In other words, it is impossible to reduce the complexity of a system (or to further simplify a system) by removing any of its component parts and still maintain its functionality objective.

So for example, consider a simple mechanism such as a mousetrap.  

That mousetrap is composed of several different parts each of which is essential to the proper functioning of the mousetrap: 

  • a flat wooden base, 
  • a spring, 
  • a horizontal bar, 
  • a catch bar, 
  • the catch, 
  • and staples that hold the parts to the wooden base.
If you have all the parts and the parts are assembled together properly, the mousetrap works as it was designed to work.  You can say that it functions effectively.

But say you remove one of the parts of the mousetrap.  The mousetrap will no longer function as it was designed, it simply will not work.  That is irreducible complexity: the complexity of the design requires that it can't be reduced any farther without losing functionality.

The same thing is true for a problem solving system.  Whether the functionality is provided using computer based functionality or manual effort; all the pieces need to exist in some form.  You could have specific levels of functionality.  For example, in financial reporting there is a difference between a "complication" and a "review" and an "audit" of a financial report.

There is a difference between a "complex system" and a simple system that is complicated.  Most software applications tend to be simple systems that may be complicated.  Fred Brooks No Silver Bullet points out that complexity comes in two forms: essential complexity and accidental complexity.  Essential complexity is what is irreducible.  Irreducible complexity = essential complexity.

The problem is making sure you avoid or eliminate the accidental complexity. Accidental complexity refers to challenges someone unintentionally make for themselves as a result of trying to solve a problem.

The Law of Conservation of Complexity states that, "Every software application has an inherent amount of irreducible or essential complexity. The question is who will have to deal with that complexity: the application developer, the platform developer that the software runs on, or the software user."

These, the graphic below, seem to be the pieces of a problem solving system which are essential.  What I have tried to do is use the framework for articulating the Semantic Web Stack or "layer cake" and generalized the pieces. This is what I came up with:


Now, you can implement such a problem solving system using the semantic web stack, using the XBRL technology stack, or some other technology stack.  There tends to be three primary problem solving system implementation approaches:

  • Semantic web stack
  • Graph database
  • Logic programming
This graphic shows the three approaches and makes an important point.  PSOA RuleML is an approach to enabling the conversion between these three technical implementation approaches.

When you think about this, being able to convert bidirectionally from any one technical approach to the other technical approaches; while the technical format and other technical implementation details may be different, the LOGIC of the information conveyed by the system should not change at all.

Why is this important?  Multiple technology stacks is a fact of life.  Different enterprises will implement different technology stacks internally.  But in order to exchange information effectively, information from one technology stack needs to be converted to some neutral standard or into some other technology stack in order to exchange information effectively.

To make something like "algorithmic regulation" work, either: (a) everyone needs to convert to exactly same technology stack internally within their enterprise or, (b) reliable conversion between different technology stacks needs to be created.

Additional Information:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Relational Knowledge Graph System (RKGS)

Image
Relational Knowledge Graph System (RKGS) is an interesting idea that combines the relational paradigm and the knowledge graph paradigm.  This documentation, Why RKGS , explains the idea. This gets even more interesting with the notion of "relational AI".  RelationalAI is described as follows by the company of the same name, Relational.ai : “RelationalAI is a cloud-based relational knowledge graph management system, with state of the art probabilistic processing and declarative reasoning at scale to make developing Data Applications a superpower for your business.” This notion of knowledge graphs represented in relational databases fits into my belief that knowledge graphs have two aspects: the expression SYNTAX and the logic of what is expressed or SEMANTICS. While the LOGIC of a knowledge graph is always the same regardless of technical syntax used to express that logic; there are many, many different technical syntaxes that can be used to represent a knowledge graph. There
Read more

Getting Started with Auditchain Luca

Image
The Innovator's Dilemma points out that disruptive innovations often look like toys that are doing everything wrong. Auditchain Luca , which is part of the Auditchain Suite , is a unique approach to creating a knowledge graph .  To experience using Auditchain Luca, have a look at the Getting Started with Auditchain Luca instructions. Be sure to grab the Excel and JSON import files used for this getting started exercise.   This getting started exercise uses one of several different approaches to getting information into a tool for constructing and viewing professional quality knowledge graphs .  Additional getting started guides will be made available over time. Auditchain Luca might not make sense to you if you don't understand the paradigm shift that is occurring and if you have not shifted your mental map. For the next step in your journey, consider trying creating a report using a financial reporting scheme template . If you are struggling to figure out how to register or
Read more

Evaluating the Quality of XBRL-based Financial Reports

Image
From the time public companies started submitting XBRL-based financial reports to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, I have been looking at those reports, trying to understand the XBRL-based reports, and trying to figure out how to get them right.  That information was used to figure out how to create software applications that help professional accountants get these reports right. Here is information that summarizes my testing and results which I stopped doing March 31, 2019: Analysis of the high level accounting relationships in the 10-Ks of about 5,716 financial reports  (5,063 public companies, about 89.1% got all these high level accounting relationships consistent with expectation, 623 were inconsistent and manual confirmation revealed the inconsistency was an error) Documentation that helps you understand 26 different types of errors in XBRL-based reports High quality documentation of hundreds of errors in XBRL-based reports submitted by public companies to the SEC Doc
Read more