24: MEDIATOR (INTERMEDIARY): (A) Use (or introduce) an intermediary object (or system or process or activity) to transfer or carry out an action ex introduce an intermediary material with a porous structure to enhance specific properties such as filtration, absorption, or diffusion, (B) Connect or merge or combine the object (or system) temporarily with another object (or system) that can be easily removed or separated after its intended period of use
EXAMPLE: Food Preservatives, Chisel (between object and hammer), Teflon (on pans, passes heat (action) to the object, and imparts non- stickiness property), Pot-Holders, Post-It, Paper Clips, Catalysts, Extract-Transform-Load (ETL) tools, Suspensions or Adhesives or Inserts, Multi-layered Software Architecture, Application Programming Interfac (API)
SYNONYMS: Go Between, Intermediary, Bridging, Connector, Interface, Link, Middleware
ACB:
At an abstract level, an “intermediary” refers to something that acts as a link or mediator between two entities, processes, or states. It serves as an intermediate element, providing a connection or facilitating interaction between different components or stages within a system. The concept of an intermediary implies a role of bridging or connecting, often to enable smoother transitions, interactions, or operations. An intermediary plays a mediating role, mediating between different elements or processes. It establishes a connection or link between entities that may be distinct or separate. It facilitates the flow of information, energy, or actions between different parts of a system.
In some cases, an intermediary may enhance or modify the interactions it mediates to achieve specific goals. Intermediaries can adapt to different situations or requirements, making them versatile in their functions. They contribute to the efficiency of processes by streamlining interactions or providing necessary interfaces. Software or services that act as intermediaries between different applications or components in a computing environment. Species that mediate interactions between other species in an ecosystem. Entities like banks or investment firms that facilitate transactions between lenders and borrowers.
Contradictions often arise when attempting to optimize certain aspects of a system while unintentionally compromising others. The introduction of intermediaries can address these contradictions in several ways: The system needs to fulfill two conflicting requirements simultaneously, making it challenging to optimize both. Introducing an intermediary that can adapt or switch between different states or functions, thereby addressing conflicting requirements. Certain elements or processes in the system have harmful effects that need to be mitigated or transformed into something beneficial.
An intermediary can act as a mediator, transforming or redirecting harmful effects into beneficial outcomes, turning a “blessing in disguise.”. Using an intermediary layer or mechanism that can provide flexibility when required but maintain stability during critical phases. Introducing intermediaries that simplify interactions or provide a more understandable interface, reducing overall complexity. Incorporating intermediaries that can adjust and adapt to different situations, enhancing the system’s overall adaptability.
Introducing intermediaries that selectively enhance or modify interactions, directing the system’s behavior in a desired way. Devices often use hibernate or sleep modes to store the current state of the system in memory or on the storage device. This allows for faster resume times when the user powers on or wakes up the device. The goal is to find creative solutions that leverage the mediating role of intermediaries to achieve a more balanced and effective overall system.
This principle may refer to a set of principles that describe the use of intermediaries or intermediate elements to achieve inventive solutions. Here are some examples of inventive principles that involve the use of intermediaries or intermediate elements: Universality: Use a universal intermediary or an intermediate element that can perform multiple functions for different parts or situations. Preliminary Action: Introduce an intermediate action or a preliminary step to prepare a system for a subsequent, more effective action. Blessing in Disguise: Turn a harmful factor into a useful one by introducing an intermediary step or element that transforms the harmful effect. Feedback: Use an intermediary feedback loop to control and adjust a process or system based on its current state. Self-Service: Introduce an intermediary element or mechanism that allows a system to perform certain actions autonomously, without direct human intervention. Flexible Shells and Thin Films: Use an intermediary layer or shell that can change its properties to adapt to different conditions or requirements. Porous Materials: Introduce an intermediary material with a porous structure to enhance specific properties such as filtration, absorption, or diffusion. Phase Transitions: Utilize an intermediary phase transition (e.g., solid to liquid) to achieve specific effects or changes in a system.
The “Intermediary” inventive principle involves introducing an intermediate element or process to facilitate or optimize the interaction between two objects or systems. Bearings placed between rotating parts. Reduces friction and facilitates smooth rotation. Transmission system between the engine and wheels.  Adjusts the torque and speed to optimize vehicle performance. Human or machine interpreters. Facilitates communication between individuals who speak different languages. Buffer Tanks in Chemical Processes. Buffer tanks between different stages of a chemical production process. Stabilizes and regulates the flow of materials between stages.
Software middleware between different software components. Facilitates communication and data exchange between different parts of a software application. Currency exchange platforms or banks. Facilitates the conversion of one currency into another for international trade. Brokerage Services in Financial Markets. Intermediary Element: Financial brokers. Facilitates buying and selling of financial instruments between buyers and sellers.
Real Estate Agents. Intermediary Element: Real estate agents. Facilitates transactions between property buyers and sellers. Mediators in Conflict Resolution. Neutral mediators or arbitrators. Facilitates communication and negotiation to resolve conflicts between parties. Distributors in Supply Chains. Distributors or wholesalers. Facilitates the distribution of products from manufacturers to retailers. Data Bridges in Networking. Intermediary Element: Data bridges or routers in computer networks. Facilitates the transfer of data between different segments of a network. Trade Shows or Expos. Trade show events. Facilitates interaction and business transactions between businesses and potential customers.
Middleware is software that acts as an intermediary layer between different software applications or components. Its primary role is to facilitate communication, data exchange, and interaction between disparate systems, applications, or services. Different software applications often use different communication protocols or data formats, leading to interoperability issues. Middleware standardizes communication by providing a common interface or protocol, allowing diverse applications to communicate seamlessly. Integrating diverse software systems with varying architectures and technologies can be challenging. Middleware acts as a mediator, enabling integration between heterogeneous systems by abstracting away the underlying complexities and providing a standardized interface.
Ensuring that applications developed independently or by different vendors can work together without compatibility issues. Middleware provides a layer of abstraction that shields applications from the details of each other’s implementations, promoting interoperability. Differences in data formats or structures between applications may hinder data exchange. Middleware can perform data transformation tasks, converting data from one format to another as it moves between applications. Tight coupling between software components can lead to inflexibility and difficulty in modifying or upgrading individual components. Middleware decouples components by providing a layer of abstraction, allowing changes to be made to one component without affecting others.
Ensuring secure communication and authentication between different components in a distributed system. Middleware often includes security features such as encryption and authentication mechanisms to secure communication channels. In essence, middleware serves as an intermediary that enables smooth communication and collaboration between different software entities, addressing contradictions related to interoperability, integration, data exchange, and system flexibility. Its role as an intermediary is fundamental to achieving a more modular, scalable, and interconnected software ecosystem.
Trait ascription bias is a cognitive bias where individuals tend to attribute observed behaviors to stable personality traits rather than situational factors. This bias leads people to overestimate the influence of personality characteristics on behavior while underestimating the impact of external circumstances. By addressing trait ascription bias proactively, individuals and organizations can improve performance evaluation, enhance teamwork and collaboration, and achieve more effective problem-solving outcomes in technical systems.
In technical systems or problem-solving contexts, trait ascription bias can manifest in several ways: Personnel Evaluation: When assessing the performance of individuals in technical roles, trait ascription bias may lead supervisors or peers to attribute successes or failures solely to the individual’s inherent traits, such as intelligence or work ethic, without considering external factors such as resource availability or team dynamics. Team Dynamics: Trait ascription bias can influence perceptions of teamwork and collaboration within technical teams. Individuals may attribute conflicts or disagreements to personality clashes rather than underlying issues such as communication breakdowns or conflicting priorities. Root Cause Analysis: In diagnosing technical problems or failures, individuals may focus on attributing the cause to specific individuals’ traits or actions rather than conducting a comprehensive root cause analysis that considers broader systemic factors, such as design flaws or process inefficiencies. Training and Development: Trait ascription bias can affect decisions related to training and development initiatives within technical organizations. Individuals may prioritize personality-based assessments or interventions over addressing structural barriers or skill gaps that may be contributing to performance issues.
To mitigate trait ascription bias in technical systems and problem-solving, it is essential to: Encourage a systemic approach to performance evaluation and problem-solving that considers both individual traits and external factors. Provide training and education on attribution theory and bias recognition to help individuals become more aware of their tendency to attribute behaviors to personality traits. Foster a culture of open communication and collaboration where individuals feel comfortable discussing and addressing situational factors that may influence behavior or performance. Implement processes and procedures for conducting thorough root cause analyses that consider both individual and systemic factors in technical problem-solving.
The actor-observer bias is a cognitive bias that describes the tendency for individuals to attribute their own actions to external factors, while attributing the actions of others to internal factors. In other words, when people observe their own behavior, they are more likely to attribute it to situational influences or circumstances beyond their control. However, when observing the behavior of others, they are more inclined to attribute it to the individual’s personality traits or dispositions. By addressing the actor-observer bias proactively, individuals and organizations can enhance collaboration, decision-making, and problem-solving effectiveness in technical systems and environments. By designing systems that account for the way users perceive and attribute their own actions, designers can improve user satisfaction, system performance, and overall usability.
In technical systems or problem-solving contexts, the actor-observer bias can manifest in various ways: Self-Attribution of Success: Individuals may attribute their own successes in technical projects to external factors such as luck, resources, or team collaboration, while attributing the successes of others to their innate abilities or skills. Excusing Personal Failures: When individuals encounter failures or setbacks in technical endeavors, they may tend to attribute these outcomes to situational factors or external constraints, such as time constraints or unforeseen obstacles, rather than acknowledging their own shortcomings or mistakes. Judging Team Dynamics: In team-based technical projects, individuals may attribute conflicts or misunderstandings within the team to the personalities or behaviors of their teammates, while overlooking their own contributions to the discord. Interpreting Performance: When evaluating the performance of technical systems or processes, individuals may attribute fluctuations or inconsistencies in performance to external factors, such as environmental conditions or equipment malfunctions, while attributing similar fluctuations in the performance of other systems to inherent flaws or deficiencies.
To mitigate the impact of the actor-observer bias in technical systems and problem-solving, it is essential to: Encourage self-awareness and reflection among team members, helping individuals recognize their own biases and tendencies to attribute outcomes to external factors. Foster a culture of accountability and mutual respect, where individuals take responsibility for their actions and decisions, and are open to feedback and constructive criticism. Promote a systemic approach to evaluating technical systems and processes, considering both situational factors and individual contributions to outcomes. Encourage perspective-taking and empathy, helping individuals recognize the complexity of factors influencing others’ behavior and decisions. Training programs can include scenarios where users are encouraged to reflect on their own actions and consider alternative explanations for system behavior. By acknowledging the actor-observer bias, designers can design feedback mechanisms (feedback principle) that encourage users to take responsibility for their actions while also recognizing the influence of external factors on system performance. By considering the actor-observer bias, designers can anticipate potential user errors and design systems that are resilient to these errors (prior action principle), allowing for easier recovery and minimizing disruption to system operation.
Illusion of External Agency: The illusion of external agency is the belief that external forces or entities are responsible for one’s own actions or outcomes. In designing a technical system, this bias might lead designers or engineers to attribute failures or shortcomings to external factors such as equipment malfunctions or environmental conditions, rather than acknowledging design flaws or human error. When solving technical problems, individuals might blame external factors for setbacks or failures rather than taking responsibility for their own actions or decisions, hindering learning and improvement.
Moral Luck: Moral luck refers to the belief that moral judgments are influenced by factors outside of one’s control, such as luck or chance. In designing a technical system, this bias might lead designers or engineers to overlook ethical considerations or potential risks associated with their designs, assuming that their intentions justify the outcomes. When solving technical problems, individuals might rationalize unethical behavior or decisions based on fortunate outcomes, ignoring the potential harm or consequences of their actions.
Extrinsic Incentive Error: The extrinsic incentive error is a cognitive bias where individuals overestimate the effectiveness of external rewards or incentives in driving behavior, while underestimating intrinsic motivations. In the context of designing a technical system, this bias might lead designers to rely too heavily on external rewards or incentives, such as monetary bonuses or gamification elements, to motivate user engagement or adoption. This could result in the neglect of intrinsic factors that influence user behavior, such as the desire for autonomy, mastery, or purpose. Similarly, when solving technical problems, individuals affected by the extrinsic incentive error may prioritize external rewards or incentives as solutions to performance issues, overlooking deeper underlying factors that may be driving the problem. To mitigate this bias, designers and problem solvers should consider a holistic approach to motivation, recognizing the importance of both intrinsic and extrinsic factors in driving behavior.
1: Mass of the moving object: [’24: Information loss’, ’33: Convenience of use’, ’39: Productivity’]
3: Length of the moving object: [’19: Energy consumption of the moving object’, ’24: Information loss’, ’30: Harmful external factors’, ’36: Complexity of the structure’, ’37: Complexity of control and measurement’, ’38: Level of automation’]
4: Length of the non-moving object: [’23: Material loss’, ’24: Information loss’]
5: Area of the moving object: [’32: Convenience of manufacturing’]
7: Volume of the moving object: [’38: Level of automation’]
8: Volume of the non-moving object: [’11: Tension, Pressure’]
9: Speed: [’28: Accuracy of measurement’, ’31: Harmful internal factors’]
10: Force: [’28: Accuracy of measurement’, ’31: Harmful internal factors’]
11: Tension, Pressure: [‘8: Volume of the non-moving object’, ’19: Energy consumption of the moving object’, ’38: Level of automation’]
13: Stability of the object: [’30: Harmful external factors’]
16: Action time of the non-moving object: [’28: Accuracy of measurement’]
17:Temperature: [’28: Accuracy of measurement’, ’29: Accuracy of manufacturing’, ’31: Harmful internal factors’]
19: Energy consumption of the moving object: [’13: Stability of the object’, ’17:Temperature’, ’22: Energy loss’, ’23: Material loss’]
21: Power: [’27: Reliability’]
23: Material loss: [‘4: Length of the non-moving object’, ’19: Energy consumption of the moving object’, ’26: Amount of substance’, ’29: Accuracy of manufacturing’, ’33: Convenience of use’, ’36: Complexity of the structure’]
24: Information loss: [‘1: Mass of the moving object’, ’25: Time loss’, ’26: Amount of substance’]
25: Time loss: [‘4: Length of the non-moving object’, ’24: Information loss’, ’28: Accuracy of measurement’, ’29: Accuracy of manufacturing’, ’38: Level of automation’]
26: Amount of substance: [’23: Material loss’, ’24: Information loss’]
27: Reliability: [‘7: Volume of the moving object’, ‘8: Volume of the non-moving object’, ’11: Tension, Pressure’, ’35: Adaptability’]
28: Accuracy of measurement: [‘9: Speed’, ’16: Action time of the non-moving object’, ’17:Temperature’, ’25: Time loss’, ’30: Harmful external factors’, ’37: Complexity of control and measurement’]
29: Accuracy of manufacturing: [’23: Material loss’]
30: Harmful external factors: [‘2: Mass of the non-moving object’, ’13: Stability of the object’, ’19: Energy consumption of the moving object’, ’27: Reliability’, ’32: Convenience of manufacturing’, ’39: Productivity’]
31: Harmful internal factors: [’17:Temperature’, ’18: Brightness, Visibility’, ’26: Amount of substance’, ’27: Reliability’]
32: Convenience of manufacturing: [’18: Brightness, Visibility’, ’21: Power’, ’24: Information loss’, ’26: Amount of substance’, ’30: Harmful external factors’]
33: Convenience of use: [’18: Brightness, Visibility’, ’19: Energy consumption of the moving object’, ’23: Material loss’]
35: Adaptability: [’27: Reliability’]
36: Complexity of the structure: [‘3: Length of the moving object’, ’18: Brightness, Visibility’, ’29: Accuracy of manufacturing’, ’33: Convenience of use’, ’38: Level of automation’]
37: Complexity of control and measurement: [‘3: Length of the moving object’, ’18: Brightness, Visibility’, ’23: Material loss’, ’28: Accuracy of measurement’]
38: Level of automation: [’25: Time loss’, ’36: Complexity of the structure’]
39: Productivity: [‘1: Mass of the moving object’, ’30: Harmful external factors’, ’32: Convenience of manufacturing’, ’36: Complexity of the structure’]
1/24 1/33 1/39 3/19 3/24 3/30 3/36 3/37 3/38 4/23 4/24 5/32 7/38 8/11 9/28 9/31 10/28 10/31 11/8 11/19 11/38 13/30 16/28 17/28 17/29 17/31 19/13 19/17 19/22 19/23 21/27 23/4 23/19 23/26 23/29 23/33 23/36 24/1 24/25 24/26 25/4 25/24 25/28 25/29 25/38 26/23 26/24 27/7 27/8 27/11 27/35 28/9 28/16 28/17 28/25 28/30 28/37 29/23 30/2 30/13 30/19 30/27 30/32 30/39 31/17 31/18 31/26 31/27 32/18 32/21 32/24 32/26 32/30 33/18 33/19 33/23 35/27 36/3 36/18 36/29 36/33 36/38 37/3 37/18 37/23 37/28 38/25 38/36 39/1 39/30 39/32 39/36
EXAMPLE: Odor-removing pouch for packed food. These pouches typically contain absorbent materials or substances that trap odors and moisture when the food is packed. The pouch, usually made of a breathable material, allows air to flow through but traps and holds odor molecules. They are often removed upon opening the pack for consumption. These pouches provide a simple and passive way to manage odors in packed food, creating a more pleasant experience for consumers by minimizing unwanted smells. The science behind their effectiveness lies in the adsorption capacity of the materials they contain.
Contradictions (13/30): Helps maintain the freshness of the food (13) by preventing odors and moisture (30), improving the overall quality and appeal. Addresses the contradiction of maintaining freshness in packaged items.
Solution: Odor-removing pouches for packed food often contain absorbent materials or substances that can trap and neutralize odors. When the food is packed, volatile compounds responsible for odors are released into the air within the packaging. The activated carbon or other absorbent materials in the pouch adsorb and hold onto these odor molecules, preventing them from escaping and affecting the food’s aroma. One commonly used material is activated carbon, also known as activated charcoal. Activated carbon has an extremely porous structure with a large surface area. This porous structure allows it to adsorb (not absorb) molecules on its surface. When the pouch contains activated carbon, it can trap and hold odor molecules. Activated carbon is effective in adsorbing a wide range of organic compounds, including those responsible for odors. It can trap volatile organic compounds (VOCs) that contribute to the smell of food. Some odor-removing pouches may also contain zeolites, which are minerals with a porous structure. Zeolites can adsorb and hold onto certain molecules, including odors. While similar to activated carbon, other types of charcoal may be used in pouches. They can help absorb and neutralize odors. The effectiveness of odor-removing pouches can vary based on factors such as the type and amount of absorbent material used, the concentration of odors, and the size of the pouch. Over time, as the absorbent material reaches its capacity, the pouch may become less effective, and replacement or reactivation (in the case of activated carbon) may be necessary.
