system design

This study addresses the challenge of quantifying the complexity and cost induced by external requirement changes when detailed knowledge of a system’s internal logic is unavailable. To this end, the authors propose a black-box assessment method based on a directed graph of component coupling. By analyzing component interfaces and integrating multi-view modeling—graphical, algebraic, and tabular—the approach uniquely links interface characteristics to cost factors, enabling computable bounded estimates of change-induced complexity and associated costs. The method was validated through a large-scale integration case in a retail banking platform, demonstrating its effectiveness and providing architects and operations teams with actionable, quantitative insights for system design and maintenance.

This paper addresses the ambiguous definitions of complexity and coupling in industrial Control and Automation Systems (iCAS), where physical-centric interpretations cause conceptual confusion. Methodologically, it pioneers a functional-domain–based theoretical framework, grounding complexity and coupling in functional relationships—not physical structure—and integrates empirical evidence from software engineering, industrial automation, and mechanical design via functional domain analysis and inductive reasoning. Key contributions include: (1) exposing the fundamental limitations of physics-based definitions; (2) demonstrating that coupling amplifies complexity through functional dependencies—not system scale; and (3) proving that functional decoupling substantially reduces complexity. These findings challenge conventional software-engineering notions of coupling and establish a cross-disciplinary, operationally grounded theoretical foundation for iCAS design.

In software design, paradigm-implied semantic expectations—such as data abstraction consistency and feedback-control closed-loop behavior—are often left implicit, leading to design deviations and verification challenges. To address this, we introduce the concept of *design obligations*: explicit, logically formalizable, and verifiable specifications that codify such implicit constraints inherent to design paradigms. Leveraging formal modeling and paradigm semantics analysis, we establish two obligation frameworks—one for data-abstraction-based systems and another for feedback-driven adaptive systems—precisely capturing their core semantic requirements. We demonstrate that common design flaws stem from obligation violations and show how these obligations enable rigorous compliance verification and pedagogical application. This work bridges the semantic gap between design intent and implementation, providing both theoretical foundations and a methodological framework for paradigm-driven design assurance.

To address interdisciplinary interoperability, variant configuration governance, end-to-end traceability, and cross-organizational collaboration challenges arising from the networked evolution of Systems of Systems (SoS), this paper proposes a lifecycle management framework for Network-Centric Development (NCD). Methodologically, it grounds the framework in Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) semantics and integrates Product Lifecycle Management (PLM) governance, CAD-CAE model synchronization, and closed-loop digital thread/digital twin capabilities. Its core contributions are four foundational principles: (1) reference architecture with a unified data model; (2) end-to-end configuration sovereignty; (3) review-driven model gating; and (4) quantifiable value contribution assessment. Empirical validation across transportation, healthcare, and public-sector domains demonstrates significant improvements in change robustness and model reuse rate, reduced delivery cycles, and enhanced support for sustainability-oriented decision-making.

Software architecture suffers from ambiguous abstraction concepts and inadequate tool support. Method: This work systematically reconstructs the seminal 1995 architectural model and proposes, for the first time, a practice-grounded conceptual framework for architectural abstraction—elevating component composition relationships to system-level abstractions that are formally modelable and verifiable. It integrates architectural description language (ADL) design, abstract modeling, prototype tool development, and diachronic historical analysis. Contribution/Results: The study establishes software architecture as an independent concern with rigorous theoretical foundations. Its outcomes catalyzed a surge in ADL research, laid the groundwork for model-based systems engineering (MBSE), and continue to inform the design of cloud-native, microservice, and AI-driven architectures. The framework significantly enhances the expressiveness, formal verifiability, and engineering applicability of architectural abstractions.

This study addresses the limitations of traditional Design Structure Matrix (DSM) modularization approaches, which rely solely on graph-based optimization and lack engineering semantic context, often failing to align with practical design requirements. The authors propose a novel DSM modularization paradigm integrating large language models (LLMs), leveraging prompt engineering and iterative refinement to embed system-level semantic information directly into the partitioning process—achieving high-quality results without custom optimization code. Central to this work is the "semantic alignment hypothesis," which elucidates how improper incorporation of domain knowledge can degrade performance. Through systematic experiments across five representative engineering cases using three mainstream LLMs, the method demonstrates convergence to reference-quality modularization within 30 iterations, offering a reproducible and practical pathway for LLM-driven engineering design optimization.

This study addresses the lack of systematic guidance for enterprise software teams in choosing between monolithic and microservices architectures. The work proposes a decision-making framework that integrates technical and organizational factors, evaluating the trade-offs of each architecture across dimensions such as scalability, reliability, deployment efficiency, and organizational complexity. The assessment is grounded in system scale, business requirements, operational maturity, and long-term maintainability. Through architectural pattern analysis, a structured evaluation model, and multiple case studies, the authors develop a practical selection methodology tailored to real-world engineering contexts. This approach offers enterprises clear architectural evolution pathways and actionable guidelines aligned with their developmental stages, thereby significantly enhancing the rationality and sustainability of system design decisions.

This work addresses the common challenges in autonomous drone development—such as fragmented requirements, architectural inconsistencies, and poor traceability—stemming from disjointed design processes. To bridge these gaps, the authors propose a SysML-based model-driven systems engineering framework that integrates a unified four-layer model encompassing requirements, functions, logical components, and physical/software elements. Crucially, this approach establishes, for the first time, a deep alignment between multiple SysML diagrams—including requirement, activity, and block definition diagrams—and the ROS 2 architecture, specifically its nodes, topics, services, and actions. The framework enables end-to-end traceable design, allowing early-stage allocation of requirements, precise interface specification, clear subsystem responsibility assignment, and verification planning—all prior to simulation or deployment—thereby effectively supporting typical mission scenarios such as obstacle avoidance and return-to-home operations.

Traditional AI systems rely on fixed monolithic models, which struggle to dynamically allocate resources, decompose tasks, or update knowledge in response to varying inputs, leading to degraded performance and increased costs. This work proposes the first system-level design methodology for distributed composite AI systems, formulating a design space through workflow topologies and configuration choices and identifying eight core design patterns. The framework jointly optimizes model selection and runtime parameters, enabling task decomposition, multi-model orchestration, and explicit control logic, thereby facilitating a shift from static monolithic architectures toward dynamic, composable, and adaptive ones. Evaluated across three case studies, the approach reduces latency by up to 60% and cost by up to 71%, with only a 2.5–4 percentage point drop in accuracy.

This study addresses the coordination challenges arising from independent control across cloud, high-performance computing (HPC), and edge AI infrastructures. Conceptualizing the AI platform as a "system of systems," this work proposes an architectural paradigm characterized by usage fusion and federated control. Methodologically, it adopts a systems engineering framework that achieves cross-domain coordination through interface contracts while preserving native control planes. The approach incorporates boundary testing, responsibility models, and seven integration facets, leveraging interface mapping, policy contexts, and operational evidence to guide integration design. The primary contribution lies in establishing a unified framework for evaluating interoperability, governance capabilities, and fault isolation, thereby delineating clear directions for future research.