MA/Carma: Advanced Computer Support For General Morphological Analysis
MA/Carma: Advanced Computer Support For General Morphological Analysis
MA/Carma: Advanced Computer Support For General Morphological Analysis
analysis-synthesis cycles
internal consistency assessments
relational database development
scenario generator features
input-output (if-then) modelling features
single and multiple driver features
hypercube generation
notes and documentation
NOTE: The example morphological fields provided below derive from a study done for the Swedish
National Rescue Services Agency. The study involved developing a computer-aided instrument to
assess Swedish Rescue Services' preparedness for chemical accidents and terrorist actions
involving the release of chemical agents. (Ritchey et.al. (2002) Using Morphological Analysis to
Evaluate Preparedness for Accidents Involving Hazardous Materials. Proceedings of the 4th
LACDE Conference, Shanghai. Available for download at: www.swemorph.com/downloads.html.
The model consists of two linked morphological fields: A 5-parameter preparedness
Resource field (the first five columns on the left) and a 3-parameter Response field,
which is based on an accident scenario representing a general class of chemical
substances. (The scenario is in fact based on an actual accident in Sweden involving the
release of ammonia caused by a railroad accident.) Although this is a relatively simple
model, for that very reason it suffices to illustrate how morphological inference models
work.
The main user interface of MA/Carma is divided into three working areas:
E - Edit Field
C - Cross-Consistency Field
D - Display Field
Figure 1: Segment of a morphological model for assessing Rescue Services' preparedness for
accidents involving chemical releases.
The Edit Field (E) is used to enter the variables and variable-values for the problem
complex to be studied. It allows the morphological matrix to be formatted -- e.g. re-sized
and colour coded if desired. Comments and documentation can be entered in text areas
associated with each text cell (the red dot indicates that there is text in the cell's text area).
The Cross-Consistency matrix relates the conditions (values) of each parameter with
those of all other parameters -- pare-wise. This allows for Cross-Consistency
Assessments (CCA) to be made within the parameter space. Comments and motivation
for the cross-consistency judgments are documented in text areas behind each cross-
consistency cell. Consistency keys can be defined for different purposes. When
consistency checks are run, internally inconsistent configurations are deleted from the
solution space, and other configurations can be flagged for different qualities.
The display field allows the solution space (or outcome space) of the morphological
(scenario, strategy or policy) model to be examined. In Figure 3 (below), the field displays
a given input (in red) concerning a rescue service's preparedness resources for a
particular chemical accident, and output (in blue) showing the level of response judged to
be associated with this preparedness level.
Figure 3: Display field showing output (blue) for given input conditions (red).
In Figure 4, the original configuration from Figure 3 is "frozen" and new parameters values
are chosen (the three light blue cells on the Resource field) in order to see how prepared-
ness response levels can be most efficiently increased (the three light blue cells on the
Response field). Note that both Planning, Training and Equipment must be augmented in
order to gain the best response to the chemical release itself. This does not, however,
improve Information and Human Rescue responses.
Figure 4
In Figure 5, the input has been shifted to the response segment, in order to ascertain
what resources would be required for a (given) desired response. It is the characteristic of
morphological models, that anything can be an input, and anything an output.
Figure 5
Applications
The morphological model presented above represents only one of many possible
applications. During the past 15 years, general morphology has been used to model:
The Author: Dr. Tom Ritchey is a former Research Director for the Institution for Technology
Foresight and Assessment at the Swedish National Defence Research Agency (FOI) in Stockholm.
He is a methodologist and facilitator who works primarily with non-quantified decision support
modelling -- especially with General Morphological Analysis (MA), Bayesian Networks (BN) and
Multi-Criteria Decision support. Since 1995 he has directed more than 80 projects involving
computer aided MA for Swedish government agencies, national and international NGO:s and
private companies. He is the founder of the Swedish Morphological Society and Director of Ritchey
Consulting and a founding partner of the U.K. base Strategy Foresight Partnership.