Talk:Operations research/Archive 1

OR/Industrial Engineering
The first draft (9 March 2002) could use some work. In particular, can anyone clarify the relationship between OR and industrial engineering? Also, are there other OR "tools" that should be listed? -Brady Hunsaker

This is a great article, thanks! Maybe a link to mathematics somewhere would be good, since I believe OR is often classified as applied mathematics. Is numerical analysis a tool that should be listed? AxelBoldt

I added a reference to applied mathematics. That certainly is important. I've never met an OR professional who has listed numerical analysis as a direct tool, though it is used implicitly sometimes. Based on that, I'm not going to add a reference to numerical analysis, but anyone who has a different experience is free to do so. Actually, the article currently (29 Mar 2002) only reflects my view of OR, so it would be nice if other OR people would make improvements, or at least suggest them here. -Brady

Wicked Problems
What are "Wicked Problems"? --Khendon 07:20, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * I've been reading google links on this subject for 20 minutes and I still have no idea what they are. I'm gonna have to call BS on this.  Unless someone can explicitly state what these things are with some good examples, I'm voting to remove the link.  Monkeyman 19:08, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)  P.S. The "Wicked Problems" article is on VFD here.  Add your input if you like.

- - "Wicked Problems" are generally considered to be inordinately complex problems that do not have a singular solution. This may be due to too many variables and too little information, or the exact opposite. Iterative decision making might be infinite, and the context of the question is rarely objective. Perhaps the ultimate Wicked Problem is "Is There A God?." In this case it's impossible to even know how to begin to define meaningful decision criteria. An OR analyst works to find a satisfactory set of data to evaluate to be able to approximate a reasonable answer (which is even less exact than that sentence).

i.e. Without specific information an intelligence analyst has to predict where a terrorist group is likely to strike next. Unless the terrorists have a clearly and narrowly defined criteria, the number of variables will be nearly infinite. But by defining the problem as practically as possible, a general plan can be formulated to protect against higher probability attacks, or at least to the higher probability of an attack.

You can calculate the result of a specific attack relatively easily, as well as how to circumvent it. Those are separate, relatively straightforward problems with testable solutions. But prediciting the when, when, and how of the actual attack is the Wicked Problem.

Wellington Damage
The Wellington was a twin-engined aircraft that shouldn't go down if one engine was killed. (Unless it's a badly underpowered twin, which appears unlikely.) If it could come home on one engine, it would occasionally come home with damage on that "one particular point", so the example seems illogical --172.181.14.113 11:40, 21 May 2005 (UTC)


 * "In particular the analysis noted that the Vickers Wellington suffered no damage on one particular point of the engine nacelle. This spot turned out to be in front of the oil cooler, if the cooler took a single hit the engine would eventually sieze and the plane would not make it home."

Examples: Bomber Armour Protection
I notice that there's a section here about adding armor protection to bombers, and that it's lacking sources. The armor protection example just doesn't sound quite right, and it closely resembles another, better-documented case.

1. Aircraft carry little or no armor - especially British heavy bombers of the Second World War. According to Jane's Fighting Aircraft of World War II 1945/6, the Stirling and Halifax carried armor plating for certain crew members, notably the pilot. The Lancaster carried a little more, for crew, plus protection for "certain other vulnerable parts of the structure." (I'm not even sure that every mark of Lancaster had that much plating; some accounts say that the Lanc's only armor was a single plate behind the pilot's head.) The entry for the Wellington doesn't even mention armor.

2. The notion that aircraft designers would need to look at bullet holes in order to figure out where to put the armor is bizarre. Think about it for a moment. I'm prepared to accept it but only if someone can provide a source.

3. As I said, this account sounds like a garbled version of a different case, one for which I can provide a source. R.V. Jones, in Most Secret War, mentions OR and Bomber Command as an example of unintended consequences. Bomber Command was losing aircraft because of icing, and engineers proposed to fit de-icing gear to the planes, a process which would require the temporary removal of planes from service. The OR people found that the increase in load to the remaining aircraft would cause more losses than the de-icing gear would save.

Dr. Jones served as Director of Air Scientific Intelligence during the war, a position closely involved in the bomber offensive. He reports the work of OR as an anecdote, but I would trust him to get the details right.

I propose to replace the bomber-armor example with the de-icing gear example.

Chelt 18:54, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

The troubles with this whole section are 1) it overlaps with applications and 2) the WW2 emphasis only stresses the view that OR may have been relevant 60 years ago, but is no longer relevant. I would much rather see examples from the recent Edelman Awards or the EURO application award or other modern examples of OR. Any interest in something more modern here (I'm happy to write it, of course). Perhaps this section could be revamped as an "Origins of OR" section? Mtrick 01:51, 13 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Mtrick, Wiki uses the subheading "History" for the history of a topic, so I've formatted it that way. There's a big blank here after WWII -- please add what you can. If you're not sure about all the formatting stuff yet, just put in what you can and I'll come back and help with the formatting. Edit the History or Scope or whatever. Happy editing! --SueHay 13:44, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Applications
The list of applications seems a bit narrow. OR is heavily used in forest management, for example. I use it to study habitat reserve design for endangered species. Laurel Travis 6/05

Question: differences between OR and systems engineering
I'm a senior in high school, and I'm thinking about going into operations research or systems engineering. Can someone please tell me the differences between the two? Thanks. - Sonica

RESPONSE

One reason that you may have asked this specific question might be due to the fact that operations research and systems engineering both require a good grounding in mathematics and also rely upon approaching problems in a holistic way.

Operations research represents a mathematical-founded approach to solving complex problems across disciplines (eg. management, economics, engineering) whereas systems engineering is nearer a philosophy of applying engineering to solving problems.

While systems engineering has its own models and techniques, it does require a multi-disciplinary approach to a defined system, rather than a focus of the application of say electrical, mechanical, chemical etc. engineering technology to a single component of a larger system.

I'd suggest that if you are interested in a career in either field that you consider focusing on continuing a good grounding in applied mathematics while looking for examples of the application of both disciplines in solving real-world problems. Simple searches of key words related to either discipline will uncover much further information that will help you decide on which career is for you.

A final note: a lifetime is a long time to consider a single career. I'd suggest it is wiser to keep your later options open by aiming for a good, broad general education while you are younger. I began my post-secondary study with an interest in physics and mathematics, but I also saw benefit in learning more in the humanities. After spending 15 years in the field of engineering, I have more recently found interest in the application of operations research to solving complex organisational problems. I hope this response is helpful to you.


 * Excellent advice. Similarly, as an undergraduate I studies math and physics, but also found some of the humanities and softer-science courses very rewarding. I then obtained an M.S. in operations research, and went to work in the LTL industry as an operations analyst for a year and a half, then switched gears & went to work as a software engineer, developing EDA tools. Common themes for I have encountered over these two diverse industries is the frequent appearance of discrete optimization issues, algorithm analysis and optimization issues, and the need for clear and effective written and oral communication. --Cheese Sandwich 02:34, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Examples section: Who is Blackett?
In the example section, the mysterious man by the name of Blackett and his situation should be introduced before jumping so deep into this example. Each section should stand alone, meaning, the reader should not have to hunt for this supporting information. "Blackett's team"? Blackett's team for what? Softball? And "the war effort": the reader does not know of which war the article speaks. I believe a simple introduction to Blackett and why his team was formed and when will do superbly.

Operational Research
"Much of the success of OR application in the last 3 decades is due to computer"

please write ur views....

Simple sentence describing OR?
I needed a brief, one sentence description of OR for an article COIN-OR SYMPHONY. I used "Operations Research is, roughly, the analysis and optimization of business decisions using mathematics.". If anyone has a more accurate, but just as accessible alternative, feel free to swap it in. And perhaps add it to the top of the OR article? The current introduction seems rather opaque. 66.30.117.127 18:22, 23 November 2006 (UTC)