Talk:Operations research

Opening / summary
This sentence, which opens the definition, is extremely broad, pedantic, and could be applied to numerous disciplines. The end result is it's basically meaningless. Someone with greater depth of knowledge should revise

- "Operations research, or operational research in British usage, is a discipline that deals with the application of advanced analytical methods to help make better decisions.[1] " — Preceding unsigned comment added by Witty al (talk • contribs) 17:35, 10 February 2017 (UTC)


 * I will look for and, as I find it. add some material that has not been previously referred to. What I see parallels what is referred to here as "British usage" but it isn't simply British that was left out.  I see an additional source and two tie-in wiki topics could be included. 1) An additional source for Operations research is with regard to the US Navy and some higher education and it seems to be missing here. Today, the Naval Postgraduate School npu.edu in fact has an entire section on operations research and there is a history to it along with the aforementioned British usage.  2) Major components of OR are concerned with "logistics" (another wikipedia topic) and process optimization.  A lot of material on process optimization has recently emerged and studied under the rubric of "data engineering" also a wikipedia topic. Pythologist (talk) 18:38, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

Second World War "origin" is dubious
I've marked the origin as "dubious"; it has no citation. What about the previous section 's statement that Modern operational research originated at the Bawdsey Research Station in the UK in 1937 and was the result of an initiative of the station's superintendent, A. P. Rowe. which is supported by a cite of Britannica Online? These can't both be true! yoyo (talk) 14:39, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
 * In his later books Edgerton argues that the methods and techniques of OR predate WW2 by some decades and that it only became a coherent academic discipline in WW2: prior to that point industrialists and time-and-motion men were doing it quite happily for many years without the benefit of academic oversight. It's like saying America didn't exist until Europeans discovered it. Similarly OR existed for many years before academics discovered it. Regards, Anameofmyveryown (talk) 01:37, 21 February 2022 (UTC)


 * The 'operations' part of the term refers to military operations not to industrial or similar 'time and motion' studies. It means using scientists in close co-operation with operational military or air force units such as fighter and bomber squadrons, naval units, etc., in order to solve specific problems or to improve effectiveness of these units. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.8.126.91 (talk) 19:24, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

Operations Research is a subfield of X
Listing operations as a subfield of applied mathematics is inaccurate. According to the latest Survey of Earned Doctorates, operations research can be considered a field of mathematics, engineering, and management. According to the latest Joint Academic Coding System, operational research is a subdiscipline of mathematical sciences, separate from mathematics and statistics.

The citation supporting the claim that operations research is a subdiscipline of applied mathematics points to the AMS Mathematics Subject Classification, which also includes astronomy, geophysics, biology, and other completely separate disciplines. The AMS MSC is intended to provide a taxonomy of AMS journal submissions rather than a statement that all of these topics belong under the umbrella of mathematics.

The brief mention on what category operations research falls under is missing a lot of nuance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.122.183.149 (talk) 17:41, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

"Pesquisa Operacional" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Pesquisa Operacional and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 February 16 until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 22:17, 16 February 2022 (UTC)