Hi, On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 1:00 AM, Alejandro F. Reimondo <alereimo...@smalltalking.net> wrote: > Complexity is not measurable in the objects (nor figures), > because it emerges from information process. > Some would disagree and argue for using Kolmogorov Complexity (or some approximation) to measure complexity of things. But you can get some support in the concept of "Effective Complexity" from Gell-Mann and Lloyd which first says:
"In nontechnical language, we can define the effective complexity (EC) of an entity as the length of a highly compressed description of its regularities." IMHO, EC is particularly interesting for Software Engineers/Developers since G-M&L make a "...distinction between regularities and those features that are treated as random or incidental" which is similar to Fred Brooks analysis of software in the "Silver bullet" paper (inherent and accidental complexity). G-M&L then goes on to say: "Like some other concepts sometimes identified with complexity, the EC of an entity is context-dependent, even subjective to a considerable extent. It depends on the coarse graining (level of detail) at which the entity is described, the language used to describe it, the previous knowledge and understanding that are assumed, and, of course, the nature of the distinction made between regularity and randomness." which i interpret as the effective complexity corresponding, in some sense, to the "mental"/computing energy an entity would need to expend to consider all the aspects of a thing/system it considers important after disconsidering the parts which it consider irrelevant. Best regards, /Robert Feldt -- Tech. Dr. (PhD), Assoc. Professor (Senior Lecturer) in Software Engineering Chalmers, Software Engineering and Technology Blekinge Institute of Technology, Software Engineering Research Lab robert.feldt (a) chalmers.se or robert.feldt (a) gmail.com http://www.cse.chalmers.se/~feldt _______________________________________________ fonc mailing list fonc@vpri.org http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc
