Vol.11 no.3 2019

Commentary : Contributing to the SpaceWire international standard (H. HIHARA et al.)−150−Synthesiology - English edition Vol.11 No.3 (2018) that enabled the Japanese proposals to be reflected in the international standard, we shall look at the behavior patterns of the Japanese participants, not just the technological accomplishments. In this chapter, the basic loop for a specic subject to evolve continuously, as explained in Reference [8], will be used as a model for the discussion.4.1 Reference modelThe basic loop referenced in this article is shown in Fig. 3.[8] The blocks shown in the gure are autonomous entities that include humans (individuals, organizations, society), and there is no integrator that controls the whole. The condition of the subject is observed by the observer, and the observer sends out an alert as it interprets the meaning of change in status. The congurator thinks and gives advice on the action that should be taken when the alert is sounded. The actor voluntarily selects the advice, and acts based on such advice. The behavior assimilates with the subject and changes the condition of the subject. When the change is observed again, the information circles along the loop. As a result, the subject evolves. As it can be seen, interpretation, conception, selection, and assimilation are done autonomously rather than heteronomously, and this means that each block is a self-governing or autonomous entity, and this is thought to be the condition of evolution.[8]In fitting the SpaceWire international standard to this basic loop for consideration, the condition is that each block is an autonomous entity. Specifically, SpW WG corresponds to the observer, and the European Cooperation for Space Standardization (ECSS) that is called the Technical Committee (TC) corresponds to the configurator. The vendors of the industrial world correspond to the actor, and the subject is the onboard satellite device or the communication standard for data that are exchanged among the equipment. Although the SpaceWire international standard is the de jure standard set by Europe, the SpW WG is placed in the preliminary stage of the TC that establishes the international standard, and it is accepted that the participants to this WG are autonomous beings. The participants can give individual opinions, and the vendors who are also actors can participate in the WG. They do not have to be representatives of national space agencies. This is different from the standard establishment process by country representatives that was the general practice for conventional communication standard establishment for spacecraft onboard equipment. It is a case of development-type standardization of which cases are increasing recently.[9] Moreover, the European vendors are allowed to participate in the ECSS which is the congurator. In the following sections, the Japanese behavioral pattern in the SpW WG is t into the basic loop and is compared with European and American behavioral patterns. In this discussion, a member of each block may overlap, and the arrows represent the roles of how they approach each other.4.2 Behavioral pattern of European participantsThe observer-configurator and the actor are separated and there is a division of labor. The observer-configurator is a governmental organization represented by ESA and may include system and equipment vendors. The actor is often a hardware or software vendor, and in some cases equipment development divisions of system vendors may be included. The division of labor between the former and latter groups is clearly separated in the specifications, and while there are frequent information exchanges such as conversations among the two groups, it is not common to see a case in which the work overlaps. That is, the work of investigating the specications, and the work of manufacturing equipment to which the specification is applied almost never overlap. The actor waits for the specs and order from the observer-configurator, and the observer-configurator waits for the results of the actor to be reected in the subject.This behavior pattern will be explained by separating the observer’s place and configurator’s place, as well as the observer and the configurator in the basic loop shown in Fig. 3. A member participating in a certain place becomes clearly aware of the role allotted to the place, the source from which information needed for decision-making is obtained, and the place to which the contents of the discussions are to be transmitted. In establishing the SpaceWire standard, the observer’s and configurator’s places are designated, and research institutes, universities, and companies are able to participate in these places. For the observer’s place, participation from outside Europe is not denied, and in some cases, such participation is encouraged. The observer and configurator may overlap, but when discussions are done in the observer’s place, one must be aware that one’s standpoint is about observation of the subject. When discussions are done in the congurator’s place, the reports from the observer’s place are received as formal reports, while the reports from the actor are not used directly for decision-making. The person who is an actor may participate Fig. 3 Basic loop required for continuous evolution of a certain subject[8]ActorConguratorObserverSubjectActionAssimilationConditionAwarenessWarningHearingAdviceSelection

元のページ  ../index.html#43