Vol.3 No.1 2010

79/110

Research paper : A field-scientific approach to Clinico-Informatics (Y. Kinoshita et al.)−76−Synthesiology - English edition Vol.3 No.1 (2010) Therefore, it seems to me that the whole W-shaped process also exists in Full Research but it is not symmetric, and the study in most cases is performed by repeating the right hand side V-shaped process.Answer (Yoshiki Kinoshita, Toshinori Takai)We did not intend to say, “The research theme is predetermined,” but we do intend to say, “Discussion on the process for determining the research theme has been missing.” Therefore, I absolutely agree with you in that “such a situation is rarely found in reality, but there usually must be a process of the research team going out to society or industry to observe the situation.”By the way, the difference between Full Research and the W-model is the emphasis of the presence of the left hand side V-shaped part and the presence of a methodology for conducting it. The difference is not the number of times the left V is repeated. Whether it be Full Research or anything else, the left hand side V-part, i.e., abduction stage, is there, and what matters is whether one is conscious of that part and look at it with emphasis or not.Question (Naoto Kobayashi)In Kawakita’s W-model for problem solving, I think the left hand side V-shaped part (“exploration,” “field observation,” and “abduction and synthesis”) is important. In the process of the application of model checking, you wrote “under a vague expectation or problem proposal that some technology may be useful somewhere in some society, one visits (make exploration) there and observes the situation (field observation).” In practice, however, don’t you conduct technology transfer to respond to some clear issue that your industrial partner has? Or, do you mean that the problem of your industrial partner is clear, but how to solve it is vague? Could you clarify the word “vagueness” in your statement here?Answer (Yoshiki Kinoshita, Toshinori Takai)The industrial partner involved does not necessarily have the full understanding of the essence of the problem. Therefore, there may be a more pressing issue touching to the essence. That issue must be solved first; the other issues are often automatically solved as soon as such an essential problem is solved. It is the responsibility of the research team, which is equipped with more of scientific knowledge and experience, to explore and observe the field with open eyes with as little bias as possible.

※このページを正しく表示するにはFlashPlayer9以上が必要です