**4. System of beliefs**

represented in it, only finding usefulness when it's found in relevant form. Raw material is

**• Symbols** are the alphabet used to order bits, shaping finite strings (words) and infinite strings (messages). Words and messages can be shaped as text or as verbal enunciation, numbers, diagrams and even static or moving (video) images. The occurrence of certain symbols may influence the occurrence of others in several time periods, inducing the

**• Data** are isolated measures about events. According to (Jones, 2000) data are usually seen as being the most fundamental shape of Information. Usually the meaning "data" means something raw or non-refined that must be "polished" as to transform itself in a finished product. One may be "flooded" with data yet it doesn't mean we have information. An example: People and city's names are usually classified as information, while a serial

**• Information** is (Jones, 2000) data in a context acquiring semantic value understood as

**• Meaning** is Information in a System of Beliefs (Dorbolo, 2003). Beliefs and ideas we have form a system whose parts are interrelated in various shapes. This system is dynamic, i.e., it alters itself as new Information is added, and when it happens all new Information is altered by the system. We all have Systems of Beliefs that condition the way we see and the

**• Knowledge** is meaning in several contexts. It's a set of aggregations that surpasses the semantic value of each individual element. It has to do with the way things are made and how they exist. The context (Brezillon, 1998), seen as knowledge, enables necessarily to make the distinction between contextualized knowledge (knowledge used in a certain time) and knowledge context (knowledge that restraints contextualized knowledge). The bigger difficulty we face is that, at a certain time for a follower, contextualized knowledge may

become contextual knowledge. There are two kinds of Knowledge (Laudon, 2009):

imitation, not being easily codified, described or reduced to rules.

**• Tacit**: concept (Polanyi, 1974) to situations in which the cognitive/behavior processes are conducted by unconscious cognition. Its the kind of knowledge characterized by being knowledge-practitioner, developed through action, experience, ideas, values, etc. so for that reason shared through conversation and changed experiences, through observation and

**• Explicit**: its (Sullivan, 2001) a summary based in direct experience that can be easily articulated or codified through a system of symbols which makes it communicated or diffused. This kind of knowledge is to be found in products, patents, source software code,

2 According to Porto Editora Portuguese Language Dictionary, the word "sememas" means the signification unit in a

lexeme (lexema), which pertains in a set of semes (semas), the minimal significant component of a word.

can be used and usually denotes data in a combined shape and in a specific purpose. The terms "data" and "Information" are in general and usually used simultaneously, so a vast

. The acquired information needs to be selected, elaborated and analyzed until it

no longer considered a level of Information.

122 Advances in Industrial Design Engineering

number one gets at the hospital is "data".

way we relate with the world.

sememes2

amount of Information obtained as each symbol is analyzed.

set of data hides Information only discovered after data analyzing.

In the past, guessing was a possible science, having the objective of trying to determine the meaning and causes of events. With science evolution, guessing was abandoned taking into account only predicament and certainty.

All that is known beyond doubt (Bernoulli, 1713), we claim to know or understand. Relatively to all that is left, we only conjecture and opine. To conjecture about something is the same as to measure the probability of something the best way possible, in order to choose the best option to our judgments and actions.

Randomness is not part of our knowledge but the object's property, rendering it impossible to make predicaments about it. The probability is a measure of how certain we are and it's achieved with a combination of arguments. An argument may be defined as a thought to prove or refute a given question.

When an argument fits with mathematics, one can make predictions. When an argument is an image, one can forecast as in "an image is worth a thousand words" as being objective. When one has both arguments (image plus mathematics) one can acquire certainty. Each argument must have a weight and the set of arguments with their relative weight is a System of Beliefs.

Probabilities are estimated by the number and weight of the arguments that prove or indicate that a certain thing is, was or will be. Arguments, by themselves, are intrinsic, or artificial in the daily speech, they are expressed or come out according to considerations of cause, the effects, the observer, the connection, indication or any other circumstances that may have any relation with the thing under proof. It can also be external and non-artificial, coming from the observer's authority and his or her witnessing.

**•** Which beliefs we have is heavier?

*construction on a two dimensional space*.

with an almost imperceptible line in the second.

actions?

*structures*".

information it contains.

(Carvalho Rodrigues, 1989).

but we do not listen.

**•** Until how far in past are our beliefs recognizable?

**•** Where did we achieve our beliefs? Did we create them or did we inherit them? **•** Did we experience big changes in our System of Beliefs? How did that happen?

**•** Is it possible to draw a diagram of a specific cluster of Systems of Beliefs, ideas, feelings or

Measuring Design Simplicity http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/54753 125

In short, and the most complete that the set of data is, there will always be a System of Beliefs where the amount of Information over the unknown variable will be zero, due to the limitations of the System of Beliefs in presence of the observer. Many times we are told the way things are

On the other hand we also have to deal with data uncertainty, as these may be "incomplete, imprecise, fragmented, suspicious, vague, contradictory, or disabled in any other way".

When we approach the matter of information we cannot avoid the observer's role. Carvalho Rodrigues advocates that the measure we take from the amount of information in messages received by our senses is based in perception. He gives us the example of two woks from the Russian painter Kasimir Malevitch3 (1878-1935) founder of Suprematism (1913), who painted "*A Black Quadrilateral* and *White over White"*, he had enough genius to show in these two works the «the pure feeling supremacy's, or the perception in painting», painting being only a *color*

When we ask what is in those paintings the immediate answer is: A black quadrilateral and a white quadrilateral. However we are before a white canvas in the first painting and a canvas

It is exactly over these paintings that that we give the black quadrilateral and the white square higher information amount, because they induce in each one of us feelings which in turn generate action. We also know that "*the rarer the event the higher the turmoil in all human*

In this case we were led to conclude that the lesser probability for an event's occurrence, or yet, the lesser its frequency, the bigger our perception upon it, so the higher the amount of

"*It is this supremacy, the supremacy of our perception over our feelings, the supremacy of information amount we can measure in*

3 KasimirMalevitch stated that art's reality depends entirely from the effect of color over the scenario. The depicted painting has not a relation of subjection to the real world. It is, in itself and by itself a real fact: it is as "concrete" as all objects surrounding us. It means that the object-painting is not imitating anything: it exists, as objects exist in nature.

*an event, over its frequency that commands our behavior that induces major modifications in systems*"

The way to apply arguments to conjecture and measure probabilities may follow nine rules or axioms:


The System of Beliefs is thus defined as being the set of arguments and their relative weight. Hence, the amount of information allowed by a set of data about an unknown variable depends on the existent System of Beliefs. Therefore with the same set of data we can obtain differen‐ tiated results, influenced by the different Systems of Beliefs we all have and that condition the way we see and how we relate to the world.

Another method, stipulating that before a set of data we can obtain higher information amount is to work and focus in the System of Beliefs… For instance, to question and inquire may be boring because it takes to much work and few results in data obtaining.

To investigate the System of Beliefs, we must raise the following questions (Dorbolo, 2003):


**•** Which beliefs we have is heavier?

effects, the observer, the connection, indication or any other circumstances that may have any relation with the thing under proof. It can also be external and non-artificial, coming from the

The way to apply arguments to conjecture and measure probabilities may follow nine rules or

**2.** It is not sufficient to weigh only one or another argument, but it is necessary to investigate all that may arrive at our knowledge and that is appropriate to prove things;

**3.** One must not consider only arguments that prove something but also those that can lead to an opposite conclusion, so that it becomes clear which one has a bigger weight; **4.** In order to judge universalities, remote and universal arguments are enough. However to conjecture about specific things, we must add closer and special arguments if available;

**5.** In the uncertainty we must cease all our actions until we have more clarity and, if we have to choose between two possibilities we must make the option for the one that may seem

**6.** What is useful and not prejudicial must be preferred over what has never been useful and

**7.** Human actions must not be evaluated according to the outcome, as, sometimes, impru‐ dent actions have a better result, while reasonable actions may lead to worse results; **8.** In our judgments we must be careful before allowing things getting a bigger weight than they deserve, nor to consider something as less probable than something absolutely

**9.** Once total exactitude can rarely be achieved we consider as absolute certainty only what

The System of Beliefs is thus defined as being the set of arguments and their relative weight. Hence, the amount of information allowed by a set of data about an unknown variable depends on the existent System of Beliefs. Therefore with the same set of data we can obtain differen‐ tiated results, influenced by the different Systems of Beliefs we all have and that condition the

Another method, stipulating that before a set of data we can obtain higher information amount is to work and focus in the System of Beliefs… For instance, to question and inquire may be

To investigate the System of Beliefs, we must raise the following questions (Dorbolo, 2003):

more appropriate, safer, wiser or at least more probable, even if none is.

observer's authority and his or her witnessing.

124 Advances in Industrial Design Engineering

is always prejudicial;

**1.** Applied to things where it is possible to acquire certainty;

certain, nor imposing to others the same opinion;

way we see and how we relate to the world.

**•** How do beliefs relate to our feelings and actions?

**•** Which beliefs do we have? **•** How do beliefs interrelate?

is morally correct through need and personalized desire.

boring because it takes to much work and few results in data obtaining.

axioms:


In short, and the most complete that the set of data is, there will always be a System of Beliefs where the amount of Information over the unknown variable will be zero, due to the limitations of the System of Beliefs in presence of the observer. Many times we are told the way things are but we do not listen.

On the other hand we also have to deal with data uncertainty, as these may be "incomplete, imprecise, fragmented, suspicious, vague, contradictory, or disabled in any other way".

When we approach the matter of information we cannot avoid the observer's role. Carvalho Rodrigues advocates that the measure we take from the amount of information in messages received by our senses is based in perception. He gives us the example of two woks from the Russian painter Kasimir Malevitch3 (1878-1935) founder of Suprematism (1913), who painted "*A Black Quadrilateral* and *White over White"*, he had enough genius to show in these two works the «the pure feeling supremacy's, or the perception in painting», painting being only a *color construction on a two dimensional space*.

When we ask what is in those paintings the immediate answer is: A black quadrilateral and a white quadrilateral. However we are before a white canvas in the first painting and a canvas with an almost imperceptible line in the second.

It is exactly over these paintings that that we give the black quadrilateral and the white square higher information amount, because they induce in each one of us feelings which in turn generate action. We also know that "*the rarer the event the higher the turmoil in all human structures*".

In this case we were led to conclude that the lesser probability for an event's occurrence, or yet, the lesser its frequency, the bigger our perception upon it, so the higher the amount of information it contains.

*an event, over its frequency that commands our behavior that induces major modifications in systems*"

(Carvalho Rodrigues, 1989).

<sup>&</sup>quot;*It is this supremacy, the supremacy of our perception over our feelings, the supremacy of information amount we can measure in*

<sup>3</sup> KasimirMalevitch stated that art's reality depends entirely from the effect of color over the scenario. The depicted painting has not a relation of subjection to the real world. It is, in itself and by itself a real fact: it is as "concrete" as all objects surrounding us. It means that the object-painting is not imitating anything: it exists, as objects exist in nature.

It is not surprising that human made creations in the most diversified systems are fragile and precarious and induce great complexity. They are structures influenced too much by nonpredictable events, becoming responsible for stronger and everlasting generated perceptions. A system's structure will only be compatible with a proper information amount, otherwise the structure will enter into collapse and that system will have to organize itself with some other structure.

understanding that *stimuli or data* are the amount, property or condition detected and con‐ verted in electrical signal, which in turn is transmitted to the brain by several sensors having

Measuring Design Simplicity http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/54753 127

In short we can state that sensors are responsible by data transmission to the decision maker

As we assessed by Maeda's (2006) proposal on the concept of Simplicity, the concept of Information as we understood it is also from a relativist or subjective nature, due to the

We are thus before a probability: the measure of certainty of who we really are, is obtained by the combination of arguments we presently dispose, knowing that there is a weight for each argument. This set of arguments, plus each argument weight is, in turn, the System of Beliefs (Melo-Pinto, 1998). Finally we can also state that before the same set of data, different Systems

Hence that we can sustain Bernoulli's proposal on arguments combination method, we will now present the results of Melo-Pinto (1998) in the recognition technique (the knowing of what the incognita is) by the mathematical method of combining arguments afterwards developed by Dempster-Shafer (Yager, 1994). They have both defined the set of each argument and its

Schools, either from Design or Engineering, were created as to allow the same school's System

The question now raised is how in Design or Engineering we built a System of Beliefs to allow design or the design simpler in itself and for users? We can state that it can be made through

According to Melo-Pinto (1998), decision process results from information gathering driven to that decision. But all along, the natural appearance of new arguments (partial or not) may

Still according to Melo-Pinto (1998), who developed a system of decision making applied to the visual recognition of images in degrading situations, he states that *due to different beliefs' functions over the same insight system, based on different bodies of evidence, he supports himself in the Dempster-Shafer rule of combination*, and as such, may help to calculate the respective functions of believe and plausibility. However, as that function is probabilistic it should be evidence resultant. But Melo-Pinto contradicts this fact, stating in turn that value associated to a given image effectively renders the beliefs we have of it, and are independent from evidence. He gives, for instance, the case of a blond woman's image (Marlene Dietrich) from whom we need no additional result to sustain how associated that image is to Marylin Monroe. Hence the capacity of combination is fundamental to a method that deals with different argument.

the capacity to recognize the surrounding universe.

that in turn consubstantiates into Information.

multiplicity and variety of the existent definitions.

weight as function constituents of the System of Beliefs.

**5. Decision processes: Combining arguments**

drove us to remake beliefs by the light of new data.

of Beliefs to deal with design or the design with the fewer possible data.

combined arguments or weights that are part of the System of Beliefs.

of Beliefs will also give different results.

A system with a great amount of data to obtain less information is said to have a highly disordered structure, and induces in the observer a huge ignorance. On the contrary with an orderly and well organized structure, with a set of data with few elements, one can obtain all the necessary information. In short, the degree of knowledge we can have over a determined system is maximized if its uncertainty is zero.

To do so, a method has been developed to calculate the information amount that events generate in the observer, tested in several domains, in studies related with the loss of cohesion from a society before events related to epidemics, or the effects caused in an army before loss in combat, or still with the detection of faults related to the tannery industry, or the determi‐ nation of fibers distribution in paper industry.

Hence in this chapter's realm we are describing a method to measure information amount. The concept of measure enhances the observer's existence. Hence, the measure of information amount to Simplicity is a relativist measure, it is always dependable on who is effectively observing, because it depends on the observer's System of Beliefs.

In this sense, the choice of what messages or which messages' specter to allow measure may take the designation of those messages as relevant factors to a determined structure within a system.

Hence convictions and concepts into which each observer allows importance, are what we designate as a System of Beliefs. Naturally each observer will have his own, and it is single, and by the time the observer is growing through out his own existence and the world around him, he accumulates ever more beliefs and concepts in respect to serials of things.

One of those things would be, for instance, what the Simplicity's meaning is before a deter‐ mined individual or group of individuals. Probably meaning can change from one individual to one another. Not in general, but in its specificity, which as we saw can induce to several definitions for Simplicity.

It all depends in the relation on how we perceive and understand the surrounding universe, which takes place in our senses, and naturally in our System of Beliefs. Already mathematician Friederich Bessel, while examining time records on stars transit in Konigsberg observatory, and facing the systematic differences present in observations made by different astronomers, concluded that perhaps he would be before the existence of a "personal equation". Being thus, one can state that an equation is also a personal experience, and it enhances the existence of a sensor that picks up information transmitted by our senses and that our brain processes.

A sensor is something like a device that receives a signal. It's associated to a specific sensation. It receives a signal – *stimuli or data* – and responds through out an electrical signal. Hence understanding that *stimuli or data* are the amount, property or condition detected and con‐ verted in electrical signal, which in turn is transmitted to the brain by several sensors having the capacity to recognize the surrounding universe.

In short we can state that sensors are responsible by data transmission to the decision maker that in turn consubstantiates into Information.

As we assessed by Maeda's (2006) proposal on the concept of Simplicity, the concept of Information as we understood it is also from a relativist or subjective nature, due to the multiplicity and variety of the existent definitions.

We are thus before a probability: the measure of certainty of who we really are, is obtained by the combination of arguments we presently dispose, knowing that there is a weight for each argument. This set of arguments, plus each argument weight is, in turn, the System of Beliefs (Melo-Pinto, 1998). Finally we can also state that before the same set of data, different Systems of Beliefs will also give different results.

Hence that we can sustain Bernoulli's proposal on arguments combination method, we will now present the results of Melo-Pinto (1998) in the recognition technique (the knowing of what the incognita is) by the mathematical method of combining arguments afterwards developed by Dempster-Shafer (Yager, 1994). They have both defined the set of each argument and its weight as function constituents of the System of Beliefs.

Schools, either from Design or Engineering, were created as to allow the same school's System of Beliefs to deal with design or the design with the fewer possible data.

The question now raised is how in Design or Engineering we built a System of Beliefs to allow design or the design simpler in itself and for users? We can state that it can be made through combined arguments or weights that are part of the System of Beliefs.
