CC BY
15DOI: 10.24412/cl-37100-2023-12-27-55
M.S. Rubin, I.L. Misiuchenko, N.A. Schedrin Laws of evolution: from technical to functional-and-targeted systems
SUMMARY
Laws of technical systems evolution (LTSE) are the main constituent and basis of TRIZ as a scientific discipline. In the present article the authors prepared criteria of scientific correctness of wording of laws of evolution and analyzed the complexes of laws of system evolution, which are already known in TRIZ. Based on this, the authors formulated dynamically developing complex of evolution's laws of functional-and-targeted system (ELFTS), which identifies the general laws of evolution both of live and social-and-cultural as well as social-and-technical systems. In particular, it became possible to show the common features of TRIZ and theory of creative personality evolution (TECP), based on the fact that the subject of both theories is the functional-and-targeted system - technical system and creative personality. The authors worded the unequivocal difference between the law of evolution and the line of evolution of functional-and-targeted systems. The scientific models of functional-and-targeted systems are based on the goal of the system, program of attaining it, operation principle of the system aimed at fulfillment of the programs and complexes of functions of the operation principle.
Key words: theory of inventive problem solving (TRIZ), theory of evolution of creative personality (TECP), complexes of evolution laws of functional-and-targeted system (LEFTS), operation principle, lines and spaces of system evolution, evolution studies.
INTRODUCTION
Laws of technical systems evolution (LTSE), developed by G.S. Altshuller in 1977 [1] became the basis for forming the theory of inventive problem solving (TRIZ). Even now LTSE remain constituent and basis of TRIZ. The laws allow us not only to research the process of technology evolution, but also to put forward the forecasts concerning the trends of this evolution. In spite of numerous developments in this field carried out by TRIZ specialists, still it is rather vital to proceed with research in this field. There are several reasons for that:
-TRIZ is actively used for development not only of technical systems, but also non-technical ones: information technologies, business, social systems, etc.
- known complexes of laws of technical systems evolution have insufficiently accurate wording, there are no unified ideas of LTSE, many researchers doubt the compliance of these laws to scientific criteria;
- there is no strict demarcation between the laws of development and lines (regularities) of system evolution.
In the present work the authors studied the criteria of scientific laws and, based on them, formulated the complex of laws of evolution of functional-and-targeted systems, which is extended not only to technical systems, but also to any functional-and-targeted systems: technical, biological, social, scientific and other systems, in which the complexes of functional connections between elements for the purpose of attaining a certain goal are formed.
1. SHORT ANALYSIS OF PUBLICATIONS ON THE TOPIC OF LTSE
It is possible to single out the following stages in the formation and development of complex of laws of technical systems evolution.
1. The first stage may be related to the end of the nineteenth century, when technology was looked upon as a secondary component of more important processes. Karl Marx, for example, was less interested in machines proper, paying more attention to their influence upon economy, society and capital formation. In 1867, in the first volume of «Das Kapital», describing the role of machines in formation of the capital and enhancement of exploitation of workers, Karl Marx remarked that «it is necessary to study how means of labor is transformed from a tool into a machine and how a machine is different from an artisan's tool». [2] Frederick Engels in his article «History of a rifle» [3] in reality wrote about popularization of articles of military technology, which were new at that moment. He concludes his article in the following way: «Not a single conscious soldier should be ignorant concerning the fact according to which principles the arms are created and how it should func-tion...». However, these works contained the fundamentals of the evolutionary approach to studying the history of evolution of technology and the objective character of the processes, which form the basis for this evolution, though the trends or laws of technology evolution were not formulated. The transition processes from the first stage to the second one characterized by works of many researchers, who focused their attention mainly on technology and its evolution, formed classifications and worded separate regularities of technology evolution, for example, the works of P. K. Engelmeier and of other authors. [4, 5, 6] The tools used in creation of an invention (as a key object of technical systems evolution were never analyzed and the notion of a technical system as a key element of technology as a whole was never singled out.
2. The second stage of evolution of LTSE were the works of G.S.Altshuller, starting with the article written in 1956 jointly with R.B.Shapiro. [7] LTSE were first formulated by Genrich Sau-lovich Altshuller in 1977 and then published in 1979 in the book. [8] Table 1 quotes a complex of trends of technical systems evolution, proposed by G.S.Altshuller.
Table 1. Laws of technical systems evolution
Statics Kinematics Dynamics
1. Law of completeness of system parts. 2. Law of «energy conductivity» of the system. 3. Law of coordination of rhythm of system parts. 4. Law of increasing ideality of the system. 5. Law of irregularity of development of system parts. 6. Law of transition to supersystem. 7. Law of transition from macro-level to micro-level. 8. Law of increasing the degree of Su-Field feature.
Beside the system of trends G.S. Altshuller formulated several lines of technical systems evolution, for example, S-curve evolution line, line of transition to supersystem «mono-bi-poli», line of emptiness. [9, 10]
G.S. Altshuller singled out two approaches to search and specification of laws of technical system evolution:
- so called «patent layer» - analysis of hundreds or thousands of inventions from different fields of technology during 20-50 years;
- «patent hole» - analysis of history of development of inventions on an example of one and the same system during thousands of years or since the very beginning of its existence, for example, watch, arms, houses, etc.
3. The third stage of development of LTSE is associated first of all with the works of disciples and followers of G.S. Altshuller regarding the development of a complex of LTSE according to several directions:
- illustrations on examples of already formulated laws of technical systems evolution, for example, in the book; [11]
- specification of wording of trends and lines of technical systems evolution; [12]
- the addition of new and detailing of known trends of the evolution of technical systems; [13, 14]
- augmentation of new trends and refinement of known trends of technical systems evolution-application of LTSE as tools for forecasting of technical systems evolution and solving inventive problems, enhancement of instrumentality of LTSE complex application;
- extending the laws of technical systems evolution to other kinds of systems: biological, art systems, journalism and advertising, management, system of demands and many other fields; [15, 16]
- different methods of structuring, classification and grouping of laws in complexes of LTSE.
4. The fourth stage is associated with the formation of a more general (as compared to LTSE) complex of laws of evolution of any systems, not only technical ones. The present article also relates to this trend.
The necessity for developing a new complex of laws of systems evolution as compared to known complexes of LTSE is associated with a number of their disadvantages. Let us list out only some of them.
As of today, hundreds of works on laws of technical systems evolution have been published, in which dozens and even more than a hundred laws of technology evolution. Such profusion strongly complicates the application of these laws in practical activity. There are very many laws -dozens and hundreds. Detailed elaboration is superfluous. For example, such a wording of the law is proposed in one of the law systems: «The structure of a technical system should be organized in such a way that the interaction of the components should result in selection and singling out of only such information, which is necessary. Informational value of a technical system or processes depends not on the quantity of information contained in it, but on ways and methods of using this information».
The terms used in the wording of laws are often non-specified and non-formalized, which makes this or that wording unclear, difficult to use and difficult to verify. For example, one of the works proposes «The law of preserving complicacy», «The law of increasing systematicity», or another «The law of complex use of forms of substance motion for the purpose of implementing the functioning of a technical system». Among the notions, which remain non-formalized in TRIZ, we find such notions as complicacy of the system, degree of systematicity or forms of motion of substance, while the attempt to formalize them and to word them correctly might lead to encounters with serious scientific and methodological difficulties. The use of non-precise notions will inevitably lead to inaccuracy of laws themselves and the complex of laws on the whole.
Of course, it is possible to encounter simply incorrect wordings of the laws. For example, rather widely spread is the following wording of the law: «Each technical system should include four basic parts: motor, transmission, working member and control member». Elementary facts prompt that it does not correspond to reality. For example, a house, a chair or a spike have no motor, but
they are evidently technical systems. Karl Marx, to whom the authors refer thereby, wrote not about the technical system in general, but about machines: "Each developed multitude of machines (Entwickelung der Machineries) consists of three significantly different parts: machine-motor, transfer mechanism, finally, the machine as an instrument or a working machine» [2]. Transfer of machine structure to all technical systems is not correct.
One more example is the formulation of laws, which stay in contradiction to themselves. For example, the law of tendency to ideality/anti-ideality, the law of stabilization-dynamization. [17] In the system of laws proposed by the authors further in this article such Contradictions will be excluded inside one law. It is also possible to trace certain discrepancy between laws and conclusions drawn from them, between laws and lines of evolution. The authors avoid this discrepancy in the proposed system of laws of development of function-and-targeted systems.
It is also possible to apply the word «incorrect» not only to the very wording of the laws, but also to the methods of composing them into complexes of laws and methods of classifying them. For example, in some works it is proposed to create the hierarchy of laws based on the dominance of «the law» of S-curve evolution though it is not a law, but simply a line of development, i.e., this is a derivative of several laws of evolution.
In the complex of laws of evolution of function-and-targeted systems the authors will also resign the dominance of the main function as the one, which entirely determines all hierarchy of system functions and will use a more general notion - operation principle of the systems.
In order to enhance scientific objectiveness of the proposed system of laws of evolution the authors analyzed possible criteria of correctness of wording of scientific laws.
2. CRITERIA OF CORRECTNESS OF COMPLEXES OF LAWS OF SYSTEM EVOLUTION
As of today, TRIZ is at bottom a theory of evolution, which acquires to a greater extent the traits, which characterize an actual science. This is true, since modern TRIZ actually possesses all main components, which are characteristic of science (object, method, theory, law, etc.) Thus, there are Laws in TRIZ (or complexes of Trends), there are structured databases of facts (for example, a database of physical effects, use of patents for inventions as databases, etc.), hypotheses are put forward and verified, specific methodologies and tools are formed, as well as models, analytical procedures, systems of notions, etc.
TRIZ is based on collection and analysis of information arrays dealing with inventive solutions, differentiation of these arrays according to levels of complicacy of contradictions being resolved, identification of techniques and methods for resolving contradictions, models of creative process and examples of developed methods for solving inventive problems and developing the systems. [18]
Theory of inventive problem solving (TRIZ) is the field of knowledge on laws, trends and tendencies of development of technical systems, methods and tools of forecasting, identification, analysis and resolving of contradictions of system evolution. TRIZ is based on laws of dialectic, and implies the use of evolutionary, system-based, functional, model-based and other fundamental scientific approaches. TRIZ model includes the bonds between models of inventive problems and the models of solutions of these problems as well as connections of system models with the models of their evolution. Regularities and methods of forming and development of inventive thinking are identified as well as methods of developing creative thinking. TRIZ methods and tools are applicable for solving inventive problems not only in technology, but also in non-technical systems. TRIZ is used in practice for development of creative personality, solving inventive problems in different areas in innovative enterprising, in solving problems at manufacturing plants. [15]
Basic theoretical methods of scientific research: induction, deduction, axiomatic method, analysis, synthesis. Main empirical methods of scientific research: monitoring, experiment, questionnaires, conversation (interview). Methods of scientific cognition can be classified in the following way: monitoring, comparison, measuring, experiment, abstraction. Key notions and terms used in science are: Hypothesis, Law, Regularity, System of law, Theory, Facts and other notions, for example, Monitoring, Experiment, Statement, Scientific notion, Scientific community, Tendency, Phenomenon, Mechanism of phenomenon, Rule, Principle. Based on facts, hypotheses are put forward, which are supported by facts. Hypotheses formulated in the form of trends, based on which regularities can be identified, as private cases or consequences of laws. The experiments enable to obtain new facts and to confirm formulated laws and regularities. System of laws includes interrelated laws of one theory. The theory is restricted by the area of application and contains a system of models (notions), laws and regularities.
Comparing this basic methodological and terminological paradigm, characteristic of science with similar methodological and terminological set used in TRIZ, it is possible to see that practically all these components of a scientific theory are present in TRIZ. For example, the facts in TRIZ are understood as arrays of inventions and multitudes of problems solved with the help of TRIZ. Hypotheses are preliminary images of tools for statement and solution of inventive problems, for example, five first experimental standards were formulated before creating a system of standards for problem solving. In order to identify new regularities in TRIZ so called united collections of cards were formed with a set of objects on this or that topic. In order to analyze the effectiveness of using TRIZ tools, like in any science, different experiments are also used. For example, statistics of solving an inventive problem in focus groups (without TRIZ) and in a group implying the use of TRIZ is collected. Another way of conducting experiments in TRIZ: solving an inventive problem first with one set of tools, for example, Contradictions and IFR and then with another set of tools, for example, standards for inventive problem solving. One more type of experiments is measuring the level of inventive thinking based on solving a set of problems or using other methods. Comparative experiments on measuring the level of physiological stress in solving inventive problems are also known: a person with zero TRIZ training experiences the stress of a higher level than the person, who is skilled in using TRIZ tools.
Like in other sciences, special role in TRIZ is performed by Laws and their components (or their predecessors): tendencies, rules, regularities. To begin with, let us recollect, for example, how physical principles are defined:
«A physical principle is a quantitative ratio between physical values, which is identified based on generalization of empirical facts and expresses objective regularities, existing in nature».
In reality such wording, which makes us reflect in Principles particularly quantitative relationships, is somewhat idealized even for physics. For example, Galilei stated that in vacuum all bodies fall down similarly, independent of their weight. And this statement is a principle, since it is unequivocal, it corresponds to the facts and there are no exceptions from it. However, quantitative relationships are absent her, they are substituted by the word «similarly». It is possible to give many similar examples, which show that in historical context not all principles (and not always) were formulated particularly in quantitative relationships. [19] Yes, the science tends to strict quantitative description, but it does not mean that it initially has it. Strict quantitative description is a result of long-term development. As of today, laws of TRIZ bear more phenomenological and less quantitative character, than the principles of physics, but this state is not final. At the same time in other sciences, for example, in biology or in sociology, the Principles are often devoid of quantitative character, but they reflect, for example, the sequence of certain stages of evolution or, for example, qualitative description of results of this or that process, etc. The most important in a scientific meth-
od is the fact that corresponding models, describing reality, are created and developed and further on science deals with these models for obtainment of new knowledge, formation of forecasts and performing the analysis. The law is also a certain model, since its formulation (wording) is based not only on objects of reality, but model-based ideas (material point, elementary charge, genome, social-and-economic system, etc.).
Consequently, it is possible to say that the principles in science stipulate qualitative (and ideally also quantitative) relationships between the notions (values, objects), which correspond to existing sets of factors and express objective regularities, existing in nature). This role is performed by TRIZ laws. However, the trends are not obliged to explain the phenomena that take place. They only record and reflect the main regularities. And the reasons why certain phenomena take place are, as a rule, stated by the Theory. The laws are part of the theory; however, the theory contains not only laws, but also phenomenological explanations of mechanisms for origination of such phenomena, with which this theory deals. Besides, the theory, as a rule, also contains the definitions of the terms as well as tools for analysis, rules, recommendations and methodologies.
Table 2. Criteria of correctness of laws and their projection on TRIZ
Criteria of correctness of laws Comments for TRIZ
Being restricted by the field of law application. With TRIZ the field of application is restricted by the analysis of system evolution in ontogenesis and phylogenies. This criterion does not allow to transcend the frames of the subject.
The law generalizes large number of facts (induction and deduction), related to the field of the law and possess forecasting qualities With TRIZ these are information funds of inventions of high level and facts of evolutionary development of the system. The trends in TRIZ enable to obtain forecasts of behavior of objects in the future and/ or in case of change of external conditions. This criterion provides for high commonality of laws and prevents the uncontrollable growth of system of laws.
Law operates model objects and notions, defined in theory Wording of law in TRIZ should contain at least one notion, defined in TRIZ. In the wording of the majority of version of LTSE this criterion was not always adhered to, since not all terms were introduced, while many introduced terms did not find an exact and unequivocal wording in TRIZ. In the system of laws proposed by the authors below, an attempt is made to eliminate these disadvantages. This criterion provides for standardization and non-ambiguity of notions.
Reproducibility of laws In TRIZ there are no sustainably repeatable results, which are contrary to the law within the frame of the field of its application This criterion provides for compliance to pragmatically obtained facts.
Laws (complex of laws) should have a certain potentiality of development. With the appearance of new objects and theoretical processes the laws are grouped into a complex of laws. A possibility of adaptation to new facts and new fields of TRIZ application should characterize TRIZ laws. Laws of TRIZ (complex of laws) should have the simplest possible wording of all possible ones. Maximum of laws and relations should be described through minimum resources. This criterion provides for potentiality of TRIZ evolution.
System of laws should be complete so that the entire cycle of processes in the given field of application should be described. System of laws in TRIZ should contain the description of forming and evolution (progress and regress) of all stages of system evolution. This criterion provides for completeness of subject description.
Based on general scientific approaches, it is possible to formulate criteria, with which certain Laws should comply and to project these criteria upon the trends of TRIZ (Table 2).
It is possible to note that the system of TRIZ trends in its initial form does not as yet possess completeness. Thus, for example, the notion of Contradictions is extensively used in TRIZ. In fact, the formulation and resolving of contradictions is almost the strongest tool for solving problems, which we find in the inventory of TRIZ. However, to the surprise of the authors there is no, for example, Law of origination and elimination of contradictions in systems among the formulations of laws of technical system evolution. Neither do we find anything reminding us of the content such law. Though a law, which has approximately the same content, for example, in philosophy bears the name of «law of the unity and struggle of opposites».
Thus, it could be said that TRIZ moves along the way of evolution to the level of quite modern science, however, in terms of a number of parameters it stays at the initial stage of this process. First of all, its Laws are mostly devoid of quantitative character, and secondly, the formulations of these Laws need improvement, additional formulation or reformulation (rewording). Secondly, neither is the appearance of new laws excluded, since the system of Laws in TRIZ is probably incomplete.
In their significant part the Laws of TRIZ correspond to the described criteria, though at any new stage of development it is necessary to check them for compliance, since as the time flows, the volume of accumulated knowledge changes, the field of application is specified, new terms and notions are introduced, new connections are established, identified cases of incorrectness, inexactness and Contradictions are eliminated. It is natural that it leads to new wording of known laws, formation of new laws, development of structures of interconnections within the system of laws as well as to trimming (amalgamation, generalization) of laws. Below the authors quote a renovated variant of a complex of laws of system evolution, which takes into account the above-listed disadvantages and criteria of laws' correctness.
Here is the list of criteria of correctness of system evolution laws intended for forming a complex of evolution laws in TRIZ:
1. The notions and terms used in the wording of each law should be unequivocal in interpretation and characteristic exactly of TRIZ. The wording of a law in TRIZ should contain at least one notion, which is defined exactly in terms of TRIZ. It eliminates the ambiguity of interpretations and notions, which exist now.
2. The wording of each law should not transcend the boundaries of the field to which the law refers (for example, it should concern exactly the evolution of the system in phylogenesis and ontogenesis and not more than that), and shouldn't be narrower as compared to the phenomenon, which is actually being described (for example, there is no sense in being restricted by technical systems only in the formulations of laws, if the law describes a phenomenon, which is characteristic of a wider field). It eliminates the blurring of the subject of research, transition of the frame of the subject.
3. The laws and their complex on the whole should correspond to known facts of development of the system and contain prognostic features, which can be confirmed. It eliminates the non-compliance of the system of laws with the available pragmatic facts.
4. Each law separately should not stay in contradiction to itself. It does not allow any internal contradictions in wording of the laws and provides for their workability.
5. The laws and their complex on the whole should be compact and should thereby describe the entire life cycle of the objects, the description of whose evolution is the goal of the law. Maximum of regulations and connections should be described by minimum wording. This principle is called in science «Occam's razor» and does not allow scientific ideas to endlessly become more and more complicated.
6. Complex of laws should be dynamic and should imply the possibility of adaptation to new facts and new fields of application. It provides for the evolution of the system of laws.
7. Complex of laws should comply with its own requirements and regularities. It is a unique criterion, which is typical particularly for TRIZ. In natural sciences there is no such criterion, since they deal with the material constituent of Nature. At the same time TRIZ is applicable not only to material systems, but also to non-material ones, for example, to systems of notions, models and trends. Thus, TRIZ should be applicable both to itself and to other sciences.
3. BASIC NOTIONS AND TERMS
The authors of the present article propose a new approach to creation of Laws of technical systems evolution with regard to above-formulated criteria of correctness of system evolution laws. The essence of this approach could be formulated in the following basic assertions:
- the main object of description in the complex of laws proposed by the authors are not the technical systems and their evolution, but the evolution of functional-and-targeted systems;
- the key issue in the description of evolution of functional-and-targeted systems will be not the main useful function of this or that object, but its operation principle, which implies not one function, but a complex of functions, which is characteristic of this object
- complex of laws of evolution of functional-and-targeted systems (LEFTS) will contain laws, consequences from laws and the lines of development of systems.
- formulation of each law and of the consequence from it separately will not contain internal contradictions, but a complex of laws of evolution on the whole and the lines of evolution should contain dialectic contradictions
- it is proposed to use not only the lines of evolution of systems, but also the planes of evolution (combination of two lines of evolution as axes of the plane) and the space of evolution (combination of three and more lines of evolution as axes of space of evolution).
- since the complex of laws of evolution in itself is a function-and-targeted system, LEFTS can be used for checking and development of the same complex of laws.
These terms are explained in the present article.
Functional-and-targeted systems.
Many authors, including, for example, Pyotr K. Engelmeier [4,5], have to strongly broaden the usual understanding of technology (technique): technique of playing musical instruments, artificial systems, anthropogenies systems, etc. It is associated, admittedly, with a higher dependence of technical systems upon the human beings and the society. However, the attempts to generalize in TRIZ the notion of technical system have serious disadvantages. For example, a human being, born in a maternity house with the aid of the midwife: is it an artificial or a natural system? A giraffe in the zoo - is it an anthropogenies system or not? It is not possible to create scientifically grounded wording of trends based on suchlike proposals concerning the broadening of the notion of technical system.
Complexes of LTSE don't possess the necessary level of generalization, however, there is considerable practice of applying them for development of technical systems and solving inventive problems. According to the opinion of the authors, it is possible to combine the generalization of laws with their instrumentality in formulating the laws of evolution as applied to function-and-targeted system.
Function-and-targeted system is a system formed for the purpose of performing a complex of useful functions and attainment of goals in keeping with the requirements of the supersystem and
the operational principle of the given system. Functional-and-targeted system is formed based on self-organization, natural or artificial selection, or as a result of targeted actions of one of the supersystems. It is possible to relate the following systems to functional-and-targeted systems: biological systems, technical systems, social, economic, scientific and other systems.
Theory of functional systems is a model, which describes the structure of living organisms, which was proposed by P.K. Anokhin in 1935 [20]. He singled out two types of functional systems:
• Systems of the first type provide for homeostasis due to internal (already available) resources of the organism, without transcending its boundaries.
• Systems of the second type support homeostasis due to changes in behavior, interaction with the external world and offer the basis for different types of behavior.
There is an obvious (though false) dissonance: the model is basically very close to technical systems, however, is formulated for living organisms, which are in no way like the technical systems. As a result, the theory of functional systems of P.K. Anokhin practically did not influence the evolution of TRIZ as a scientific theory.
The term functional-and-targeted system is used in describing social organizations, in theory and practice of managing organizations and projects, for living and social systems. One of the reports in 2020 [21] quotes the examples of functional-and-targeted systems: organism, population, system «nature-society-human being», family. In TRIZ the term of function-and-targeted systems was introduced in 2008. [22] In formulation of complexes of evolution laws the authors used (as an object of research) exactly the notion of function-and-targeted system as a more general and more exact for describing the laws of evolution than the technical systems. In this case the succession of LTSE and LEFTS (laws of evolution of functional-and-targeted systems) was preserved. It enabled on the one hand to procure a sufficient level of generalizing the trends and on the other hand - to preserve and even to enhance the instrumentality of complex of LEFTS as compared to LTSE.
It is possible to single out three reasons why it is necessary to use the term functional-and-targeted systems, not the term functional systems :
- the term «functional systems» with P.K. Anokhin and with TRIZ are a private case of functional-and-targeted systems;
- LEFTS describe evolutionary development of systems, not simply their functioning, which requires the inclusion of a notion of goal for this evolution;
- LEFTS embrace the evolution, including that of social systems, which are better matched with a tendency for attainment of the goal.
Figure 1. Interconnections of LEFTS with TSE and laws of system evolution [23]
Function-and-targeted systems were formed on Earth as a result of processes for self-organization of substance approximately 4 billion years before in the form of first one-celled anaerobic organisms and their communities. Later on, the evolution of these systems started and goes on till the present day: microorganisms, water weeds, plants and animals and their communities, people, technique, science, civilizations, states, economy, law - all this and many other things are examples of function-and-targeted systems.
Transition to function-and-targeted systems made it necessary to consider as the basic notion not the function, but the operation principle, in which the function is only one of the subsystems.
Operation principle of function-and-targeted systems.
Operation principle is the key model for describing function-and-target systems. Let us quote several examples.
Example 1. System «Planting hoe». If we assume that a technical system necessarily consists of an energy source, motor, transmission, working member and control member, a hoe is not a technical system at all [11], since it is devoid of both energy source and transmission. If we try to formulate the main useful function of the hoe, we shall also encounter difficulties. It is possible to describe fairly different functions of the hoe: to crush the clumps of earth, move the earth, dig out the plants, take away the weeds, form the earth, make beds in the earth, make small pits, etc. However, all these functions in reality don't define the essence of the hoe, all these functions could be performed, for example, be performed by a spade or a rake. An attempt to describe the operation principle will give us much more in terms of understanding. The goal of using the hoe is manual ploughing earth or digging it. The elements, shape and materials: metal or stone (in ancient times) blade of the working part, wooden handle. The working part can be narrow or wide, flat, curved or spade like. The functions were numerated above by us. One might add an instruction sheet to it: what kind of hoes could be selected for which kind of work, what soil or lawn is processed, etc. It is obvious that the operation principle describes the hoe in greater detail than simply a list of possible functions. Especially if we try to single out and to formulate one main function of the hoe.
In 1935 P.K. Anokhin formulated provisions of the theory of functional systems based on the research of function performance with the animals:
• The function is performed by the organism as a whole, not its separate organs;
• Motivation and stated goal are very important;
• A program containing a list of steps for attainment of the set goals;
• The micro-level (subsystems) is involved for fulfillment of the program;
• The implementation of the function is accompanied by monitoring of the result; feedback is introduced and decisions are taken for attainment of the goals.
All these provisions are in the fullest sense related to functional-and-targeted systems. Figure 2 shows the hierarchical connection from the Goal to functions of the system. Formulated goals of the system are attained based on certain programs with feedback for controlling the attainment of the goals and correcting the programs. The programs are performed due to implementation of operation principles of the systems, which include complexes of functions.
It is necessary to note that not every system if a functional-and-targeted one. There are so called resource systems, in which there is no action or the instances of action could be neglected, there is a self-regulating system, in which there are actions, but no functions and there are function-al-and-targeted systems, in which a certain complex of functions is created for attainment of this or that goal. For example, the rocks somewhere in the mountains or the sand near the shores of the sea are resource systems, in which there is no action or this action is not significant. If we take into account that the action is the change of parameter of a certain object, then we come to a conclusion that the actions can be found in self-regulating systems. For example, galaxy, Solar system, climate of the Earth. No doubt, there are actions in these systems, there are variations of numerous parameters of a huge number of objects, however there is no «customer» and «designer» of these actions in the form of supersystems, as it is observed for complexes of functions. Solar system, for example, does not provide for existence of our galaxy.
Figure 2. Interconnection between the Goal, operation principle and functions of the system. Formation of the set of requirements to the analyzed system
Another situation with living organisms is their existence and vital activity depends upon the functions of heart, kidneys, blood system, upon behavior, etc. Live organisms can be simultaneously considered to be both self-organizing and functional-and-targeted systems: in one aspect or at one level - these are self-organized systems (for example, a flock of migrant birds, a crowd of people), while in other aspect or at another system level these are functional-and-targeted systems (digestion, blood circulation, etc.). For example, it would be fairly complicated to provide a wording of a goal for an ecosystem, animals or humans - these are self-organizing systems. Living organisms can be considered to be a transition period in the evolution of systems from self-regulating to functional-and-targeted ones. For example, it would be fairly complicated to formulate the function, goal or meaning of existence of an ecosystem, animals or human beings. However, it is possible to formulate the goals and functions of breathing, nutrition, motion, reproduction and other functional-and-targeted components of living organisms. It is impossible to formulate a function or a goal of existence of the human being, however, it is possible to formulate the goals of a scientist, functions of a baker or a metallurgist.
Example 2. System «fishes with spawning migration». Spawning migrations are carried out by many kinds of fishes. An example of spawning migrations is migration of salmon fishes of the Far East: Siberian salmon and humped-back salmon. At a certain period of time these fishes in huge shoals consisting of myriads and hundred thousand species pass from the Pacific Ocean to the mouths of the rivers and move upwards along the rivers upwards at distances of hundreds and even thousands of kilometers. It would be impossible to describe such a system through the wording of the main useful function. It can be done only through the complex: «Goals - Programs for attainment of these goals - Operation principles - Functions of the systems».
Example 3. System «Alpinist». In the same sense it is impossible to describe the activities of the alpinists through one main function. It could be done through the same chain: Goals - programs for attainment of these goals - Operation principles - complexes of functions. The goals were clear - to attain the chosen top. There are also requirements in the form of restrictions - to get back intact, physical and financial restrictions of the alpinist himself and of his group. There is a whole set of programs for attainment of the goal: programs of preparation, program of expedition, climbing program, program for passing through rick and ice relief, program of getting down from the top,
program of actions in case of emergency, program of communication with the basic camp and rescue team. With each program there are operation principles of the system, which are involved with the fulfillment of these programs. There is also feedback for correcting these programs with regard to particular situations: weather, state of the route, speed of passage, level of actual preparation of participants, available set of equipment and food products, etc.
It is proposed to use the following notions and definitions as the foundation of a complex of laws of evolution of functional-and-targeted systems:
Goal is an information image (model) of «System AS TO BE», which is capable to encourage the subject of the Goal to perform actions, which are directed at preparation and fulfillment of actions of programs for attainment of the Goal. The goal is formed by the system (subject of the Goal), supersystem or based on their interaction. The goal is attained due to realization of ready or formed programs of action and complex of interconnected functions.
Model system of System AS TO BE type is formed based on the model of the System AS IS by certain transformations: parametrical, structural, etc.
Operation principle is a description of the method for performing a complex of interconnected functions of the system, directed at the attainment of the goal and also including the description of its morphology, composition of elements and sub-elements, their interconnection as well as technologies for realization of functions.
The program of attainment (fulfillment) of the goal is an information image (model) of the possible sequence of actions (technologies) and intermediary results, which are necessary for the attainment of the Goal by this or that subject - carrier of the Goal. The program is fulfilled due to realization of operation principles of systems, which are required for that and contains mechanisms of correcting (adaptation) based on feedback.
Requirements to the system is a complex of functions, restrictions or interactions, which should necessarily be realized for supersystem, directed at this or that object. The requirement is formulated for the attainment of a certain goal, program of its realization or operation principle of this or that subject and directed at this or that system. The requirements could be grouped into systems of interconnected requirements, which form the foundation for forming and evolution of the system, at which these systems of requirements are directed. It is possible to single out goal-oriented (targeted) requirements and restrictive requirements.
Restriction (restrictive requirement) is a type of requirements, in which such functions, interrelations, components or parameters of components are described, which are obligatory for this operation principle or which are prohibited.
A technical system is a material functional-and-targeted system, the evolution of which takes place under the influence of requirements of a supersystem and target-oriented change (or application) of known system. Technical systems don't possess the feature of self-evolution in phylogenesis. It is impossible to identify a technical system without knowing, how it originated: based on active actions of supersystem or due to self-organization and self-development.
This complex of notions is the basis for forming and development of a complex of LEFTS.
Laws, evolution lines and complexes of evolution laws of functional-and-targeted systems
The laws of system evolution (LSE) are a complex of general, objective and internally non-contradictory trends of evolution of the systems, based on scientific approaches to system evolution. Among the scientific approaches used are dialectical approach, system-based approach, evolutionary approach, parametrical and model-based approach, basics of psychology of creative thinking.
Basic law of LSE: the evolution of the systems follows the direction of increasing the level and efficiency of capture and use of resources. The field, which deals with forming and development of LSE is called "System evolution studies" or "Evolutionology".
The law of evolution of functional-and-targeted system (LEFTS) is an objective law, in which the sustainable direction of evolution of a functional-and-targeted system is described, which enhances its compatibility at the level of system-based phylogenesis. The laws of evolution of func-tional-and-targeted system are internally non-controversial. Each trend can be specified by providing the consequences from this trend. Based on LEFTS the lines of evolution of functional-and-targeted systems are formulated, methodologies of analysis of functional-and-targeted systems and of forecasting their evolution are developed. Hierarchy of LEFTS complex is based on supremacy of the law of increasing ideality.
The lines of evolution of functional-and-targeted system are a description of this or that direction of system evolution based on a chain of transformations, which are in their turn based on a group of laws of evolution of functional-and-targeted systems. The description of evolution line include: the laws based on which the line of evolution is created, Contradictions of requirements of evolution line, IFR for formulated contradictions, no less than three steps along the evolution line (fulfillment of one of the requirements, fulfillment of the contrary requirement, a step towards IFR). The combination of two lines constitutes a plane of development, while a combination of three and more lines of development constitute the space of system evolution. The lines of system evolution are included with the systems of standards for inventive problem solving and are used in forecasting the system evolution.
System of requirements and goal^
1. Law of increasing ideality and functionality of systems
Evolution of system structure
Laws 2-4
L
Interaction with external environment
Laws 5-7
T
8. Law of evolution through origination of contradictions of requirements and resolving them with principles for resolving contradictions
Lines (planes, spaces) of evolution of functional-and-targeted systems
Model for each line of evolution: Laws; Contradictions; IFR; Steps on line (no less then 3 steps : fulfillment of one requirement, fulfillment of an opposite requirement, a step towards IFR)
Figure 3. Structure of LEFTS: Laws and lines of evolution of functional-and-targeted systems
Complex of LEFTS is a complex of interconnected laws and lines of evolution of functional-and-targeted systems, describing the entire life cycle of forming and evolution of functional-and-targeted systems. The complex consists of 4 main parts:
1) Law of increasing ideality,
2) Group of laws of evolution of system structure,
3) Group of laws of interaction with external environment and
4) Law of evolution through origination of contradictions of requirements and resolving these contradictions.
Laws of complex of LEFTS can enter into a dialectic Contradiction in contrast to each trend separately. Resolution of this Contradiction is pre-conditioned by the law of evolution through origination of contradictions of requirements and through resolving these contradictions. The complex of LEFTS in itself is a functional-and-targeted system and can evolve due to new consequences from laws, lines of evolution, new laws and the interaction between them. The structure of LEFTS complex is shown in Figure 3.
The law of increasing ideality of functional-and-targeted systems is a sort of translator of system of requirements: requirements should be adhered to at minimum or absent expenditures and harmful functions.
System of ideal requirements is implemented due to two groups of laws: a group of laws of system evolution and a group of laws of interaction with external environment. Since the requirements of laws can enter into Contradictions, the law of evolution through origination of contradiction of requirements and resolving these contradictions using the principles of contradiction resolving is included with the complex for the purpose of resolving them.
Since the complex of LEFTS in itself is a functional-and-targeted system, this very complex of trends should be used for its evolution.
4. LAWS OF EVOLUTION OF FUNCTIONAL-AND-TARGETED SYSTEMS
Figure 4 shows the hierarchical structure of a complex of laws of evolution of functional-and-targeted systems: the laws, consequences from laws and lines of system evolution.
Let us analyze these laws, consequences from them and lines of evolution in detail. 4.1. Law of increasing ideality of functional-and-targeted systems.
The law of increasing ideality of functional-and-targeted systems: evolution of functional-and-targeted systems follows the direction of increasing ideality (ratio of complex of useful functions to expenditures on fulfillment of these functions increases). Complexes of useful functions of the system operation principle are firmed in keeping with the requirements and goals of the system.
This law is a kind of a conductor of system of requirements and goals, which are given to the system. In keeping with the law of increasing ideality these goals and requirements should be realized at the minimum of expenditures.
Let us quote the examples characterizing the functional-and-targeted systems of three types:
- for technical systems
- for biological systems
- for creative personalities as a functional-and-targeted system.
Example 4. For a technical system. Tendency to ideality. Efficiency of motors grows in the process of evolution: steam engine - 1%, carburetor engine 20-30%, steam turbine - 35-46%, electric motor - more than 97%.
Example 5. For biological systems. Tendency to ideality for living substance on the whole: the efficiency of using available energy in biosphere is constantly increasing. «The meaning of evolution is the deceleration of entropy as related to the source of life - the sunbeam». [24] All variety of organic forms is but a peculiar method of complication of cycles of energy transformation on Earth and increase of energetic efficiency of living beings, which manifests itself in the formation of stable energy systems».
Evolution of system structure
rSystemof requirements and goals>
1. Trend of increasing ideality of functional-and-targeted systems
Hierarchy of TEFS
2. Trend of completeness of forming the operation principle for attainment of the
goals
Consequence 2.1. Completeness of components and functions.
Consequence 2.2. Increase of conductivity of flows.
Consequence 2.3. coordination and structuring of components, fields and processes. Consequence 2.4. Completeness of using space: point—line—plane—volume
Consequence 2.5. Use and gradual pushing out of augmenting system, in particular, with TS this is elimination of human involvement Consequence 2.6. Formation of tools for braking and feedback.
3.Trend of deployment and trimming of components and functions of the system k
4. Trend of increasing controllability and dynamization of the systems
Interaction with external
environment -
5. Trend of transition to supersystems
Consequence 5.1. Integration with similar or other systems Consequence 5.2. Increase of efficiency of replication
6. Trend of succession in application of resources and their parameters: from easily accessible to hard-to-get ones, from ready to derivatives , from known to new ones
V
Consequence 6.1. Application of components (substances and fields).
Consequence 6.2. For technology. Transition to microlevel. Consequence 6.3. For technology. Rejecting terrestrial conditions .
7. Trend of formation and development of augmenting , alternative and competing systems and of interaction with them
8. Trend of formation and development of programs (technologies)of actions for attainment of the goal
9. Trend of evolution of functional-and-targeted systems through origination of contradictions of requirements and resolving them with the aid of principles for resolving contradictions
Lines (planes, spaces) of evolution of functional-and-targeted systems
Ll. Line of introducing elements (substances) |_5. Line of «mono - bi - poly - trimming»
L2. Line of introduction and development of interaction fields |_6. Lines of collective/individual use of systems
L3. Line of fragmentation and dynamization |_7. Line of S-curve evolution L4. Lines of coordination-discoordination and structuring
Figure 4. Hierarchy in complex of laws of evolution of functional-and-targeted systems.
Example 6. For the development of creative personalities. Tendency to ideality. During the Middle Ages (11th - 14th centuries) in Central Europe the percentage of science-intensive products can be evaluated approximately in the amount of 0.5%. B ecause of illiteracy in England King's autographs date back to the 13* century, while the ladies' signatures appeared one hundred years later. In Germany even the poets first dictated their songs to the clerks. Currently in Germany the portion of science-intensive products in gross domestic product constitutes more than 60%. The time between evolutionary events in the development of civilization decreases according to exponential rate: in ancient times it constituted 8000 years, in the Middle Ages more than 100 years and currently - less than 10 years. The volume of information in the world since 1500 till the present time has increased billion times. If recalculated for each citizen of the Earth, the increase of information amounts to 55 million times. It means that the scientists should process a volume of information, which is many times higher and the resultativeness is increased: important evolutionary events take place more often and the number of science-intensive products is increased. 4.2-4. Laws of evolution of structure of functional-and-targeted systems
A group of laws of evolution of structure of the system consists of three laws and several consequences from these laws.
4.2. Law of completeness of forming the operation principle for the attainment of the goals
Law of completeness of forming the operation principle for attainment of the goals: a necessary condition of forming and improvement of the operation principle is arranging for completeness
of fulfillment of operation principle of functional system, conductivity of its flows and coordination of rhythms of its parts.
The definition of the notion of operation principle was given above in this article.
The law of forming and improvement of operation principle provides for interconnection between components, processes and flows within the system. Several consequences follow from this law.
Consequence 2.1. Completeness of components and functions.
The necessary condition for fulfillment of operation principle of functional-and-targeted system is the presence and minimum fulfillment of functions of the main components of the given system. The component is understood either as an element or the field of interaction (mutual relations) of the elements.
Consequence 2.2. Increase of conductivity of flows.
The condition for fulfillment of operation principle of a functional system is the presence of certain necessary bonds between the components of the system, including the flows of substances, information and energy between them, which are necessary for fulfillment of operation principle.
Consequence 2.3. Coordination and structuring of components and processes.
The necessary condition for fulfillment of operation principle of a functional system is coordination of all parameters of bonds (including flows) between the system components, including their variation in time. To achieve the target-oriented braking of the system functioning it is necessary, on the contrary, to reduce or to completely exclude the coordination of bonds between the system components.
Consequence 2.4. Completeness of using space.
Completeness of fulfillment of operation principle of the system is provided for, in particular, by the completeness of using space, which leads to transitions from point to line, from line to plane, from plane to volume of the entire available space.
Consequence 2.5. Use and gradual elimination of augmenting systems, in particular, the humans.
Completeness of fulfillment of functions of the system is provided for, in particular, due to the use of other augmenting systems, which replenish the missing components and processes. For example, the plough is augmented by the horse, the sail ship - by the wind, and the first textile machines - by the humans. With the growth of the source system augmenting systems are eliminated, while the source system becomes more and more self-contained, independent of necessity to use external systems: the horse, the wind, the human.
Consequence 2.6. Forming the tools for braking and feedback.
With formed functional-and-targeted systems a necessary component is a set of mechanisms for braking and feedback, which are necessary for control of attainment of the set goal and dynamic adaptation to the changing external conditions.
4.3. Law of deployment and trimming of components and functions of the system.
In evolution of functional-and-targeted systems the growth of new useful and controlled functions outpaces the growth of new elements (deployment), while the decrease of the number of elements in a system (trimming) outpaces the decrease in number of useful functions. The processes of trimming and deployment could interact one with another (some elements stay at the stage of deployment, while others - at the stage of trimming), and the periods of trimming and deployment could alternate.
4.4. Law of increasing controllability and dynamization of the system.
In the process of evolution components of the systems, their mutual bonds and the system on the whole enhance the potentiality of controllable change of their parameters for the purpose of
adapting them to the conditions of external environment. For this purpose, the system should contain the elements, which provide for controllability and the elements, which are capable of changing their parameters.
4.5-7. Laws of evolution of interaction with external environment.
The group of laws of evolution of interaction with external environment consists of four laws and several consequences from these laws. The laws of this group are interconnected with the laws from the group of evolution of the internal structure of the system.
For example, consequence 2.5 from the law of completeness of forming the operation principle concerning the elimination of augmenting systems is interconnected with law 7 concerning the formation and evolution of augmenting systems.
Law 4 concerning the enhancement of controllability and dynamization of system is interconnected with law 8 concerning the formation of programs for attainment of the goals.
Law 6 concerning the transition from easily available to hard-to-get resources is associated with law 2 of completeness of forming the operation principle of the system: the systems evolving based on this law can become new easily available resources for other systems. For example, the coach became a convenient resource for first cars, microorganisms became a resource for origination of plants and animals. 4.5. Law of transition to supersystems.
Supersystem is a system, which includes the analyzed system as a constituent part. Supersystem is a multitude consisting of systems and possessing the features of a new system.
The law of transition to supersystem proclaims that the evolution of any system, including functional-and-targeted ones, can be continued by formation of or inclusion with a supersystem. Supersystem can also be formed from the system itself, for example, a double-barreled gun is formed from a one-barreled gun, or the system might be included with a ready system. For example, a trolley-bus can be included with a supersystem of city transport. The system, included with a supersystem, becomes more stable and efficient. For example, a pride of lions is more efficient than a lonely lion, the tribe is more efficient than a single family.
Consequence 5.1. Integration with similar or other systems.
Supersystems can be formed by integration of similar systems, transformed systems, antisystems or systems with other operation principles and goals.
Consequence 5.2. Increase of efficiency of replication and scaling.
One of the methods for forming supersystems is the replication of the system. The processes of replication form the foundation for creating similar or transformed systems. In order to form a copied system, there is no necessity to exactly copy the entire evolutionary pattern, which was needed for creating the original system. There are always mechanisms of replication and their efficiency in the process of phylogenesis is increased. For example, it is easier to replicate a machine, than an animal; it is easier for a computer to copy information, than for a painter - to make a copy of an original oil painting. External connections of the systems being copied, which form a supersystem, become internal connections for a supersystem.
Scaling is understood as a proportional increase of system parameters without any functional distortion of proportions and with retaining of operation principle. Increase of the picture, increase of productive capacity, increase of dimensions, increase of clientele - all these are examples of scaling. Replication can be understood as a private case of scaling, for example, creation of a network of similar shops is a method for scaling business. Scaling can lead to forming a supersystem. For example, scaling of a village can lead to formation of a city or a megapolis. Scaling of a squad leads
to formation of a squadron, regiment or army. It means that scaling is also one of the methods for forming a supersystem. Internal connections of the scaled system are the foundation for the formed supersystem. Systems develop in the direction of increasing efficiency of their scaling. For example, the growth of a logarithm of weight as a result of the increase in length with cars is 1.4 times less than with animals [25], i.e., in technology the scaling is more efficient than with animals. 4.6. Law of transition from easily available resources to hard-to-get resources.
Any system can originate and develop exclusively due to the environment. In this case there are always mechanisms, enabling to use resources of environment for formation and development of internal structure of the system. The wording of the law implies that first of all the systems use such resources, which are easily available for them, and then hard-to-get resources are used, first they use ready resources and then their derivatives. In this case the very mechanisms of converting external resources into the system proper are improved: resources, which were unavailable earlier become available, the expenditures on their conversion are also reduced in the process of evolution of functional-and-targeted systems.
For example, during the Archean era, 4 billion years ago the atmosphere of the Earth had low density, consisted of ammonia, hydrogen, methane, sulfureted hydrogen, water vapors, oxide and dioxide of carbon, oxygen was absent, as well as continents. [26] Strictly speaking, blue-and-green seaweeds had nothing else for their origination and evolution. Solar light was added to it - that is all, from what the blue-and-green seaweeds created themselves and create until now. The eukaryot-ic green seaweeds, which appeared later, exhausted free oxygen into the atmosphere, which was poisonous at that time. Gradually this «poison» became a ready resource, which was used by bacteria, capable of living in an oxygen medium. Currently there is 21% of oxygen in the atmosphere of the Earth and we use it every day, like all the rest of the animals.
Another example is the opportunity to use huge resources of mineral wealth's in which -4880 minerals are present (beside oxygen). Living organisms cannot make use of these wealth's, however, the minerals are actively used in technical systems. For example, live substance appeared on Earth approximately 4 billion years ago. During this period the overall weight of biomass on Earth constituted approximately 2.4 trillion tones of living substance. Instruments of production are improved and developed approximately 2.5 million years, while the overall weight of technical substance (techno-sphere) already constitutes according to different evaluations from 3 to 30 trillion tones. One can form the opinion on the rates of growth of anthropogenies mass on Earth by the fact that at the very beginning of the 20* century it constituted only 3% of weight of biomass of living beings on Earth, and now it exceeds the weight all living beings on Earth. [25]
Consequence 6.1. Application of components (substances and fields).
External environment first offers for system formation 1) available elements (substances) and 2) fields of interaction (See also consequence 2.1 from trend 1).
For example, water, carbon, oxygen, gravitation, electricity and magnetism, which are available on Earth as well as other substances and fields are first used for live and technical functional-and-targeted systems. Pyramids of ecosystems are built according to hierarchy of resources, which are available for nutrition, for example, plants, herbivorous insects, raptorial insects, birds. Each of them creates a resource for further sub-chain in this ecological chain. Similar bonds can be observed in industry: branches of mining industry, power industry, processing industries, power engineering, production of goods and services.
Cars and airplanes use the available resource - oxygen in the atmosphere. Spaceships have no such ready resource; they have to carry oxidizer on board.
Consequence 6.2. For technical systems. Transition to micro-level.
Sequence in the use of resources affects their size as well. For a human being the ordinary dimensions from several millimeters to several hundred kilometers are usual. In this range of dimensions, the traditional technology develops. However, as the time flows, the human being manages to transcend the boundaries of usual dimensions. Microscopes enable to pass over to angstroms and nanometers, while telescopes are associated with light years and parsecs. New ideas of dimensions enable to pass over also to creation of technical elements of such dimensions. For example, typical is the transition to microlevel for technical system: from hammer to sandblaster, from sand-blaster to laser, from bulb calculators to notebooks, from old telephones to mini-telephones and smartphones.
As an example of this consequence from the law it is possible to quote the evolution of Computer Numeric control (CNC) of a machine intended for cutting different materials (from plywood to metal). In the middle of the 20th century the working member of this machine was a milling cutter, which takes away the material of the object being processed. Nowadays the working member is the laser beam, which processes the object throughout the area of processing amounting to several micrometers, which yields a more exact result of processing.
Consequence 6.3. For technical systems. Reject of terrestrial conditions.
One more consequence of law of transition from easily available to difficult-to-get resources (as applied to technical systems) is the reject of terrestrial resources in case of using substances and fields. For example, a transition takes place from the usual atmosphere either to purely oxygen medium or to inert medium. From the usual pressure equal to one atmosphere, they pass to the using either of vacuum or very high-pressure values. The same is true temperature values, which are usual for the Earth, composition of the atmosphere and composition of the Earth crust, gravitation and other terrestrial characteristics. From the use of usual values of these parameters the technology gradually passes over to their highest values. Accordingly, other parameters will be usual at other space objects and the tendency will take the form, corresponding to these conditions. 4.7. Law of forming and development of augmenting, alternative and competing systems and interaction with them.
For each system augmenting systems are always formed in the external environment, as well as alternative systems performing the same functions, but in a different way, as well as competing systems. Competition can take place not only in terms of functions, but also in terms of used resources or in terms of a possibility to enter this or that supersystem. Interaction with these systems can be both a source of system evolution and a source of breaking this evolution.
Example of augmenting system. There is a whole network of repair shops and filling stations for cars. For aviation the corresponding infrastructure of overland transport is created.
Example of alternative system. An automobile always has an alternative in terms of being transported to another place: tube, trolleybus or an electric car, bike, cutter, aircraft, helicopter and other means of transport. Alternative systems can be additional and competing and can be grouped into supersystems. [27]
Examples of competing systems in terms of functions. Many alternative systems can be competing, for example, railway transport and aviation transport. Diesel motors compete with motors on gas, pens with pencils, linoleum with parquet, etc.
Competition affecting resources. The wolves have many competitors with those, who eats hares and hoofed animals: panther, fox, polar fox, raccoon dog, jackal, wolverine, badger, brown bear, wild pig. In industry there is competition for energy resources, industrial areas, areas for burying wastes.
Competition for markets and integration into business processes. For example, competition for state orders, competition of business models (earning money through services and goods, now or with delay of payment), etc.
4.8. Law of forming and development of programs (technologies) of actions aimed at attainment of the goal.
To attain the goal, functional-and-targeted systems form programs of action and realize them based on such operation principles, which are typical of them. In this case also the image of anticipated result of performing the program of action is formed, while the feedback enables to correct the program of action based on comparing this image of anticipated result with the actual results of the action.
The notions program of action and expected result of performing the program of action (acceptor of the result of action) are a part of the theory of functional systems set forth by P.K. Anokhin. [20] With animals, for example, a program of action is found and the expected final image in hunting, in protecting animal cubs, for continuation of the gender, in case of fire or flood, etc. It is obvious that the programs are different with each animal, since all of them have different potentiality in keeping with their «operation principle». These programs are corrected during the process of their fulfillment depending upon the actual result of actions performed. Similar programs for acting are created in all functional-and-targeted systems, for example, in preparation of businessplans, in constructing buildings and edifices, in formation and development of the cities, etc.
4.9. Law of system evolution through forming and resolution of contradictions.
Evolution of system components and of their parameters takes place irregularly, which leads to the violation of trend of sequence (coordination) and to origination of contradiction in system evolution.
Law of irregularity in the evolution of components of the system can be traced in systems of many authors, for example, [11]. In spite of that many authors mention this law in the proposed systems of LTSE, the connection between this law and other laws of system evolution was never defined explicitly. Ontological approach to study of LTSE enabled to demonstrate this connection explicitly. Its existence shows that in the process of evolution the system is transformed under the action of certain trends. Such transformations lead to generation and aggravation of contradictions, the resolution of which, in their turn, lead to irregularity of development of system components.
4.10. Operation principle of a complex of LEFTS.
Development of the complex of LEFTS, like any other functional-and-targeted system, should be described by this very complex of laws. In particular, it is possible to describe the operation principle of a complex of LEFTS.
The goal of a complex of LEFTS consists in the creation of a model of evolution of functional-and-targeted systems. The complex consists of four constituents:
- law of increasing ideality
- group of laws of evolution of the system structure
- group of laws of evolution of interaction with external environment
- law of evolution through formation and resolving of contradictions.
All laws and groups of laws are interconnected. Formed complexes of requirements to the system through the law of increasing ideality leads to gradual formation and evolution of internal structure of the system based on operation principle, which is necessary for realization of the requirements. Internal structure develops in the direction of increasing completeness, the evolution is accompanied by alteration of trimming and deployment in the system, increasing controllability and dynamization of components and processes.
Evolution of the system takes place not in the interaction and mutual influence of the system and external environment. On the one hand, the system takes from the external environment all necessary resources for development and on the other hand - changes this very external environment and matches the requirements of the external environment. Interaction and mutual influence between system and external environment takes place due to the formation of a supersystem, use of available resources and competition or interaction with other competing and augmenting systems. With regard to available structure and operation principle of the system as well as conditions of changing external environment, the programs are formed for attainment of set goals and for fulfillment of available requirement.
Described processes and formed requirements to the system due to objective reasons leads to formation of contradictions, which are solved by the main principles of resolving contradictions of requirements: in time, in space, in relationships, system transition. 5. LINES, PLANES AND SPACES OF SYSTEM EVOLUTION
While laws of evolution of the system should not contain any internal Contradictions, the evolution line should necessarily contain a Contradiction. Here is a model of description for each of the lines of evolution:
• Laws on which the evolution lines are based;
• Contradictions of requirements in the evolution line;
• IFR for evolution line is the direction for resolving Contradictions;
• Steps on the line (there should be no less than three 3: matching one requirement, matching the second requirement, step towards IFR for resolving Contradictions of requirements, logic should be traced in the selection of succession of these steps).
The planes of evolution can be formed out of two lines of evolution. For example, Line of fragmentation and dynamization with the line of collective-and-individual use. Should one more line be added, for example, Line of S-curve evolution, and we get the space of system evolution. The idea of line, plane and space echoes the structure of evolution trees of N. Shpakovsky. [13] L1. Line of introducing elements (substances)
Contradiction: If we introduce a new element, THEN it is possible to increase functionality or eliminate the non-desirable effect. BUT the system will be made more complicated and additional resources will be required.
IFR: Absent additional element ITSELF increases functionality or eliminates non-desirable effect.
Key steps: Emptiness - Modification of resource - Field - Small doses - For a period of time - Copy - disappears after use
Logic of steps. Emptiness is the introduction of an element «from nothing» which is close to IFR. If it cannot be achieved, the modification of available resource - small deviation from IFR. The use of the field can increase the degree of IFR, like the introduction of element in small doses or the use of copies, if it is possible.
L2. Line of introduction and evolution of interaction fields
Contradiction: If we introduce a new field, THEN it is possible to increase functionality or eliminate the non-desirable effect, BUT the system will become more complicated and additional resources will be required.
IFR: Absent additional field ITSELF will increase functionality or eliminates non-desirable effect.
Key steps: Modification of available resource - Fields from accessible external environment - Use of controllable fie fields - Introduction of field temporarily - The field vanishes after being used.
Logic of steps. Similar to logic in L1.
L3. Line of fragmentation and dynamization
Contradiction: If we fragment the system or its element and connect these parts in this or that way, THEN it is possible to increase dynamicity and controllability of the system. BUT, in this case the system will become more complicated and additional resources will be required.
IFR: The system without fragmentation ITSELF will provide for a possibility of dynamization and increasing controllability.
Key steps: Fragment the system into two parts - Fragment the system into many parts - nonflexible integration of fragmented parts - Integration of parts by flexible connections - Integration of parts by fields - The separated parts are flexible themselves - Flexible elements integrated through controllable fields - The entire system is flexible - Instead of elements there are controllable fields of interaction. The sequence of steps can vary. L4. Lines of coordination-discoordination and structuring
Contradiction: If we coordinate and structure the system and its elements, THEN it would be possible to enhance the efficiency of the system, BUT, in this case, the system will be more complicated and additional resources will be required
IFR: The System ITSELF provides for coordination and structuring without any additional expenditures.
Key steps: Forced coordination of parts - Buffer (by special element, field or subsystem) -Self-coordination of parts without introducing elements and fields - Temporary coordination and structuring - Coordination of rhythm - Use of capillary-and-porous system for structuring - Use of effects and local active additives for coordination of necessary features. The sequence of steps can vary.
L5. Line «mono - bi - poly - trimming»
Contradiction: If new systems are added to the system, THEN it is possible to increase functionality and opportunities of a new complex, BUT the complex will be still more complicated and additional resources will be required
IFR: Absent new additional system will ITSELF increase its functionality and enhances new opportunities of united complex of systems.
Key steps: Add to the system another system of this type (bi-system) - Add to the system many similar systems (polysystem) - In similar integrated systems some characteristics are made different. Instead of integrating similar systems different systems are integrated. - Systems and antisystems are integrated. - Many similar parts of different systems are integrated into one element (partial trimming) - Bonds between integrated systems are developing - Trimming of bi- and polysystem into a monosystem with possible repetition of a cycle of origination of a polysystem. L6. Lines of collective and individual use of systems
This line is a private case of evolution of a bi-system, in which one of the systems is the analyzed object, while another is a consumer, user of this object (human, group of persons, team). Line relates to social functional-and-targeted systems.
Contradiction: If the system is created for individual use (possession) by one subject (human being), THEN it is convenient and does not create any conflicts with other subjects, BUT, this is expensive and requires additional resources.
If the system is used for collective use (obsession) by many subjects (team), THEN it reduces expenditures, BUT, creates inconvenience in use and conflicts between the members of the users' team.
IFR: Collective system with low expenditures ITSELF provides for convenience and absence of conflicts of individual use.
Key steps: Collective use - Individual use - Part of the time is a collective one -Part is an individual one - Part of the system is a collective one - Part is an individual one - In one place it is collective, while in another place it is collective-and-individual system.
L7. Line of S-curve evolution
It is possible to identify five characteristic stages at the S-curve line of system evolution. Each stage will have its characteristic Contradiction, IFR and corresponding steps of evolution.
1. 1st stage (beginning of evolution). Contradictions are associated with the low functionality and bog specific expenditures. Wording of IFR are directed at forming the operation principle and enhancement of efficiency of functioning, at the use of ready resources for the system. Recommendations are as follows:
• It is necessary to maximally use already existing infrastructural resources and demands;
• It is recommended to integrate the system with the systems, which are leading at the present moment;
• It is recommended to develop the system in a particular field, in which its advantages surpass its disadvantages.
2. Transition period from stage 1 to stage 2.
• It is necessary to maximally speed up the implementation.
• It is required to attain the least possible admissible value of basic parameters and dramatic overtaking in terms of at least one of them.
• TS should be implemented in one field, where the ratio of its advantage sand disadvantages is most appropriate and demanded for.
• The system should be adapted to existing infrastructure and resources.
• Serious changes within the system and its elements are admissible. Operation principle of the very TS (its core) should not be changed.
3. 2nd stage, active evolution.
• It is recommended to adapt the system to new kinds of application;
• To adapt the available infrastructure resources to the needs of the system.
rd
4. 3 stage, stabilization, cessation of growth.
• Problems should be solved in the near and nearest future concerning expenditures and development of service functions.
• For the distant future it is necessary to foresee the change of operation principle of the TS or of its components, resolving Contradictions, breaking the evolution of the system.
• Very efficient are deep trimming, integration of alternative systems and other methods of transition to supersystem.
5. 4th stage, oscillations or decline.
• In the nearest future it is necessary to solve problems on decrease of expenditures and development of service functions.
• In the near and distant future, it is necessary to foresee the change of operation principle of TS, which resolves the Contradictions, which break the evolution.
• It is necessary to look for local fields, in which the system will still be compositable.
Table 3. Connection between laws and lines of evolution.
Laws Lines of evolution 1. Increase of ideality 2. Completeness of operation prin- 3. Deployment and trimming 4. Increase of controllability 5. Transition to supersystem 6. Transition to application of resources 7. Forming and evolution of alternative systems 8. Origination of contradictions
L1. Line of introduction of elements V V V V V
L2. Line of introduction and evolution of fields V V V V V
L3. Line of fragmentation and dynamization V V V V V
L4. Lines of coordination and structuring V V V
L5. Line of transition to supersystems V V V V V
L6. Lines of collective and individual use V V V
L7. Line of S-curve evolution V V V V V V V V
Since there can be many combinations of laws of evolution, the number of lines of evolution can also be higher than that of above described. Besides, there may be evolution lines for special fields or systems. For example, in business it is possible to form an entire complex of evolution lines, for example, Line of formation of chains of creating values, Line of forming the structure of organization, Line of business objects, Line of price and payment, Line of assortment, Line of market development, Line of customer evolution.
As an example, let us quote the description of a Line of evolution of the product assortment.
Contradiction of requirements of the line. The assortment should be wide in order to provide for the needs of the customer and to foresee them and should be narrow in order not to distract large resources of the manufacturer and seller.
IFR 1: Wide assortment of products ITSELF creates an opportunity not to distract large resources of manufacturer and seller.
IFR 2: Narrow assortment of products ITSELF provides for fulfillment of wishes of the customer and provides for foreseeing these wishes.
Use of trends and lines of development: line L5 «Mono - bi - poli - trimming» and Line L1 of introduction of elements (substances).
Here is a possible variant of sequence of steps of lines of evolution of assortment:
• single product, no assortment
• Products with «shift» of characteristics and price. Assortment groups.
• Increase of number of assortment groups and their price range.
• Saturation of assortment. Full coverage of assortment niche.
• Partnership of suppliers and manufacturers for regulation of assortment.
• Formation, structuring and dynamization of assortment policy depending upon the territory, place in the shop, season and time of the day.
• Instead of part of the assortment - copies of specimens of goods, analysis of assortment of competitors. [28]
• Use of Internet-technologies for independent formation by the user of necessary set of goods (assortment).
Table 4 quotes an example of plane of development, for which two lines of evolution have been chosen: «Line of fragmentation and dynamization» and «Line of collective-and-individual use». For the sake of simplicity only part of steps of these lines are quoted. As an object let us quote, for example, a bus. Then a private individual bus can be placed in the cell 1 -2 of this space of development. Two or more buses (trailers, half-trailers), attached one to another for collective transportation of passengers. Cell 5-4 could take the form of a bus fragmented into parts (sections) with flexible bonds and with a private (individual) driver, however intended for collective use by the passengers. Or another variant - the tractive vehicle is private, while flexible buses-half-trailers are of collective use. Cell 6-5 - it could be individual private buses without drivers, which can be grouped on the road (through city information system) into a collective train, if their routes coincide art least partly. Cell 9-6 - it could be flexible buses with completely changeable geometry. In case of individual use, it is «compressed» to small size, while in collective use it can be stretched to big dimensions.
Table 4. Example of plane of development: «Line of fragmentation and dynamization» and «Line of collective-and-individual use». Only part of steps of these lines is quoted
Line of collective-and-individual use Line of fragmentation and dynamization l.Collective use 2.Individual use 4. Part of the system is collective - part is individual 5. In one place it is collective, in another place 6. Collective-and- individual system
1. Monolith system 1 - 2
3. Many parts 2 - 1
5. Flexible bonds 5 - 4
6. Connecting parts by fields 6 - 5
9. The entire system is flexible 9 - 6
10. System is created of fields
6. APPLICATION OF COMPLEX OF LAWS OF EVOLUTION OF FUNCTIONAL-AND-TARGETED SYSTEMS
The complex of LEFTS proposed by the author has several directions and a rather wide sphere of application. It is possible to single out five directions of application and development of a complex of LEFTS:
1. Forecasting of development of functional-and-targeted systems. It is possible to use lines, planes or spaces of system development. It is possible to use trends themselves directly.
2. Statement of inventive problems. Based on the forecast it is possible to state a problem, associated with the transition of a particular functional-and-targeted system.
3. Application of a complex of LEFTS for creation and specification of complexes of laws in different functional-and-targeted systems.
4. Development of a complex of LEFTS. Complex of LEFTS needs to and should develop. For this purpose, it is possible to use different approaches:
- accumulation and analysis of collections of cards of inventions («patent layers») and histories of system evolution («patent holes»)
- mutual adaptation of trends from different areas
- specification of a complex of LEFTS for a particular narrow field, for example, metallurgy, medical science, jurisprudence, theory of values (axiology), etc.
- application of complexes of LEFTS to the evolution of the very complex of LEFTS (complex of LEFTS is in itself a functional-and-targeted system and laws and line soft development of a complex of LEFTS can also be applied to it).
5. Accumulation of collections of cards with examples confirming or violating the laws of evolution of functional-and-targeted systems.
Transition from analysis of technical systems to functional-and-targeted systems as an object of TRIZ study, enables to significantly widen the circle of system, evolution of which TRIZ is able to study and describe. In particular, LEFTS enable to unite TRIZ and theory of evolution of creative personality (TECP). Let us quote only several examples of TECP compliance with the complex of LEFTS. In TECP, for example, there are analogs of law of increasing ideality: Great Dignified Goal, tendency to Ideal Creative Personality, tendency to realization of Ideal Creative Strategy. Completeness of operation principle in TECP is, for example, a complex of features of creative personality and formation of it. [15]
A group of laws of evolution of the system structure and a group of laws of interaction with external environment correspond in life strategy of creative personality (LSCP) to interaction of Creative Personality and External circumstances. Law of increasing controllability and dynamiza-tion in LSCP is a regular change of specialization, change of Goals, change of program of actions, change of disciples and own schools. Transition to supersystems is presupposed by the concept of maximum motion upwards, generalization of stated goals and application of obtained results, transition of personal work to a School of disciples, creation of institutions. No doubt, LSCP presupposes maximum use of resources and preliminary steps made in advance. The presence of partners and competitors, formation and development of programs for attainment of the set goal - all this is characteristic of LSCP and is described in LEFTS.
All activity of creative personality is permeated with Contradictions and the necessity to solve them. The Choice of a Dignified Goal, creation and realization of plans concerning the attainment of this goal, getting necessary education and search for required information, protection and saving of obtained results, avoiding the pressure of external circumstances and betrayal of colleagues and disciples - all this requires the skill of overcoming the encountered Contradictions.
7. ANALYSIS OF PROPOSED COMPLEX OF LEFTS FOR COMPLIANCE TO REQUIREMENTS TO A COMPLEX OF LAWS OF EVOLUTION
The table quotes the comparison of a complex of laws of functional-and-targeted systems evolution developed by the authors with developed criteria applied to this complex of laws.
Table 5. Comparison of a complex of LEFTS with criteria of requirements to it.
Criterion Compliance with the complex of LEFTS
1. Use of TRIZ terms Each law and line of evolution in complex is worded based on the terms, notions and phenomena, described in TRIZ
2. Compliance with the field of laws application All laws and lines of evolution in a complex of LEFTS correspond to and are restricted by the area of functional-and-targeted systems. Thereby they don't contradict more general laws of evolution of the systems and narrowest laws of evolution of technical systems
3. Confirming through facts and prognoses Complex of LEFTS corresponds to arrays of inventions and evolutionary development of functional-and-targeted system from fairly different fields. The complex of laws possesses large prognostic potential
4. Laws are not contradictory Each law of the complex of LEFTS separately is non-contradictory
5. Laconic character of wording at the completeness of descriptions At significant increase of area of application and introduction of new laws of evolution the number of laws was reduced to eight. Ideality of complex of LEFTS grew
6. Dynamicity and possibility of adaptation of a complex of LEFTS As a result of retaining the general structure of a complex of LEFTS, the number of laws, consequences of these laws and lines of evolution can also change
7. Compliance with own requirements and laws The directions of evolution of a complex of LEFTS corresponds to laws and lines of evolution of the same complex: ideality and completeness of laws have increased, the complex underwent the stages of deployment and trimming, its ability to undergo dynamization and adaptation, there is a supersystem in the form of laws of system evolution
Developed complex of laws of evolution of functional-and-targeted system corresponds to criteria of requirements to complexes of system evolution.
The authors are deeply thankful to colleagues, who took part in the discussion of this material and made suggestions and remarks: A. Kuryan, A. Kharitonov, N. Rubina, A. Trantin and other TRIZ specialists.
CONCLUSIONS
1. The authors performed the analysis of known publications on the topic of laws of technical systems evolution in TRIZ, identified their positive and negative features and formulated criteria for correctness of complexes of laws of system evolution.
2. Based on the analysis of large array of facts and publications on the topics of evolution of functional systems the authors developed a complex of laws of evolution of functional-and-targeted systems, which corresponds to criteria of correctness of complexes of system evolution laws.
3. Complex of LEFTS is dynamically developing, able to be adapted to new fields of knowledge and specialized in narrower directions of application, and is based on the notion of completeness of operation principle of functional-and-targeted systems.
4. Complex of LEFTS enables from standardized positions to analyze the system of TRIZ-TECP,
since the strategies of creative personality evolution are also functional-and-targeted systems.
4. One of the directions of evolution of a complex of LEFTS is the transition from the lines of
evolution to surfaces and spaces of evolution of functional-and-targeted systems.
5. Next steps of presented research are associated with refinement of the complex of LEFTS,
its application for development and forecasting of functional-and-targeted systems.
REFERENCE
1. G.S.Altshuller. On laws of technical systems evolution. - Baku, 20.01.1977
2. Karl Marx. THE CAPITAL. Volume one. Section four. Production of relative surplus value. Chapter thirteen. Machines and big industry. 1. Evolution of machines. http://lugovoy-k.narod.ru/marx/23/020.htm
3. Frederick Engels, History of a rifle, Written by Engels at the end of October, 1860 - first half of January 1861 http://lugovoy-k.narod.ru/marx/15/036.htm
4. P.K. Engelmeier Philosophy of technology. Issues 1-4. SPb, 1912.
5. P.K. Engelmeier. Theory of creativity. Moscow: TERR - Book club, SPb: Severo-Zapad, 2009 (1910)
6. A.A.Zvorykin. On certain issues of history of technology. - Voprossy filosofii, 1953, No. 6.
7. G.S.Altshuller, R.B.Shapiro, ON PSYCHOLOGY OF INVENTIVE ACTIVITY //Voprosy psychologies, No. 6, 1956. - p. 37-49 https://www.altshuller.ru/triz/triz0.asp
8. G.S.Altshuller. Creativity as an exact science. Theory of inventive problem solving. - M.: Sov. radio, 1979.-184 p. Cybernetics. (p. 113-127)
9. G.S.Altshuller, «Find the idea. Introduction to theory of inventive problem solving», Nauka publishers, Novosibirsk, 1991.
10. G.S. Altshuller, B.L. Zlotin, A.V.Zousman, V.I.Filatov. «Search for New Ideas: from Insight to Technology». Kishinev, Cartia moldoveniaske, 1989.
11. Yu.P.Salamatov. Laws of technical systems evolution (foundations of theory of technical systems evolution), publishing house "Karelia" (Petrozavodsk), collection of articles "Chance for an adventure", 1991 (pp. 5 - 174).
12. A.L.Liubomirsky, S.S.Litvin. Trends of technical systems evolution, February 2003. http://www.metodolog.ru/00767/00767.html
13. N.A.Shpakovsky. Trees of Evolution. Analysis of technical information and generation of new ideas. Training and methodological manual, «Pulse publishers», Moscow, 2006
14. B.I.Goldovsky. On some peculiarities of mechanism of action of trends of technical systems evolution and on system of TTSE, September, 2019, Nizhny Novgorod https://triz-summit .ru/triz/metod/gold/zrts/
15. G.S.Altshuller , I.M.Viortkin. How to become a genius: Life strategy of creative personality. -Minsk: Belarus, 1994. 479 p.
16. Petrov V.M. Biology and trends of technology evolution, 1976, 2008. https://triz-summit.ru/triz/metod/204718/
17. Petrov Vladimir. Trend - antitrend, https://metodolog.ru/00787/00787.pdf
18. G. Mageramov. «On general principles of creating an algorithm of creative process», 1973, https://triz-summit.ru/triz/metod/science/203865/
19. E.A. Korolyova, A.V. Yeliseeva, Trends of scaling in live and non-live nature, KuzGTUK, 2017. http://science.kuzstu.ru/wp-content/Events/Conference/RM/2017/RM17/pages/Articles/0806007-.pdf
20. P.K. Anokhin. Fundamental issues of general theory of functional systems, 1973. [electronic resource]. - URL: http://www.bio.bsu.by/phha/downloads/anohin_obscaia_teoria_fs.pdf
21. Why the Space needs a family with many children. https://cosmatica.org/articles/1090-zachem-kosmosu-mnogodetnaja-semja.html September 26-27, 2020.
22. M.S. Rubin. «On theory of designing innovative technological systems», S.-Petersburg, 2008, http://temm.ru/ru/section.php?docId=3935
23. M.S. Rubin. Foundations of TRIZ for enterprises. Manual for the basic course on TRIZ for industrial enterprises. - M.: KTK «Galaktika», 2022.
24. V. L. Komarov «The Meaning of Evolution» N. V. Pavlov. "Vladimir Leontjevich Komarov" Publishing house of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, M., 1951. Library of natural history http://www.biografia.ru/timiryazev/komarov42.html
25. The weight of objects, created by the people has exceeded the weight of all living organisms, 2020, https://nplus1.ru/news/2020/12/10/human-made-materials-vs-biomass
26. Archean era (4-2.5 billion years ago), https://sitekid.ru/pl aneta_zemlya/arhejskaya_era_425_mlrd_let_nazad.html
27. V.M.Gerassimov, S.S.Litvin. Why does technology need pluralism: (development of alternative technical systems by integrating them into a supersystem) // TRIZ Journal. - 1990. - V.1. -No. 1. - P. 11-26. - http://www.metodolog.ru/00594/00594.html
28. S.A.Shevchenko, E.V. Kuzmina, V.F. Trunina. Assortment policy of an industrial enterprise, Scientific journal: Economy and Enterprising, 2015, https://naukarus.com/assortimentnaya-politika-promyshlennogo-predpriyatiya
