Smith, E. D., & Salcedo, O. H., & Akundi, A. (2015, June), Jury Procedures for Systems Engineering Decision Making  Paper presented at 2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Seattle, Washington. 10.18260/p.24385

\bibitem{asee_peer_24385}
  Smith, E. D., \& Salcedo, O. H., \& Akundi, A. (2015, June), \emph{Jury Procedures for Systems Engineering Decision Making}
  Paper presented at 2015 ASEE Annual Conference \& Exposition, Seattle, Washington.
  10.18260/p.24385

Eric D Smith, Oscar H. Salcedo, and Aditya Akundi.  "Jury Procedures for Systems Engineering Decision Making".  2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Seattle, Washington, 2015, June.  ASEE Conferences, 2015.  https://peer.asee.org/24385 Internet.  28 May, 2024

\bibitem{asee_peer_24385}
  Eric D Smith, Oscar H. Salcedo, and Aditya Akundi.
  "Jury Procedures for Systems Engineering Decision Making".
  \emph{2015 ASEE Annual Conference \& Exposition, Seattle, Washington, 2015, June}.
  ASEE Conferences, 2015.
  https://peer.asee.org/24385 Internet.  28 May, 2024

@INPROCEEDINGS{asee_peer_24385
author = "Eric D Smith, Oscar H. Salcedo, and Aditya Akundi"
title = "Jury Procedures for Systems Engineering Decision Making"
booktitle = "2015 ASEE Annual Conference \& Exposition"
year = "2015"
month = "June"
address = "Seattle, Washington"
publisher = "ASEE Conferences"
note = {https://peer.asee.org/24385}
number = {10.18260/p.24385}
}

TY  - CPAPER
AB  -             Jury Procedures for Systems Engineering Decision MakingTradeoff studies used in engineering choices are organized in a branching tree conceptualstructure that curiously matches the conceptual schema employed by the law to find the bestalternative in the natural world of human occurrences. Just as tradeoff study trees differentiate alevel of attributes and a level of measures, common law legal practice has institutionalized theseparation of the trier-of-law and the trier-of-fact. Recognition of this similarity leads to theinvestigation of how the knowledge employed in each method can inform the other, both havingevolved in rather insular research and practice fields. Broadly speaking, technical tradeoffstudies can lend precision to this hybridization, while legal processes utilized in the jury trialsystem can provide wisdom as to the management of human perceptions and biases. This cross-disciplinary comparison helps engineering acknowledge and engage these human biases with aformulation and analysis of the components and workings of the law. While both decisionprocesses span the breach between complementary qualitative and quantitative regions, theyemploy vastly different apparati that are best studied together. 
AU  - Eric D Smith
AU  - Oscar H. Salcedo
AU  - Aditya Akundi
CY  - Seattle, Washington
DA  - 2015/06/14
PB  - ASEE Conferences
TI  - Jury Procedures for Systems Engineering Decision Making
UR  - https://peer.asee.org/24385
DO  - 10.18260/p.24385
ER  -