Login
You're viewing the mastodon.coffee public feed.
  • Aug 14, 2026, 4:08 AM

    Rasmussen maps these as a space across two dimensions: abstraction (purpose to physical) and decomposition (whole-system to individual components). Each component can have a physical set of properties, but also a high level purpose it is connected to; so do aggregated portions of a system.

    He then describes how workers do their work by skipping around abstraction layers, going up and down the hierarchies based on both purposes (high-level goals and functions) and reasons (bottom-up signals) but also across various aggregations (whole systems vs. components).

    The cool thing though is that he then maps a problem-solving path as a line walking that conceptual path within a "conceptual reasoning space" of operators that is event-independent. Neelam Naikar (doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2016.) re-renders diagrams Rasmussen had made in a few publications in the mid 80s:

    This is the "abstraction-decomposition space". It maps a troubleshooting workflow from a system symptom ("no communication to tape or disk") via a diagonal walk to isolate a faulty component ("short-circuited transistor").

    This is such an incredible visualization of so many complex elements!

    A grid diagram plotting an Abstraction–Decomposition space. The vertical axis, Abstraction, runs from Physical (bottom) to Purposive (top) through five levels: Physical Form, Physical Function, Generalized Function, Abstract Function, and Functional Meaning/Purpose. The horizontal axis, Decomposition, runs from low resolution/coarse (left) to high resolution/fine-grained (right) through five columns: Whole System, Subsystem, Functional Unit, Circuit-stage, and Component. Fifteen numbered nodes connected by arrows trace a diagnostic troubleshooting path through the space, ending at a burnt-looking transistor short-circuit.
    💬 0🔄 0⭐ 0