Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Boundary judgment in system dynamics modeling: An investigation through the science of complexity

  • Research Note
  • Published:
Systems practice Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Checkland, P. B. (1981).Systems Thinking, Systems Practice, John Wiley & Sons, Chichester.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coyle, R. G. (1989). System dynamics—The next ten years. In Flood, R. L., Jackson, M. C., and Keys, P. (eds.),Systems Prospects: The Next Ten Years of Systems Research, Plenum Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flood, R. L. (1987). Complexity: A definition by construction of a conceptual framework.Syst. Res. 4, 177–185.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flood, R. L., and Jackson, M. C. (1991).Creative Problem Solving: Total Systems Intervention, John Wiley & Sons, Chichester.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flood, R. L., Jackson, M. C., and Keys, P. (eds.) (1989).Systems Prospects: The Next Ten Years of Systems Research, Plenum Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Forrester, J. W. (1985). “The” model versus a modeling “process”.Syst. Dynam. Rev. 1, 133–134.

    Google Scholar 

  • Forrester, J. W. (1987a). Lessons from system dynamic modeling.Syst. Dynam. Rev. 3, 136–149.

    Google Scholar 

  • Forrester, J. W. (1987b). 14 “obvious truths”.Syst. Dynam. Rev. 3, 156–159.

    Google Scholar 

  • Forrester, J. W., and Senge, P. M. (1980). Tests for building confidence in system dynamics models.TIMS Stud. Manage. Sci. 14, 209–228.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garey, M. R., and Johnson, D. S. (1979).Computers and Intractability: A Guide to the Theory of NP-Completeness, W. H. Freeman, San Francisco.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, M. C., and Keys, P. (1984). Towards a system of systems methodologies.J. Operat. Res. Soc. 35, 473–486.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keys, P. (1988). System dynamics: A methodological perspective.Trans. Inst. M.C. 10, 218–224.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klir, G. J. (1985). Complexity: Some general observations.Syst. Res. 2, 131–140.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mass, N. J. (1986). Methods of conceptualization.Syst. Dynam. Rev. 2, 76–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Midgley, G. (1992). Pluralism and the legitimation of systems science.Syst. Pract. 5, 147–172.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mohapatra, P. K. J., and Roy, R. K. (1993). System dynamics models for problems of reliability. In Sushil (ed.),System Dynamics for Management Support, Wiley Eastern, New Delhi.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weaver, W. (1948). Science and complexity.Am. Sci. 36, 536–544.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolstenholme, E. F. (1990).System Enquiry: A System Dynamics Approach, John Wiley & Sons, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolstenholme, E. F., and Coyle, R. G. (1983). The development of system dynamics as a methodology for system description and qualitative analysis.J. Operat. Res. Soc. 34, 569–581.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Systems Engineering and Cybernetics Centre, Tata Consultancy Services, Shakar Bhavan, 3rd Floor, Fateh Maidan Road, 500 004, Hyderabad, India

    D. P. Dash & P. N. Murthy

Authors
  1. D. P. Dash
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. P. N. Murthy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Dash, D.P., Murthy, P.N. Boundary judgment in system dynamics modeling: An investigation through the science of complexity. Systems Practice 7, 465–475 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02169367

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02169367

Keywords

Search

Navigation