Decision support model for decision Sample Clauses

Decision support model for decision based design and collaborative decision support framework The conceptual product design is characterized as a collaborative task between different organizations with several decision-points that involve the participation of various designer and engineers for product definition and optimization. During this process, a design team collects and monitors data streams generated from parameter studies and simulation as a foundation for its decision making process. Streams are handled in two forms of data: verbal-conceptual and visual-graphic. In the Smart Vortex project we will develop new collaboration environment that bring together the right experts from different organizations to make decisions in a collaborative environment. During this process, the system should provide relevant information from the data streams which is needed to make a decision as well as relevant information about possible experts profile, which should be part of the problem solution. Data stream of the product lifecycle will be analyzed for possible decision points in the definition and realization stage. The environment detects these points and starts its intelligent configuration process to bring together engineers and designers from different domains, such as mechanical and electronic design, which provide knowledge or skills that will be needed for decision making. The environment also configures collaborative tools that the design team can use to analyze and interpret data as well as to support the communication of a distributed team. According to the massive data stream of the product lifecycle, the system needs to filter relevant data for the design decision-making process. The system should further capture previous decisions and their influence on the product lifecycle. This data can be used for future decision making as best practice or solutions that did not solve a problem but provide information for its fail.
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Decision support model for decision based design and collaborative decision support framework The conceptual product design is characterized as a collaborative task with several decision-points that involve the participation of various designer and engineers for product definition and optimization. During this process, a design team collects and monitors data streams generated from parameter studies and simulation as a foundation for its decision making process. Streams are handled in two forms of data: verbal-conceptual and visual-graphic. In the Smart Vortex project we will develop new collaboration environment that bring together the right experts to make decisions in a collaborative environment. During this process, the system should provide relevant information from the data streams which is needed to make a decision as well as relevant information about possible experts profile, which should be part of the problem solution. Data stream of the product lifecycle will be analyzed for possible decision points in the definition and realization stage. The environment detects these points and starts its intelligent configuration process to bring together engineers and designers from different domains, such as mechanical and electronic design, which provide knowledge or skills that will be needed for decision making. The environment also configures collaborative tools that the design team can use to analyze and interpret data as well as to support the communication of a distributed team. According to the massive data stream of the product lifecycle, the system needs to filter relevant data for the design decision-making process. At early stages of product design; the data might not be complete or accurate. For that purpose, the collaboration environment provides a fuzzy decision-making approach that allows designers and engineers to describe the confluence of the different criteria. The system can use this information to analyze the influence of a criterion on a given decision results and to provide an alternative decision if the situation change during the product lifecycle. The system should further capture previous decisions and their influence on the product lifecycle. This data can be used for future decision making as best practice or solutions that did not solve a problem but provide information for its fail. .

Related to Decision support model for decision

  • Litigation Support In the event and for so long as any Party actively is contesting or defending against any charge, complaint, action, suit, proceeding, hearing, investigation, claim, or demand in connection with (i) any transaction contemplated under this Agreement or (ii) any fact, situation, circumstance, status, condition, activity, practice, plan, occurrence, event, incident, action, failure to act, or transaction on or prior to the Closing Date involving the Seller, the other Party will cooperate with the contesting or defending Party and its counsel in the contest or defense, make available his or its personnel, and provide such testimony and access to its books and records as shall be necessary in connection with the contest or defense, all at the sole cost and expense of the contesting or defending Party (unless the contesting or defending Party is entitled to indemnification therefor under Section 7 below).

  • Production Support Each Red Hat Cloud Infrastructure Software Subscription comes with Standard or Premium Production Support. Red Hat only provides Production Support for the Red Hat Products and does not provide any Production Support for any underlying infrastructure or for any third party products that may be running on any servers or virtual machines.

  • Decision Making The JDC shall make decisions unanimously, with each Party’s representatives collectively having one (1) vote and at least one (1) representative from each Party participating in such decision. In the event the JDC determines that it cannot reach an agreement regarding a decision within the JDC’s authority, then, within *** Business Days after such determination: (a) for any matter that is not a Critical Issue *** shall have the final decision making authority on such matter; and (b) for any matter that is a Critical Issue, the matter shall be referred to FivePrime’s Chief Executive Officer (or designee) and HGS’ Chief Executive Officer (or designee) for resolution. If such executives cannot resolve the matter within *** Business Days, then the Chief Executive Officer of *** (or designee) shall have the final decision making authority on such matter. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Development Plan shall not be amended, without FivePrime’s prior written approval (which approval may be withheld in FivePrime’s sole discretion), to: (i) increase or materially change the nature of FivePrime-Conducted Trials or Other FivePrime-Conducted Activities; or (ii) require FivePrime to continue any FivePrime-Conducted Trial if FivePrime, in its reasonable judgment, decides not to continue such trial for any business, scientific, safety, efficacy, enrollment or ethical reason, provided that, in the event FivePrime so decides to discontinue such trial, HGS shall have no further obligation to reimburse FivePrime under Section 4.2(d) except with respect to costs *** INDICATES MATERIAL THAT WAS OMITTED AND FOR WHICH CONFIDENTIAL TREATMENT WAS REQUESTED. ALL SUCH OMITTED MATERIAL WAS FILED SEPARATELY WITH THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION PURSUANT TO RULE 406 PROMULGATED UNDER THE SECURITIES ACT OF 1933, AS AMENDED. already incurred by FivePrime prior to such discontinuation and any and all standard close out costs incurred thereafter, and HGS shall have the right to continue such trial by itself at its expense. When *** make a final determination under this Section 3.4, that final determination must be consistent with the terms of this Agreement.

  • Independent Review Contractor shall provide the Secretary of ADS/CIO an independent expert review of any Agency recommendation for any information technology activity when its total cost is $1,000,000.00 or greater or when CIO requires one. The State has identified two sub-categories for Independent Reviews, Standard and Complex. The State will identify in the SOW RFP the sub-category they are seeking. State shall not consider bids greater than the maximum value indicated below for this category. Standard Independent Review $25,000 Maximum Complex Independent Review $50,000 Maximum Per Vermont statute 3 V.S.A. 2222, The Secretary of Administration shall obtain independent expert review of any recommendation for any information technology initiated after July 1, 1996, as information technology activity is defined by subdivision (a) (10), when its total cost is $1,000,000 or greater or when required by the State Chief Information Officer. Documentation of this independent review shall be included when plans are submitted for review pursuant to subdivisions (a)(9) and (10) of this section. The independent review shall include: • An acquisition cost assessment • A technology architecture review • An implementation plan assessment • A cost analysis and model for benefit analysis • A procurement negotiation advisory services contract • An impact analysis on net operating costs for the agency carrying out the activity In addition, from time to time special reviews of the advisability and feasibility of certain types of IT strategies may be required. Following are Requirements and Capabilities for this Service: • Identify acquisition and lifecycle costs; • Assess wide area network (WAN) and/or local area network (LAN) impact; • Assess risks and/or review technical risk assessments of an IT project including security, data classification(s), subsystem designs, architectures, and computer systems in terms of their impact on costs, benefits, schedule and technical performance; • Assess, evaluate and critically review implementation plans, e.g.: • Adequacy of support for conversion and implementation activities • Adequacy of department and partner staff to provide Project Management • Adequacy of planned testing procedures • Acceptance/readiness of staff • Schedule soundness • Adequacy of training pre and post project • Assess proposed technical architecture to validate conformance to the State’s “strategic direction.” • Insure system use toolsets and strategies are consistent with State Chief Information Officer (CIO) policies, including security and digital records management; • Assess the architecture of the proposed hardware and software with regard to security and systems integration with other applications within the Department, and within the Agency, and existing or planned Enterprise Applications; • Perform cost and schedule risk assessments to support various alternatives to meet mission need, recommend alternative courses of action when one or more interdependent segment(s) or phase(s) experience a delay, and recommend opportunities for new technology insertions; • Assess the architecture of the proposed hardware and software with regard to the state of the art in this technology. • Assess a project’s backup/recovery strategy and the project’s disaster recovery plans for adequacy and conformance to State policy. • Evaluate the ability of a proposed solution to meet the needs for which the solution has been proposed, define the ability of the operational and user staff to integrate this solution into their work.

  • Decision The decision by the arbitrator shall be rendered within thirty (30) days after the close of the hearing. Decisions by the arbitrator in cases properly before him shall be final and binding upon the parties, subject, however, to the limitations of arbitration decisions as provided by the P.E.L.R.A.

  • Information Supplementation Prior to the Trial Operation date, the Parties shall supplement their information submissions described above in this Article 24 with any and all “as-built” Electric Generating Unit information or “as-tested” performance information that differs from the initial submissions or, alternatively, written confirmation that no such differences exist. The Interconnection Customer shall conduct tests on the Electric Generating Unit as required by Good Utility Practice such as an open circuit “step voltage” test on the Electric Generating Unit to verify proper operation of the Electric Generating Unit's automatic voltage regulator. Unless otherwise agreed, the test conditions shall include: (1) Electric Generating Unit at synchronous speed; (2) automatic voltage regulator on and in voltage control mode; and (3) a five percent (5 percent) change in Electric Generating Unit terminal voltage initiated by a change in the voltage regulators reference voltage. The Interconnection Customer shall provide validated test recordings showing the responses of Electric Generating Unit terminal and field voltages. In the event that direct recordings of these voltages is impractical, recordings of other voltages or currents that mirror the response of the Electric Generating Unit’s terminal or field voltage are acceptable if information necessary to translate these alternate quantities to actual Electric Generating Unit terminal or field voltages is provided. Electric Generating Unit testing shall be conducted and results provided to the Participating TO and the CAISO for each individual Electric Generating Unit in a station. Subsequent to the Commercial Operation Date, the Interconnection Customer shall provide the Participating TO and the CAISO any information changes due to equipment replacement, repair, or adjustment. The Participating TO shall provide the Interconnection Customer any information changes due to equipment replacement, repair or adjustment in the directly connected substation or any adjacent Participating TO-owned substation that may affect the Interconnection Customer’s Interconnection Facilities equipment ratings, protection or operating requirements. The Parties shall provide such information pursuant to Article 5.19.

  • Review by the Association of Procurement Decisions The Procurement Plan shall set forth those contracts which shall be subject to the Association’s Prior Review. All other contracts shall be subject to Post Review by the Association.

  • Technical Advisory Committee (TAC The goal of this subtask is to create an advisory committee for this Agreement. The TAC should be composed of diverse professionals. The composition will vary depending on interest, availability, and need. TAC members will serve at the CAM’s discretion. The purpose of the TAC is to: • Provide guidance in project direction. The guidance may include scope and methodologies, timing, and coordination with other projects. The guidance may be based on: o Technical area expertise; o Knowledge of market applications; or o Linkages between the agreement work and other past, present, or future projects (both public and private sectors) that TAC members are aware of in a particular area. • Review products and provide recommendations for needed product adjustments, refinements, or enhancements. • Evaluate the tangible benefits of the project to the state of California, and provide recommendations as needed to enhance the benefits. • Provide recommendations regarding information dissemination, market pathways, or commercialization strategies relevant to the project products. The TAC may be composed of qualified professionals spanning the following types of disciplines: • Researchers knowledgeable about the project subject matter; • Members of trades that will apply the results of the project (e.g., designers, engineers, architects, contractors, and trade representatives); • Public interest market transformation implementers; • Product developers relevant to the project; • U.S. Department of Energy research managers, or experts from other federal or state agencies relevant to the project; • Public interest environmental groups; • Utility representatives; • Air district staff; and • Members of relevant technical society committees. The Recipient shall: • Prepare a List of Potential TAC Members that includes the names, companies, physical and electronic addresses, and phone numbers of potential members. The list will be discussed at the Kick-off meeting, and a schedule for recruiting members and holding the first TAC meeting will be developed. • Recruit TAC members. Ensure that each individual understands member obligations and the TAC meeting schedule developed in subtask 1.11. • Prepare a List of TAC Members once all TAC members have committed to serving on the TAC. • Submit Documentation of TAC Member Commitment (such as Letters of Acceptance) from each TAC member. Products: • List of Potential TAC Members • List of TAC Members • Documentation of TAC Member Commitment

  • Joint Review JADRC may, at the request of either party, review issues arising from the application of this Article.

  • Shared Decision Making 33-1 Purpose The purpose of a shared decision making program is to create an atmosphere in which decision making is a collegial, shared, process that fosters an exchange of ideas and information necessary for effective professional practice and for improved student performance. The Association and District agree to continue pursuing jointly the implementation of legitimately recognized school councils as a foundation of a shared decision-making program. All provisions of this Agreement shall continue to be in full force and effect throughout the process.

Time is Money Join Law Insider Premium to draft better contracts faster.