Are quantitative decision-making practices possible in complex systems such as NASAs technology-development program?
We performed this study for the Capabilities, Requirements, Analysis and Integration Team (CRAI), which NASA created as an inter-center effort to capture, validate, and analyze information that would enable a systematic approach to technology investment for space exploration. We employed our standard methodology to collect quantitative information and use it to assemble optimal development portfolios. The process and results are intended to be tools that a decision-maker can use to assess trends and better understand the underlying value of each capability area. Mission-enabling vs. democratic CRAI selected a set of missions for a proposed Lunar/Mars campaign consistent with the Presidential Vision for Space Exploration and sought information on capability requirements. One possibility for guiding investment decisions is a “mission-enabling” approach, in which sets of technologies are selected to enable particular missions. In such an approach, no technologies for a particular mission
Related Questions
- Is it possible to bypass the KARMA function and play a specific program just like usual without having complex phrases being created all the time?
- Why are trading systems for quantitative decision-making instruments preferable to intuitive decisions?
- Is it Really Possible to Program "Humane AI" Systems?
