The Dynamic Usage of Models (DYSAM)

  • Gianfranco Minati
  • Sabrina Brahms


Usually a (dynamic or non dynamic) model1 is formulated to understand, simulate, manage, forecast the behavior of a system or phenomena of different kinds (i.e. physical, biological, chemical, social). The models are formulated on the basis of theoretical assumptions, for instance suitable to be used to produce software models and mathematical descriptions.


Cognitive Model Optical Character Recognition Handwritten Digit Dynamic Usage Shopping List 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Allen, R. B., 1990, User model: theory, methods, and practice. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies 32: 511-543.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson, J., 1985, Cognitive Psychology and its Implication. 2nd Edition, W. H. Freeman and Co, New York, N Y.Google Scholar
  3. Benjafield, J. G., 1992, Cognition. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.Google Scholar
  4. Cruchtfield, J. P., 1994, The Calculi of Emergence: Computation, Dynamics and Induction. Physica D 75: 11-54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Goulding, M. M., and Goulding, R. L., 1997, Changing lives through redecision therapy. Grove Press, New York.Google Scholar
  6. Krippendorff, K., Definition of Model. In Web Dictionary of Cybernetics and Systems (F. Heylighen, ed.). This dictionary is a combination (with permission) of the ASC Glossary, Krippendorff s Dictionary and Hornung’s Glossary. The original texts were compiled and converted to hypertext by Francis Heylighen, helped by An Vranckx. Scholar
  7. Minati, G., 2001a, The Concept of Emergence in Systemics. In, General Systems Bulletin, Vol. 30, International Society for the Systems Sciences, Cookeville, USA, pp 15-19.Google Scholar
  8. Minati, G., 2001b, Esseri Collettivi. Apogeo, Milano, Italy (Collective Beings, 2001, in progress).Google Scholar
  9. Minati, G., 2001c, Experimenting with the DYnamic uSAge of Models (DYSAM) approach: the cases of corporate communication and education. In Proceedings or the 45th Conference of the International Society for the Systems Sciences (ISSS), USA.Google Scholar
  10. Minati, G., 2002, Emergence and ergodicity: a line of research. In Proceedings of Second Italian Systems Conference, Kluwer Academic.Google Scholar
  11. Minati, G., Penna, M. P., and Pessa, E., 1997, A conceptual framework for self-organization and merging processes in social systems. In Systems For Sustainability, Plenum Press, New York.Google Scholar
  12. Minati, G., Pessa, E., and Penna M. P., 1998, Thermodynamical and logical Openness. Systems Research and Behavioral Science 15: 131 -145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Mingers, J., and Gill, A., (eds), 1998, Multi methodology: Towards Theory and Practice and Mixing and Matching Methodologies. Wiley & Sons, U.K.Google Scholar
  14. Stewart, I., 1989, Transactional analysis counselling in action. Sage Publishing, Newbury Park, CA.Google Scholar
  15. The Land Institute, 2001, Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gianfranco Minati
    • 1
  • Sabrina Brahms
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
  1. 1.AIRS - Associazione Italiana per le Ricerca sui SistemiItaly
  2. 2.Los AngelesUSA
  3. 3.Phillips Graduate InstituteLos AngelesUSA
  4. 4.Saybrook Graduate SchoolSan FranciscoUSA

Personalised recommendations