Cybernetic model of rational world order under the paradigm of directed evolution
With the development of technological civilization, the dynamics of global processes, the pace of environmental degradation, competition for access to resources, the emergence of new large-scale epidemics, and many other phenomena are increasing. All these processes and phenomena negatively affect g...
Saved in:
| Published in: | Проблемы управления и информатики |
|---|---|
| Date: | 2022 |
| Main Authors: | , |
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Інститут кібернетики ім. В.М. Глушкова НАН України
2022
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://nasplib.isofts.kiev.ua/handle/123456789/210920 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Journal Title: | Digital Library of Periodicals of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine |
| Cite this: | Cybernetic model of rational world order under the paradigm of directed evolution / O. Palagin, D. Symonov // Проблеми керування та інформатики. — 2022. — № 6. — С. 54–66. — Бібліогр.: 36 назв. — англ. |
Institution
Digital Library of Periodicals of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine| _version_ | 1859571810178170880 |
|---|---|
| author | Palagin, O. Symonov, D. |
| author_facet | Palagin, O. Symonov, D. |
| citation_txt | Cybernetic model of rational world order under the paradigm of directed evolution / O. Palagin, D. Symonov // Проблеми керування та інформатики. — 2022. — № 6. — С. 54–66. — Бібліогр.: 36 назв. — англ. |
| collection | DSpace DC |
| container_title | Проблемы управления и информатики |
| description | With the development of technological civilization, the dynamics of global processes, the pace of environmental degradation, competition for access to resources, the emergence of new large-scale epidemics, and many other phenomena are increasing. All these processes and phenomena negatively affect global security and become the subject of scientific research aimed at developing recommendations for shaping a world order that will ensure the ability to meet the needs of humanity, regardless of racial, national, sociocultural, or religious affiliation, and will allow for the restoration of nature. New principles of world order should be based on the main principle — "human security and the possibility of rational development of civilization." This can be ensured by implementing an optimal system of world order management.
З розвитком технологічної цивілізації зростають динаміка світових процесів, темпи деградації довкілля, конкуренція за доступ до ресурсів, зʼявляються нові масштабні епідемії та багато іншого. Всі ці процеси та явища негативно впливають на безпеку в світі та стають обʼєктами дослідження науковців з метою розробки рекомендацій щодо формування світопорядку, які забезпечать можливість задовольнити потреби людства, незалежно від расової, національної, соціокультурної та релігійної приналежності, та дозволять відновити природу. Нові принципи світоустрою повинні базуватися на головному принципі — «безпека людини та можливість раціонального розвитку». Це можливо забезпечити, впровадивши оптимальну систему керування світоустроєм.
|
| first_indexed | 2026-03-13T18:17:54Z |
| format | Article |
| fulltext |
© O. PALAGIN, D. SYMONOV, 2022
54 ISSN 2786-6491
ТЕХНІЧНІ ЗАСОБИ ДЛЯ ВИМІРЮВАНЬ ТА КЕРУВАННЯ
UDC 004.9
O. Palagin, D. Symonov
CYBERNETIC MODEL OF RATIONAL
WORLD ORDER UNDER THE PARADIGM
OF DIRECTED EVOLUTION
Olehander Palagin
V.M. Glushkov Institute of Cybernetics of NAS of Ukraine, Kyiv,
ORCID ID: 0000-0003-3223-1391,
palagin_a@ukr.net
Denys Symonov
V.M. Glushkov Institute of Cybernetics of NAS of Ukraine, Kyiv,
ORCID ID: 0000-0002-6648-4736,
denys.symonov@gmail.com
With the rapid advancement in our civilization s̓ technology, the dynamics of a varie-
ty of global processes are on the rise as well, the environmental degradation rate in-
creases, competition for access to resources grows, new large-scale epidemics
emerge, etc. All of these processes and phenomena have a negative impact on global
security and are being studied by scientists to develop recommendations for a world
order that will meet the needs of humanity, regardless of race, nationality, socio-
cultural and religious affiliation, and will allow for the restoration of the environment.
The new principles of the world order should be rooted in the main principle of hu-
man security — «the possibility of rational development of civilization». This can be
achieved by implementing an optimal control system for the world order. Human se-
curity should be considered, in addition to the factors of the direct threat of military
conflicts, in the context of climate change and natural disasters, cultural and social
development, migration and health care. Considering that the problem of human se-
curity and development is an interdisciplinary one, the only way to solve it is to com-
bine the efforts of scientists who specialize in different sciences and to use a
transdisciplinary approach that appeals to the creation of a scientific picture of the
world based on the systematic integration of scientific knowledge and the Noosphere
Theory of Academician Vernadsky V.I.
Keywords: directed evolution, world order, cybernetic system model,
transdisciplinarity, security index, conflicts, sustainable development.
To maintain international peace and security, and to that end: to take effective collective measures for
the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or
other breaches of the peace, and to bring about by peaceful means, and in conformity with the princi-
ples of justice and international law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations
which might lead to a breach of the peace.
Article 1 of the UN Charter [1]
Introduction
Life on the planet is caused by the functioning of many interconnected systems and
organisms that ensure the functioning of cyclic processes. The human being is the un-
disputed leader among living beings that influence the life of the planet. Human beings,
https://org.i.ua/js/compose/?id=7245370
Міжнародний науково-технічний журнал
Проблеми керування та інформатики, 2022, № 6 55
like many other beings, tend to form a group with other people to ensure their own safe-
ty, needs, and self-expression. The evolutionary development of mankind has created
the conditions for people to form groups such as «countries» that have stable ties to var-
ious elements of society, and interaction within the group is regulated by certain laws,
norms, and customs. Of course, decomposition into groups can be done at a less detailed
level, but for the purposes of the task at hand, «country» is a sufficient level of detail.
The today s̓ level of human development requires the existence of interconnected polit-
ical and economic systems between regions and countries. Decisions made in one country
have an impact on the state of the system in another country, or even on the whole world.
The extraction and distribution of natural resources is global in nature, which, on the one
hand, empowers some, and on the other hand, limits the access to others as a result of grow-
ing competition. The access to limited natural resources for certain users (countries) and the
lack of high-quality tools for regulating their global distribution provoke extraction in an
amount exceeding the economically optimal level, which further negatively affects the over-
all balance and contributes to the emergence of a conflict of interest due to a deficit or nega-
tive impact on other factors of life of certain countries.
Sharing limited resources is a problem that users cannot solve on their own, which
causes each interested side to choose suboptimal strategies. If group members are seek-
ing to achieve their own interests or needs, they will have no motivation to strive to
achieve the group goal until they are able to satisfy their own needs or until the forcing
them to act exceeds the strength of their resistance. Examples of shared resources in-
clude the planet s̓ ecology and security.
Today s̓ human life on the planet can be defined as a self-organizing system that
functions through formalized and non-formalized processes, the interaction of many
parties with their own interests and values, using limited resources to meet the needs
arising from their vision of fairness and further development. The competition for re-
sources, both tangible and intangible, affects the level of tension between countries and
regions, which ultimately affects the level of safety of life for all the people.
Life safety is an ordered multitude of structurally interconnected and functionally
interdependent systems of different types, which defined by certain indicators of risk to
life. Within the United Nations (UN), it is assumed that the use of a human security ap-
proach will enable, through analysis and planning, more comprehensive and, if possible,
preventive measures to be taken in response to exacerbations and conflicts. But statistics
shows that this approach does not work. Figure 1 (The total number of people killed in
the war between 1946 and 2020) shows the dynamics of the level of deaths in wars in
the period after the end of World War II (1946) to 2020 [2, 3].
Fig. 1
As Figure 1 shows, the total number of deaths in military conflicts since World
War II is almost fifteen percent of the total losses of World War II. These «losses» oc-
curred despite the existence of the UN Security Council, which has five permanent and
ten non-permanent members (Article 23 of the UN Charter) and whose decisions are le-
gally binding on all member states. The current situation indicates that there are prob-
56 ISSN 2786-6491
lems in the functioning of the existing system of ensuring global security, which direct-
ly affects the future of sustainable development of our planet.
Long-lasting crises, violent conflicts, natural disasters, persistent poverty in certain
regions, epidemics and economic recessions create difficulties and undermine the pro-
spects for peace, stability and sustainable development of humanity. Table 1 shows in-
formation on the variability of the composite security (peacefulness) index [4]. The in-
dex is calculated using 23 quantitative and qualitative indicators, which are rated on a
scale from 1 to 5, with the lower the score, the more peaceful the country.
The index variables include: number of internal and external wars, deaths in external
wars, deaths in internal wars, level of organized internal conflicts, relations with neighboring
countries, degree of distrust between citizens, percentage of refugees in the total population,
political instability, level of respect for human rights, possibility of terrorist acts, number of
murders, level of serious crimes, probability of violent demonstrations, number of prisoners,
number of police and security officers, percentage of military expenditures as a percentage
of GDP, number of military personnel, imports and exports of conventional weapons, mili-
tary presence as part of UN troops, number of heavy weapons, availability of small arms and
light weapons, military capabilities or modernization of military forces.
Table 1
Country σ Country σ Country σ Country σ
Japan 0,024 Bulgaria 0,045 Nepal 0,068 Lebanon 0,108
North Korea 0,026 Guatemala 0,046 Tanzania 0,069 The Gambia 0,109
New Zealand 0,027 Denmark 0,046 Namibia 0,069 Guinea 0,110
Slovenia 0,029 Gabon 0,046 Tajikistan 0,071 Iran 0,112
South Korea 0,030 Morocco 0,047 Belarus 0,075 Thailand 0,112
Papua New Guinea 0,030 Latvia 0,047 Kenya 0,076 DR of the Congo 0,114
Cuba 0,031 Moldova 0,048 France 0,076 Cote d ̓Ivoire 0,114
Iceland 0,031 Zambia 0,048 Portugal 0,077 Senegal 0,116
Slovakia 0,031 Mauritania 0,050 Qatar 0,077 Lesotho 0,119
Trinidad and Tobago 0,031 Poland 0,051 Eritrea 0,078 UAE 0,120
Albania 0,032 Ireland 0,051 Spain 0,078 Saudi Arabia 0,122
Ghana 0,032 Cyprus 0,051 Azerbaijan 0,079 Nigeria 0,128
Kosovo 0,032 Belgium 0,052 Kazakhstan 0,080 Pakistan 0,132
Hungary 0,033 Angola 0,052 Haiti 0,083 Bahrain 0,135
Italy 0,036 Uruguay 0,053 Tunisia 0,086 Iraq 0,140
Peru 0,036 Jordan 0,053 Mongolia 0,086 Mozambique 0,141
Indonesia 0,036 Sweden 0,054 Russia 0,088 Ethiopia 0,142
Argentina 0,037 China 0,055
Republic of
the Congo
0,089 Kyrgyz Republic 0,145
Dominican Republic 0,037 Turkmenistan 0,055 Algeria 0,090 Myanmar 0,150
Romania 0,037 Austria 0,055 Armenia 0,091 Chad 0,158
Bolivia 0,038 Australia 0,056 Chile 0,091 Brazil 0,168
Norway 0,038 India 0,056 Sudan 0,091 Bhutan 0,172
Botswana 0,038 Liberia 0,056 Uganda 0,092 Egypt 0,187
Panama 0,038 Colombia 0,057 Burundi 0,093 Turkey 0,190
Mauritius 0,039
Bosnia and
Herzegovina
0,057
North Mace-
donia
0,094 Zimbabwe 0,194
Lithuania 0,039 Bangladesh 0,057 Djibouti 0,094 Afghanistan 0,199
Netherlands 0,039 Eswatini 0,057 Uzbekistan 0,095 Mali 0,207
Sierra Leone 0,039 Malawi 0,059 USA 0,095 Venezuela 0,213
South Africa 0,040 Estonia 0,060 Serbia 0,096 Nicaragua 0,215
Equatorial Guinea 0,040 Philippines 0,061 Madagascar 0,097 CAR 0,215
Timor-Leste 0,041 Greece 0,061 Mexico 0,097 Niger 0,235
Switzerland 0,041 Somalia 0,062 Rwanda 0,097 Sri Lanka 0,283
Jamaica 0,041 Guyana 0,063 Israel 0,097 Cameroon 0,302
Costa Rica 0,041 Honduras 0,063 Togo 0,097 Georgia 0,328
Paraguay 0,041 Malaysia 0,063 Palestine 0,098 Burkina Faso 0,331
El Salvador 0,041 Germany 0,064 Kuwait 0,099 Yemen 0,338
Finland 0,042 Singapore 0,064 Montenegro 0,099 Ukraine 0,353
United Kingdom 0,042 Croatia 0,065 Ecuador 0,099 South Sudan 0,385
Laos 0,043 Taiwan 0,066 Cambodia 0,101 Libya 0,398
Czech Republic 0,045 Canada 0,067 Benin 0,104 Syria 0,463
Vietnam 0,045 Oman 0,068 Guinea-Bissau 0,108
Міжнародний науково-технічний журнал
Проблеми керування та інформатики, 2022, № 6 57
Analyzing Table 1, (Standard deviation of the Global Peace Index in the period
20092022) we can assume that more than 80 percent of the countries in the ranking
have a fairly stable index value, meaning that qualitative changes in countries occur
over periods of more than 10 years. If a country is inclined to conflict behavior, then,
taking into account globalization, this will have a negative impact on neighboring coun-
tries, and if its size and economy have a significant impact on the region, the impact
will be not only on the countries directly bordering the «aggressor». Countries in Africa,
Asia, and South America have the lowest level of security. A more in-depth study is
needed to understand the reasons for this trend.
It should be mentioned that the index does not provide for the distribution of items
of expenditures for military operations, taking into account the «purpose» of these ex-
penditures, i.e., budget expenditures are made on a forced basis, to defend the country,
or to prepare for future aggression. There is also no normalization of the indicator by
population, size of the country s̓ territory, and income level, which makes it difficult to
assess the impact on the overall picture of the security situation in the world.
Let s̓ make an assumption and categorize the countries of the world into groups
depending on the index of living safety:
— group 1: [0; 1,5] — safe countries;
— group 2: (1,5; 2,5] — sufficiently safe countries;
— group 3: (2,5; + ∞) — unsafe countries.
Fig. 2
As you can see in Figure 2 (Statistics of indicators by groups of human safety
in 2022), eleven percent of the world s̓ population (almost 900 million people) live
in conditions of risk to their own security, these are poor countries (their total share
in the global economy does not exceed five percent), but the average area of these
58 ISSN 2786-6491
countries exceeds the global average. Group 3 countries have a high rate of variabil-
ity in the security index compared to the global average, which indicates that co n-
flicts and political instability are quite frequent.
«Conflict» is a negative social phenomenon that occurs in the form of aggressive
opposition of interested parties (e.g., social groups or countries) for the predominant
possession of certain resources or benefits [5]. The German sociologist Georg Simmel
believes that social conflicts arise as a result of the contradiction between forms of «in-
dividualization» and forms of «socialization», between «individual» and «culture» [6].
The combination of «individual» characteristics makes up the overall vision of a society
that reflects the characteristics of a particular country. The interactions in the society of
a particular country are both an expression of the hostile instincts of individuals and
groups as well as factors determined by social relations within the society. As studies
and historical experience show, the «conflict-free» society does not really exist, due to
the inability to remove completely the preconditions for the existence of conflicts, i.e.
the contradiction between forms of individualization and forms of socialization, be-
tween the individual and the culture of a society.
Open conflicts are the most threatening and have the most negative consequences.
Researchers believe that the main motivation for open conflicts is the inability of one of
the conflicting parties to convey its arguments to the opponent and urge him to elimi-
nate the causes of the conflict through negotiations [7]. The generalized conflict model
categorizes conflict types into three groups [8]:
— conflict of interest, i.e., the confrontation over the distribution and redistribution
of scarce resources: political power, material and social goods, technology, etc;
— conflict of values, reflected in the clash of value orientations of the conflicting
parties;
— conflict of identity is a situation when a person identifies himself or herself
not with society (the state), but with a certain group (racial, national, religious, or
linguistic).
A system of values is the key guidelines that define the determinant of an individu-
al s̓ or group s̓ behavior; they are a source of motivation and can be used for assessment
and forecasting. Hegel believes that the most important values and principles of the civil
society are: personal freedom of citizens; just laws that are strictly followed by citizens;
general knowledge, awareness and freedom of thought; and publicity of government [9].
Therefore, civil society is rooted in the autonomy and freedom of its citizens, the mutual
influence of society and the state to ensure democratic processes of the country s̓ devel-
opment. Values are relatively stable and permanent. Understanding the values can help
predict behavior and the degree of response to certain political processes. For a person,
a value is anything that has a certain importance, personal or social meaning for him or
her. The key components of social value systems are moral norms, aesthetic ideals, po-
litical and legal principles, philosophical and religious ideas [10]. The values of society
are formed through historical processes and can be used as a kind of coordinate system
for analyzing the cognitive behavior of a society [11]. These values directly affect the
sense of justice, which can be a factor of discontent and, later, a catalyst for conflict.
The concept of justice contains the ability to maintain a balance between rights and ob-
ligations; between action and punishment; between work and reward; between
achievements and their recognition in society [12].
Relations between people are not an exhaustive factor of impact on the threat to
«human security». Sustainable development of humanity has provoked another signifi-
cant problem which is the environment. Compensating for the accumulated human
damages to the biosphere is the key to the continuation of the planet s̓ life, i.e. balancing
the relationship between humans and nature is also one of the top priorities in the effort
to minimize the potential for conflict. Conflict resolution, let alone prediction, is impos-
Міжнародний науково-технічний журнал
Проблеми керування та інформатики, 2022, № 6 59
sible without a certain system of defining the rules of living in a common space and
without the functioning of conflict response mechanisms that use a comprehensive
analysis of the content, structure and dynamics of social processes, as well as without
following the agreed rules of coexistence. The other important factor that affects the
likelihood of conflicts over the value system is culture. The various social processes and
phenomena are a result of the personal reality of a particular person; they are compo-
nents of the culture of society, constantly replenishing its internal content. Culture re-
flects all the phenomena in the social consciousness of a particular society; it absorbs
the subjective features of human diversity.
To summarize, the task of ensuring the safe existence and sustainable development
of humanity is a multi-criteria task that requires the creation of new institutions and or-
ganizations that should serve the functioning of an adaptive system for directing the
evolution of the planet. The new institutions should be responsible for implementing
programs to enforce compliance with the rules and obligations of all members of the
world system, ensuring the functioning of transparent monitoring and control systems,
and providing prompt response to any deviations from the rules and regulations.
Mills [13] defined five main institutional trends that should be taken into account
when planning a human (societal) life system:
1. Institutions of power — the political level;
2. Institutions ensuring resource allocation, production, and scientific and techno-
logical development — economic level;
3. Institutions for ensuring security and order — military level;
4. Institutions for ensuring civil relations and parenting — the family level;
5. Organizations contributing to the possibility of realizing the needs of honoring
God — the religious level.
Balancing is the main task of both the leadership of certain countries, global insti-
tutions and organizations. As the task of «human security» is currently the most urgent,
it is advisable to focus on it as the main component, without which the existence of the
overall system is impossible (the principle of directed evolution). The primary task is to
develop a generalized model of a dynamic system, whose control allows, with the help
of rather weak signals (corrections), to transform chaotic processes into the required dy-
namic mode and thus stabilize its behavior. To implement the task, it is necessary to de-
velop a balanced system of indicators of the current state (Figure 3) and determine the
methods of responding to their changes to prevent negative consequences (threats to
«human security»). This system should be scalable, i.e., it should be possible to use it at
different levels of detail: the world order (planet), continents, countries, administrative
and territorial units, and civil society.
Fig. 3
The most appropriate model for a system of directed evolution is the principle of
controlled chaos stabilization with feedback (an example is shown in Figure 4). An
adaptive control system with feedback, which has a system for accumulating and ana-
lyzing the experience of the system s̓ operation and the consequences of responding to
fluctuations within the system, makes it possible to improve continuously the develop-
ment control process, which contributes to the achievement of the ultimate goal.
60 ISSN 2786-6491
The goal of developing a system for directing evolution can be viewed as an opti-
mization problem, which can be expressed as a tuple in general:
, , , , ,f Y X P extà ð (1)
where f is the objective function of the optimization problem; Y is an aggregate indica-
tor by category of the controlled hazard index distribution; X is a partially controlled
signal to the input of the control system (at the first stage, it is possible to use indices
from existing international institutions); P is a predicate that defines a subset of possible
decisions in accordance with the existing constraints: rules, laws, methods, resources,
etc; {max, min}extÍ are parameters of the optimization task.
Fig. 1
As depicted in Figure 4, the process of functioning of the evolution control system
starts with the assessment of the impact of country-generating factors ( )nC on the sys-
tem using the ix XÍ signal, information about the previous state of the system. These
factors are constantly fluctuating, i.e., the values of their indicators (parameters) deviate
from the «standard» (agreed) values, while the level of deviations within the system
does not cause concern, but is used by the system for learning. If the indicators of ran-
dom fluctuations reach critical values, the system reacts with the help of decisions that
form a vector of corrective parameters — is SÍ the control vector, under whose influ-
ence the system moves from the ( )ix t- current state to the ( )norm
ix t state. Corrective ac-
tions should be timely and binding. The model uses the current state of the system as a
feedback signal from the previous assessment of its actions, with further usage for train-
ing the system and forming the ik KÍ corrective parameters, which are used to make a
decision on the feasibility of corrective actions to control the overall system and train
the system in the current state.
The system s̓ goal is to provide timely information for making decisions that
accelerate human evolution, make life safer, and create conditions for the develop-
ment of the future generation. Decision-making requires information about the cur-
rent state of S, the causes of crisis situations, rules for responding to ig GÍ various
situations, archiving of decisions to ensure further analysis of the consequences of
such decisions, and trained systems. It is difficult to design a perfect system, and its
implementation will encounter resistance. Therefore, it is most advisable to start
with the most important issues, specifying the prototype of the system, which will
allow avoiding fatal mistakes during its operation and ensuring the gradual evolu-
tion of both the system itself and its capabilities, as well as the attitude of all poss i-
ble interested parties to it. Consequently, it is advisable to start designing the sys-
tem with the most relevant issue such as human safety.
{gi}
x2
C1
xn
C2
Cn
1{ }nx
X
Y
K
I
I S
S
x1
Міжнародний науково-технічний журнал
Проблеми керування та інформатики, 2022, № 6 61
The most common problem when designing a new index to be used in a model is
the selection of relevant variables. Typically, the procedure for selecting variables and
calculating the index is based on theoretical considerations using two components:
1) analysis of trends and current characteristics of the index components; 2) analysis of
expert opinions. Traditionally, international agencies and institutions use gross domestic
product (GDP) as the main indicator. This is quite practical, as it enables us to compare
the economic situation of countries. GDP is also used as a scale for converting meas-
urements of other integral indicators. Recently, the use of indicators measuring social
progress as variables in integral models has become increasingly popular: health, educa-
tion and cognitive behavior, political freedom, and others. The main bottleneck of the
existing indices is the lack of integration between the indices and rating organizations.
The lack of integration makes it impossible to use this information to determine the
country s̓ preconditions and its impact on other parties (countries) and, ultimately, on
human evolution. This raises the question of developing a generalized index that will in-
tegrate information from a variety of sources that contain information on all aspects of
life that affect human evolution.
When international institutions ̓ indices and statistics published by countries are
used for estimating the X signal, it allows us to assess the quality of decisions made, to
understand the impact of certain factors on the potential for achieving the development
strategy of both a particular country and humanity in general. On the one hand, the sta-
tistical data calculation is a fairly transparent process that is easy to verify, but on the
other hand, it requires high-quality data, which has the potential to be a significant prob-
lem, as some countries tend to correct their reporting or not provide it at all. Currently,
the most widely available and high-quality information is the information provided by
international organizations: UN, World Bank, WHO and others.
As the current plan is to use third-party indices for calculating the security in-
dex, it is important to unify the information, i.e., to determine the following order
( ) miniI y is a desired state and ( ) maxiI y is a state requiring attention. Thus, the
higher the unsafety index (
1
lim sup ( )),i
y
I y
the more attention the country needs. The un-
safety index is the transformation of the safety index by the
s( ) 1 ( )i iI y I y= - formula,
where
s ( )iI y is the safety index.
The optimization problem can be written in the following form to meet the goal of
implementing an evolutionary control system:
1 1
( ) min ( ) | ( ) , , 0, 1, 1,
n n
i i i i i i
i i
I y y t y t Y M i ns
= =
ë û
= w Ö Í sÍ w ² w = =ì ü
í ý
ä ä , (2)
where ( )iI y is the unsafety index; σ is the agreed level of variations (deviations from
the normal value) for a certain aggregate indicator in terms of the unsafety index distri-
bution categories; М is a set of alternative (acceptable) options for the optimal solution
that fulfills the level of the requirements of interested parties, while taking into account
the organization s̓ goals; iw is the weighting coefficient of the aggregated indicator.
The weighting coefficient and the agreed level of variation of the aggregate indica-
tors should be defined by experts or through a combination of expert decisions and sta-
tistical analysis (e.g., through correlation analysis). Scientists, politicians, state officials,
and other respected persons with authority from relevant organizations and institutions
can be experts who assess processes and suggest further development for improving the
security processes.
62 ISSN 2786-6491
The number of categories used to classify the strategy components should be lim-
ited and reasonable, which allows to distribute responsibilities by specialty and to per-
form directed planning of improvements in a particular field, taking into account the
priorities within the overall strategy. As part of the prioritized planning of the function-
ing of the directed evolution system, the following categories are suggested for as-
sessing the unsafety index:
— Y1 — ecology: ecological efficiency index [14], Global climate risk index [15].
— Y2 — economics: multidimensional poverty index [16], natural capital ra-
ting [17], human capital index [18], index of globalization [19], average monthly salary
of employees [20].
— Y3 — social indicators: social capital rating [21], assessment of social prog-
ress [22], current healthcare spending as a percentage of gross domestic product [23],
human development index [24], human freedom [25], world press freedom index [26],
percentage of active population [27].
— Y4 — science and technology: the world energy trilemma index [28], interna-
tional science ranking (Н index) [29].
— Y5 — security: global food security [30], homicide indices [31], political insta-
bility index [32], organized conflict (domestic) [31], military spending [32], terrorist ac-
tivity [33].
Since the various indices published by international organizations have their
own measurement scales, and the information needed to calculate the insecurity risk
index must be in one dimension, it is advisable to use the normalization of indices
by the formula:
min
max min
.i
i
x x
x
x x
-
=
-
(3)
Since at the first stage, the decision-making insecurity index calculation involves
the use of third-party international coefficients and indices as variables (e.g., [14–33]),
the calculation of the ( )iI y insecurity index is summarized as an aggregate assessment
of the indices, taking into account the weighting factors for each category by itself. The
algorithm has a number of steps:
1. Developing the structure of the overall index: choosing a structure for decom-
posing the categories that are used to assess the risk. The authors suggested to use the
provided above Y1–Y5 categories during the test operation of the system;
2. Designing the structure of each category, selecting iw weighting factors for each
ix XÍ indicator, and searching for data sources;
3. Normalization of input data using (3);
4. Calculating Y by category using formula (4):
1
.
n
i i
i
Y x
=
= w Öä (4)
During the implementation and test operation of the system, it is not recommended
to take into account probable stochastic fluctuations (σ) to develop the response rules.
This is due to the lack of accumulated data and experience in responding to events (the
level of the insecurity index). But this should definitely be implemented in the future, to
ensure that the system is more sustainable.
Міжнародний науково-технічний журнал
Проблеми керування та інформатики, 2022, № 6 63
5. Calculating the ( )iI y insecurity index using formula (5):
1
.
n
i i
i
I y
=
= w Öä (5)
Table 2 shows the calculation results of the ( )iI y insecurity index for 2021. In the
calculations, the territories and countries were chosen in order to consider the reasons
for the high difference in indicators. In the calculations, the highest priority was given
to the economy and security, as shown by the weighting coefficients of the iw aggre-
gate indicator at 0,3.
Table 2
Category iw
Africa Asia European Union
USA and
Canada
Ukraine
Global
(general)
iy
iI
iy
iI
iy
iI
iy
iI
iy
iI
iy
iI
Ecology 0,2 0,64 0,13 0,76 0,15 0,36 0,07 0,40 0,08 0,45 0,09 0,60 0,12
Economy 0,3 0,58 0,18 0,50 0,15 0,25 0,07 0,22 0,07 0,40 0,12 0,41 0,12
Social indicators 0,1 0,72 0,07 0,59 0,06 0,35 0,04 0,35 0,04 0,53 0,05 0,52 0,05
Science and technology 0,1 0,76 0,08 0,54 0,05 0,36 0,04 0,07 0,01 0,58 0,06 0,46 0,05
Security 0,3 0,46 0,14 0,30 0,09 0,13 0,04 0,25 0,08 0,59 0,18 0,30 0,09
Insecurity index (I): 0,59 0,51 0,26 0,26 0,50 0,43
As Table 2 shows, the safest «territories and countries» analyzed are the European
Union and the United States and Canada. If we analyze Figure 5 (Dynamics of the inse-
curity index components for certain territories and countries in 2021), we can make an
assumption that the overall level of security is significantly impacted by the level of sci-
ence and economy. But this requires an in-depth study.
Fig. 5
In addition to the information received, a cross-correlation analysis for each of
ix XÍ can provide a route for analyzing the probable causes. The correlation analy-
sis of the 2021 indicators shows that the greatest impact (correlation coefficient
( ) 0,7)ir x ² on the insecurity index is provided by the following: social capital rating,
global energy trilemma index, human development index, social progress assessment,
ecological efficiency index, globalization index, and global food security. Thus, further
64 ISSN 2786-6491
analysis of the structural components of the impact of indices and ratings, which are the
ix XÍ input data of the directed evolution system, would provide information on the
most priority corrective actions for achieving the goal of the system.
Conclusion
The authors have suggested a systematic approach to developing a model of a
rational world order that ensures the sustainable development of planet Earth as a
complex system through its further civilizational development with guaranteed se-
curity of human life. The focus is on the development of a cybernetic model of the
system using the principles of system analysis, feedback, multicriteria optimization,
and the integrity of distant and near-term goals.
The complexity of the task requires that the control system to be considered
from the standpoint of developing adaptive goal-directed systems of research de-
sign. The initial step was to combine all the parameters, criteria and assessments
describing its functioning into a single global human security index, which is calc u-
lated using reliable statistics from the United Nations and its institutions.
The development of the system assumes the development of a balanced system
of indicators of the security system s̓ current state which can be scaled up and used
at various levels of detail (planet, continents, countries, administrative units, co m-
munities).
As previously discussed, ensuring sustainable development of humanity requires
the launch of a dynamic system of global processes management, controlled by a bal-
anced system of indicators of the current state (at the first step, monitoring the insecuri-
ty index is sufficient) and coordinated methods for response to the growing negative
trends that impact human security. The system requires the creation of new institutions
or the reorganization of already working ones, whose functional responsibilities would
include the development and implementation of a sustainable development program us-
ing a systematic approach, providing transparent monitoring and control systems, and
quick response to deviations from norms and rules by all members of the global com-
munity.
The primary task of implementing the suggested model should be designing the or-
ganizational structure of institutions which provide for the implementation of the system
at the global level.
The suggested dynamic model of the evolution control system requires high-
quality data and clear rules for both coexistence and development, as well as for re-
sponding to the growth of the insecurity indices of certain countries. Thus, the most
pressing task of the new organization is to design information flows to ensure that
timely information is received for decision-making.
Considering that the implementation of the suggested system would take a long
time and concern the interests of many parties (countries), it is advisable to start
this project with the involvement of the younger generation. The consciousness and
commitment of young scientists and politicians to the suggested evolution model
would ensure long-term interest in achieving the desired goal. Thus, starting with
the detailed development of the model, it is important to prepare a program for
working with young people, as they should be the driving force for the implementa-
tion of a control system for the planet s̓ evolution.
Міжнародний науково-технічний журнал
Проблеми керування та інформатики, 2022, № 6 65
О.В. Палагін, Д.І. Симонов
КІБЕРНЕТИЧНА МОДЕЛЬ
РАЦІОНАЛЬНОГО СВІТОУСТРОЮ
В ПАРАДИГМІ КЕРОВАНОЇ ЕВОЛЮЦІЇ
Палагін Олександр Васильович
Інститут кібернетики ім. В.М. Глушкова НАН України, м. Київ,
ORCID ID: 0000-0003-3223-1391,
palagin_a@ukr.net
Симонов Денис Ігорович
Інститут кібернетики ім. В.М. Глушкова НАН України, м. Київ,
ORCID ID: 0000-0002-6648-4736,
denys.symonov@gmail.com
З розвитком технологічної цивілізації зростають динаміка світових
процесів, темпи деградації довкілля, конкуренція за доступ до ресурсів,
з̓являються нові масштабні епідемії та багато іншого. Всі ці процеси
та явища негативно впливають на безпеку в світі та стають обє̓ктами
дослідження науковців з метою розробки рекомендацій щодо форму-
вання світопорядку, які забезпечать можливість задовольнити потреби
людства, незалежно від расової, національної, соціокультурної та релі-
гійної приналежності, та дозволять відновити природу. Нові принципи
світоустрою повинні базуватися на головному принципі — «безпека
людини та можливість раціонального розвитку цивілізації». Це можливо
забезпечити, впровадивши оптимальну систему керування світоустроєм.
Безпека людини повинна розглядатися, окрім факторів безпосередньої
загрози воєнних конфліктів, в розрізі факторів зміни клімату та стихій-
них лих, факторів культури та соціального розвитку, міграції та охорони
здоровя̓. Оскільки проблема безпеки та розвитку людства має міждис-
циплінарний характер, її вирішення можливе лише шляхом обє̓днання
зусиль учених, які спеціалізуються у різних науках та використовують
трансдисциплінарний підхід, що апелює до створення наукової картини
світу на основі системної інтеграції наукових знань та ноосферної теорії
академіка В.І. Вернадського.
Ключові слова: керована еволюція, світоустрій, кібернетична модель
системи, трансдисциплінарність, індекс безпеки, конфлікти, сталий ро-
звиток.
REFERENCES
1. Charter of the United Nations and Statute of the International Court of Justice. San Francisco.
26.06.1945. https://treaties.un.org/doc/publication/ctc/uncharter.pdf
2. Max Roser, Joe Hasell, Bastian Herre and Bobbie Macdonald. War and Peace. Our World in Da-
ta. https://ourworldindata.org/war-and-peace
3. Observed Trends in a World of Risk. https://www.un.org/pga/70/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2016/
01/Conflict-and-violence-in-the-21st-century-Current-trends-as-observed-in-empirical-research-and-
statistics-Mr.-Alexandre-Marc-Chief-Specialist-Fragility-Conflict-and-Violence-World-Bank-Group.pdf
4. Global Peace Index Map. https://www.visionofhumanity.org/maps/
5. Hahn A. Georg Simmel s̓ theory of conflict. Modern Western Studies of Sociological Classics.
М., 1992. Vol. 1. 117 p.
6. Simmel G. Man as enemy. Journal of Sociology. 1994. N 2. 115 p.
7. Krisberg L. Peacemaking, peacekeeping, and conflict resolution. Socis. 1990. N 11. P. 28–32.
https://org.i.ua/js/compose/?id=7245370
https://ourworldindata.org/team
https://www.un.org/pga/70/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2016/01/Conflict-and-violence-in-the-21st-century-Current-trends-as-observed-in-empirical-research-and-statistics-Mr.-Alexandre-Marc-Chief-Specialist-Fragility-Conflict-and-Violence-World-Bank-Group.pdf
https://www.un.org/pga/70/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2016/01/Conflict-and-violence-in-the-21st-century-Current-trends-as-observed-in-empirical-research-and-statistics-Mr.-Alexandre-Marc-Chief-Specialist-Fragility-Conflict-and-Violence-World-Bank-Group.pdf
https://www.un.org/pga/70/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2016/01/Conflict-and-violence-in-the-21st-century-Current-trends-as-observed-in-empirical-research-and-statistics-Mr.-Alexandre-Marc-Chief-Specialist-Fragility-Conflict-and-Violence-World-Bank-Group.pdf
66 ISSN 2786-6491
8. John W. Burton. Conflict and communication: the use of controlled communication in interna-
tional relations. Theory of International Relations: Reader s̓ Digest / by Tsygankova P.A. Mos-
cow : Gardariki, 2002. P. 353–361.
9. Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel. Basic lines of the philosophy of law or natural law and political
science in outlines / translated from the German by Osadchuk R. and Kushnir. M. K. : Universe,
2000. 336 p.
10. Uznadze D.N. Psychology of Attitude. St. Petersburg : Peter, 2001. 416 p.
11. Hofstede G. Culture s̓ consequences: comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations
across nations. London, Thousand Oaks, New Delhi : Sage Publications, 2001. P. 209–211.
12. Hubar O.M. Understanding of justice by modern youth: the experience of a specific sociological
study. Science. Religion. Society. 2010. N 3. P. 184–191.
13. C. Wright Mills. The Power Elite. 2nd edition. UK : Oxford University Press, 1999. 448 p.
14. Environmental performance index. https://epi.yale.edu/downloads
15. Global climate risk index. https://www.germanwatch.org/en/cri
16. Reports and publications. Human development reports. https://hdr.undp.org/reports-and-
publications
17. World natural capital Index. https://solability.com/the-global-sustainable-competitiveness-index/the-
index/natural-capital
18. Human capital index. DataBank. http://databank.worldbank.org/data/source/human-capital-index
19. KOF globalization index. https://kof.ethz.ch/en/forecasts-and-indicators/indicators/kof-globalisation-
index.html
20. Wages and working time statistics (COND) — ILOSTAT. https://ilostat.ilo.org/resources/
concepts-and-definitions/description-wages-and-working-time-statistics/
21. Global social capital index by country. https://solability.com/the-global-sustainable-competitiveness-
index/the-index/social-capital
22. Social progress index. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Progress_Index
23. Global health expenditure database. https://apps.who.int/nha/database/Select/Indicators/en
24. Human development index (HDI). https://hdr.undp.org/data-center/human-development-
index#/indicies/HDI
25. The human freedom index 2021. Cato Institute. https://www.cato.org/human-freedom-index/2021
26. Index RSF. https://rsf.org/en/index
27. ILOSTAT data tools to find and download labour statistics. https://ilostat.ilo.org/data/
28. WEC energy trilemma index tool. https://trilemma.worldenergy.org/
29. SJR — International Science Ranking. https://www.scimagojr.com/countryrank.php
30. Global food and nutrition security dashboard. Data on food crisis. https://www.gafs.info/
31. Global peace index map. https://www.visionofhumanity.org/maps/
32. Worldwide governance indicators. DataBank. https://databank.worldbank.org/source/worldwide-
governance-indicators
33. List of countries by military expenditures. Available at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_
of_countries_by_military_expenditures
Submitted 23.02.2023
https://epi.yale.edu/downloads
https://www.germanwatch.org/en/cri
https://hdr.undp.org/reports-and-publications
https://hdr.undp.org/reports-and-publications
https://solability.com/the-global-sustainable-competitiveness-index/the-index/natural-capital
https://solability.com/the-global-sustainable-competitiveness-index/the-index/natural-capital
http://databank.worldbank.org/data/source/human-capital-index
https://kof.ethz.ch/en/forecasts-and-indicators/indicators/kof-globalisation-index.html
https://kof.ethz.ch/en/forecasts-and-indicators/indicators/kof-globalisation-index.html
https://solability.com/the-global-sustainable-competitiveness-index/the-index/social-capital
https://solability.com/the-global-sustainable-competitiveness-index/the-index/social-capital
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Progress_Index
https://apps.who.int/nha/database/Select/Indicators/en
https://hdr.undp.org/data-center/human-development-index#/indicies/HDI
https://hdr.undp.org/data-center/human-development-index#/indicies/HDI
https://www.cato.org/human-freedom-index/2021
https://rsf.org/en/index
https://trilemma.worldenergy.org/
https://www.scimagojr.com/countryrank.php
https://www.gafs.info/
https://www.visionofhumanity.org/maps/
https://databank.worldbank.org/source/worldwide-governance-indicators
https://databank.worldbank.org/source/worldwide-governance-indicators
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures
|
| id | nasplib_isofts_kiev_ua-123456789-210920 |
| institution | Digital Library of Periodicals of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine |
| issn | 0572-2691 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2026-03-13T18:17:54Z |
| publishDate | 2022 |
| publisher | Інститут кібернетики ім. В.М. Глушкова НАН України |
| record_format | dspace |
| spelling | Palagin, O. Symonov, D. 2025-12-20T22:08:38Z 2022 Cybernetic model of rational world order under the paradigm of directed evolution / O. Palagin, D. Symonov // Проблеми керування та інформатики. — 2022. — № 6. — С. 54–66. — Бібліогр.: 36 назв. — англ. 0572-2691 https://nasplib.isofts.kiev.ua/handle/123456789/210920 004.9 10.34229/2786-6505-2022-6-5 With the development of technological civilization, the dynamics of global processes, the pace of environmental degradation, competition for access to resources, the emergence of new large-scale epidemics, and many other phenomena are increasing. All these processes and phenomena negatively affect global security and become the subject of scientific research aimed at developing recommendations for shaping a world order that will ensure the ability to meet the needs of humanity, regardless of racial, national, sociocultural, or religious affiliation, and will allow for the restoration of nature. New principles of world order should be based on the main principle — "human security and the possibility of rational development of civilization." This can be ensured by implementing an optimal system of world order management. З розвитком технологічної цивілізації зростають динаміка світових процесів, темпи деградації довкілля, конкуренція за доступ до ресурсів, зʼявляються нові масштабні епідемії та багато іншого. Всі ці процеси та явища негативно впливають на безпеку в світі та стають обʼєктами дослідження науковців з метою розробки рекомендацій щодо формування світопорядку, які забезпечать можливість задовольнити потреби людства, незалежно від расової, національної, соціокультурної та релігійної приналежності, та дозволять відновити природу. Нові принципи світоустрою повинні базуватися на головному принципі — «безпека людини та можливість раціонального розвитку». Це можливо забезпечити, впровадивши оптимальну систему керування світоустроєм. en Інститут кібернетики ім. В.М. Глушкова НАН України Проблемы управления и информатики Технічні засоби для вимірювань та керування Cybernetic model of rational world order under the paradigm of directed evolution Кібернетична модель раціонального світоустрою в парадигмі керованої еволюції Article published earlier |
| spellingShingle | Cybernetic model of rational world order under the paradigm of directed evolution Palagin, O. Symonov, D. Технічні засоби для вимірювань та керування |
| title | Cybernetic model of rational world order under the paradigm of directed evolution |
| title_alt | Кібернетична модель раціонального світоустрою в парадигмі керованої еволюції |
| title_full | Cybernetic model of rational world order under the paradigm of directed evolution |
| title_fullStr | Cybernetic model of rational world order under the paradigm of directed evolution |
| title_full_unstemmed | Cybernetic model of rational world order under the paradigm of directed evolution |
| title_short | Cybernetic model of rational world order under the paradigm of directed evolution |
| title_sort | cybernetic model of rational world order under the paradigm of directed evolution |
| topic | Технічні засоби для вимірювань та керування |
| topic_facet | Технічні засоби для вимірювань та керування |
| url | https://nasplib.isofts.kiev.ua/handle/123456789/210920 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT palagino cyberneticmodelofrationalworldorderundertheparadigmofdirectedevolution AT symonovd cyberneticmodelofrationalworldorderundertheparadigmofdirectedevolution AT palagino kíbernetičnamodelʹracíonalʹnogosvítoustroûvparadigmíkerovanoíevolûcíí AT symonovd kíbernetičnamodelʹracíonalʹnogosvítoustroûvparadigmíkerovanoíevolûcíí |