Blueprint Programs. Ads Guide. Safety and Integrity. Business Equality. Social Good. Find a Business Partner. Create an Ad chevron-down chevron-down Create a Page.
Create a Page. Create an Ad. Help Center. Your progress on this course. You can do things like: Say hi to someone after they first message you. Respond to common questions.
Customize messages to provide quick answers to people asking for contact info or the location of your business. Ask your audience for feedback. You must be an admin, editor or moderator of a Facebook Page to use Messenger. Turn on and edit Automatic Responses. Go to the Facebook section of Creator Studio. Select Inbox. Select Automatic Responses. Toggle any of the automatic response options on or off. Here you can customize things like: Timing when the message is sent after being triggered.
Personalization dynamically include the person's name. Images, videos and buttons. Types of automatic responses for Facebook Messenger Here are several of the automatic responses available, with examples. Away message Respond to all incoming messages that you're not available. Instant reply Respond to the first message someone sends your Page. In complex systems this means that even minor deviations in initial conditions due to random deviation can produce unimaginably different end states.
The notion of randomness renders obsolete the positivist reliance on linear cause and effect, certainty of measurement, the reversibility of systems, reductionism and induction as the best way to understand the behaviors of complex systems. Scientific evidence that the notion of randomness renders obsolete the positivist reliance on deterministic methods to best understand complex systems is an object of the present invention.
Fundamental rule sets that bound patterns of behavior in complex systems are deduced using analogous scientific methods. Science tells us that metaphor is a figure of speech that we transfer to something that is not directly applicable in order to illuminate by highlighting or providing a unique interpretation.
Scientists go on to say that analogy is different because it asserts some level of direct similarity or difference between the elements of two or more different domains and the causal relationships driving them.
Analogies are usually used to connect one well-understood domain to one less well understood by extrapolating similarities. Science tells us that using analogy to extrapolate between domains one can then devise empirical tests to prove or disprove similarities or differences as one moves from one well-understood domain to another less understood domain.
For example, one leading scientist on the behavior of complex systems reminds us that Huygens extrapolated the wave theory of light based on the better-understood and empirically tested notions of sound waves.
Similarly, he tells us that Fourier's theory of heat conduction was based on better-known laws associated with the flows of liquids Rosenhead, The use of analogous methods for scientific extrapolation using the CSM Method is an object of the present invention.
Care is taken to discriminate between initial conditions and fundamental rule sets. In complex systems, fundamental rules sets bound the manner in which initial conditions propagate to produce different behaviors of systems.
Multidisciplinary expertise is used to assure that a variety of perspectives and knowledge are brought to bear in deducing fundamental rule sets that define the behavior of a complex system versus the initial condition sets that can affect how the observed behavior may propagate in the complex system. This includes recognition of significant qualitative social process factors that can affect the manner in which human beings exercise the fundamental rule sets defining and bounding the propagation of patterns of complex systems behavior that are addressed as part of Phase 2.
The systematic integration of quantitative reality with human social process is an object of the present invention. Based on the fundamental rule sets defining the behavior being observed, the critical nodes of system operation are determined.
The critical nodes of a complex system are those core interrelationships within the system itself that are particularly sensitive to changes in initial conditions.
The critical nodes of a complex system, if significantly affected, upset the equilibrium of a system and result in its evolution or devolution. This is akin to the scientific findings that the stability of a turbulent gaseous system is a function of energy gain or loss as described in dissipative structure theory Prigogine, It is also akin to the deduction of rule sets that discriminate between initial conditions and fundamental rule sets as exemplified by traffic systems and the occurrence of traffic jams Resnick, The characterization of critical nodes as those core interrelationships within the system itself that are particularly sensitive to changes in initial conditions, is an object of the present invention.
Since the application of linear deterministic methods, when coupled with the imprecise mathematical constructs we use to measure complex systems contribute to our inability to precisely predict the future behavior of any complex system, a range of potential scenarios of potential future systems behaviors are developed.
Using fundamental rule sets to define and bound potential systems behaviors, a range of possible scenarios using different combinations of initial conditions that affect the critical nodes of the system are derived. These scenarios reflect the different ways in which human beings can exercise fundamental rule sets to propagate an array of potential outcomes. Abandoning the notion of exact predictability in complex systems due to randomness and the imprecision of the mathematical constructs we use to measure complex systems is an object of the present invention.
Each potential scenario that could affect a critical node of system operation is reverse engineered. During the process of reverse engineering each critical node of system operation, the initial conditions that affect the critical node of system operation are identified. The specific series or sequence of events for each scenario that would have to occur to significantly affect each critical node of operation is identified.
This is accomplished using real or imaginary combinations of initial conditions and assessing their relative impact on the manner in which fundamental rules sets are exercised to propagate a pattern of behavior in a complex system. The development and application of the EESI algorithm is an object of the present invention. As scenarios are reverse engineered, great care is taken to identify and structure the precise events and the sequence in which they must occur for a given event to take place in the real world.
For risk applications, scenarios are structured along a time continuum that begins with earliest possible detection of an adverse event moving sequentially through deterrence, prevention, response and the mitigation of consequences should the event occur.
The structuring of exact event sequences along a time continuum using the CSM Method is an object of the present invention. Structured responses to the following two questions are developed for each hypothetical risk scenario: 1 what information had it been known before the adverse situation happened could have been used to prevent it from happening in the first place? These become the warnings of impending adverse events and the subject of structured intelligence data collection strategies designed to identify warning signals as early as possible to interrupt event sequences in order to prevent adverse outcomes before they occur.
Specific warnings of impending adverse events and structured intelligence data collection protocols to proactively identify these warning signals is an object of the present invention. For benefit applications, scenarios are structured along a time continuum that begins with earliest possible recognition of an opportunity moving sequentially through strategy development to take advantage of the opportunity, specific actions to capture the opportunity and short and long-term sustainment of beneficial outcomes.
Structured responses to the following two questions for each real or hypothetical benefit scenario are developed: 1 what information had it been known before the opportunity was first recognized could have been used to recognize and act on it sooner?
These become the indicators of impending opportunities and the subject of structured intelligence data collection strategies designed to identify opportunities as early as possible and sustain optimum event sequences, i. The derivation of specific indicators of impending opportunity and structured intelligence data collection to identify these indicators as early as possible is an object of the present invention.
Quantitative, i. This is significant because the CSM business process discriminates between the uses of metaphor in favor of science-based analogical rigor. The application of analogical rigor versus metaphorical fancy as a scientific tool to extrapolate from one well known knowledge domain to another is an object of the present invention. Consistent with the tenets of a priori optionality, the relative impacts of initial conditions expressed as mathematical values are imprecise because of the irreversibility of systems, continuous systems of systems interactions and the imprecision of the mathematical constructs we use to measure complex systems.
In other words, the CSM business process is based on the fundamental premise that there exist no single correct answers to explain complex system behaviors. For this reason, specific sequences of events and different combinations of initial conditions in a real or imagined system are considered in terms of a range of potential outcomes as bounded by fundamental rule sets.
The fundamental premise that there exist no single correct answers to explain complex system behaviors and the requirement to analyze a plurality of potential event outcomes within the bounds of fundamental rules is an object of the present invention.
Consistent with the tenets of a priori optionality we recognize that the bounds within which patterns of systems behavior arise are inexact and ever-changing because of systems of systems interactions that affect fundamental rule sets. The fundamental rule sets, initial conditions, sequence of events and the potential outcomes for each scenario involving a critical node of operation, the warnings of adverse situations and the indicators of opportunity situations are structured, catalogued and archived in a supporting CSM Method computer knowledgebase.
Utilizing the same rule sets initially deduced, an array of future system behaviors can then be simulated by adjusting the relative values of initial conditions affecting the manner and degree to which fundamental rule sets are exercised to propagate system behaviors that can, in turn, affect critical nodes of systems operation.
The scientific finding that initial conditions affect the propagation of fundamental rules to produce different systems behaviors is an object of the present invention. The assumptions, upon which fundamental rule sets are initially deduced, however, must be continually reassessed based on systems of systems interactions.
For example, significant step advances in technology development can change the fundamental rule sets upon which complex systems behave. In the case of a traffic system and the application of analogy, imagine a future time; say years from today, when personal vehicles operate on the principle of magnetic levitation via centrally controlled computer secure automated data acquisition SCADA networks in order to optimize safe, efficient and very large volume traffic flows in highly complex traffic systems.
While the observed behavior of speeding up, slowing down and stopping a vehicle remains the same, the fundamental rule sets defining and bounding the behavior of the traffic system would have significantly changed. In such a different traffic system, the notion of a driver putting their foot on the brakes to stop the vehicle would no longer represent a fundamental rule of the behavior of the traffic system.
The fundamental rule set guiding the behavior of the complex traffic system has changed and with it, the relative importance of initial conditions that propagate how system behaviors will multiply.
The scientific finding that the assumptions upon which fundamental rule sets are deduced must be continually reassessed based on systems of systems interactions is an object of the present invention. These simulations are designed to reflect complex interdependencies among different critical nodes and their effects on outcomes. As depicted in FIGS. Special attention is paid to the relationships between and among deterrence, detection, prevention, response, mitigation and recovery.
For example, actions taken to respond to a given event can have a major effect on mitigating the consequences of an event. Mitigating the consequences of an adverse event can positively affect long term recovery. The creation of risk event continuum from earliest possible detection of an adverse event through deterrence, prevention, response and mitigation of consequences is an object of the present invention.
Scientists remind us that if organizations fail to prevent adverse events that can quickly escalate from contingencies to disasters to catastrophes, they lose competitive advantage. If organizations can prevent adverse events before they happen or more effectively mitigate their consequences they gain competitive advantage.
The systematic method used under the CSM Method to prevent adverse events before they happen or, when necessary, more effectively mitigate their consequences is an object of the present invention. Special attention is paid to the relationships between and among opportunity recognition, strategy development, opportunity capture and short and long-term sustainment. For example, strategies used to capture an opportunity may affect both short and long-term sustainment.
Scientists remind us if organizations do not recognize opportunity and act to capture and sustain it for the long-term, they can lose their competitive advantage. In this way, the organizations of the future will achieve and maintain competitive advantage. The early identification of opportunity events before they happen and their sustainment is an object of the present invention.
Those critical points within a simulation where decisions must be made to exploit the evolution or avoid the uncontrolled devolution of a system are identified.
These are called critical decision points. The method of identifying critical decision points and the systematic method of reverse engineering them is an object of the present invention.
Out of the range of possible decisions, the optimum decision sets in a simulation that lead to the most desirable outcome s are identified. The supporting rationale for selected decisions, in both quantitative and qualitative terms is structured, digitized and indexed using consistent methods to assure repeatability, i.
The systematic, science-based process for determining best optimum decision sets is an object of the present invention. The consequences of decisions and the warnings and indicators of risk or benefit applications, respectively, are identified and structured. These computer supported collaboration tools also help to assure the repeatability by organizing both structured and unstructured information as data to a supporting CSM Method knowledgebase in ways that the data can be readily understood by subsequent users, i.
The methods used to structure data for repeatability is an object of the present invention. Computer graphic representations of critical nodes of operation, models visualizing systems and systems behaviors, decision outcomes and the extended order effects of decisions to include decision maps, decision fault trees, and other computer visualization techniques are developed in preparation for Phase 2.
The use of tailored computer visualization platforms to guide the implementation of the CSM Method and structure data for repeatability is an object of the present invention. Business Process Steps. Phase 2. Each step of Phase 2. The purpose of Phase 2. The scientific method of a priori optionality and its integration throughout all phases of the CSM Method business process is an object of the present invention.
They are provided with the opportunity to systematically consider and plan in advance for complex contingencies and create risk and benefit decision support templates that can be used to guide decision making when similar analogous events happen in the real world.
The creation of pre-agreed risk and benefit decision support templates that can be archived in the CSM Method knowledgebase and readily retrieved for use by human beings to manage real world events is an object of the present invention. During phase 2. This is done to encourage shared situational awareness from the policy to the operational level. Cutting across organizations both vertically and horizontally to identify immersion participants to increase situational awareness and diversity of inputs is an object of the present invention.
Analogously derived science-based simulations of hypothetical events and situations involving systems relationships among critical nodes of operation of a complex system are used during immersions. As noted previously, these simulations reflect the earlier thinking of the multidisciplinary experts who developed and reverse engineered scenarios for the critical nodes of systems operations during Phase 1.
Analogously derived science-based simulations of hypothetical events involving systems interrelationships among critical nodes of operation of a complex system is an object of the present invention. During Phase 2. They are asked to identify the decisions they would make, consider the outcomes and the extended-order effects of their decisions as they work through simulations involving the behavior of complex systems and their associated critical nodes of systems operation.
Including decision makers and technical subject matter experts as participants in immersions to support multidisciplinary problem solving is an object of the present invention.
The decisions made by participants and the outcomes and extended order effects of their decisions are compared and contrasted against the results of the Phase 1. This data includes the critical decision points, i. The notions of opportunity advantage and system failure are akin to dissipative structures, i.
The comparison and contrast of the results of the Phase 1. A special consensus team decision tool is used during Phase 2. Michelson, McGee and Hawley describe consensus as a term that connotes something more than simple agreement The process is structured to assure repeatability of data.
The use of a structured and repeatable consensus model tailored for application as part of the CSM Method to achieve consensus on best decision options is an object of the present invention. Using the process of compare and contrast with Phase 1. The opportunity for immersion participants to see and experience the outcomes and extended order effects of both good and bad decisions is an object of the present invention.
The result is called a best decision option. The derivation, digitization and computer archiving of a plurality of scenarios and pre-generated and agreed-upon best decision options and associated decision templates is an object of the present invention.
Best decision options, outcomes and extended order effects are visually mapped for use during immersions, digitized and archived in the supporting CSM Method knowledgebase. The process allows participants to achieve consensus on best decision options in a way that the lessons learned from the experience can be captured in a computer knowledgebase to build a body of repeatable knowledge that establishes reference points for further simulations.
This data form the basis of risk and benefit decision support systems that can be used to assist in the management of analogous events as they occur in the real world.
Building a body of repeatable knowledge that establishes reference points for further simulations that serve as the basis for risk and benefit decision support systems is an object of the present invention.
Before an immersion takes place, inputs are sought from the entire system both vertically and horizontally to gather subject matter knowledge at every level. The critical nodes of systems operation for the complex systems behavior under examination as identified during Phase 1. Results of Phase 1. Analogous science-based simulations based on CSM Method futures driven event scenarios is an object of the present invention. For risk applications, the precursor warning signals that can lead to adverse events or cause disasters to escalate to become catastrophes are identified.
For benefit applications, the precursor indicators of opportunity that can be exploited to increase the competitive advantage of the organization are identified. The immersion process examines the range of possible decisions that could be made and their extended order effects.
Science-based models are used to show participants the extended order effects of their decisions. Using analogous science-based methods to extrapolate the extended order effects and consequences of events and decisions is an object of the present invention.
The tools and techniques described below are used to help immersion participants reverse engineer critical decisions and reach consensus on best decision options under differing sets of circumstances, i.
As described previously, a team decision process is used for participants to achieve consensus on the best decisions to make. This team decision process is designed to address the concerns raised by Janis in Groupthink The creation of CSM learning knowledgebases that use structured data derived from the methodical application of a priori optionality is an object of the present invention.
The creation of optimum decision templates structured for repeatability and immediately accessible from digitized computer data stored on a CSM knowledgebase is an object of the present invention. The resulting knowledgebase can be used for educational, strategic and tactical operational uses as a planning and operational response tool to manage analogous events that confront decision makers in the real world.
The creation of pre-agreed upon decision templates that are structured for repeatability and immediately available to decision makers by querying the CSM Method knowledgebase is an object of the present invention. Process Steps. The purpose of Phase 3. One of the scientifically derived tenets of a priori optionality is that there exist no absolute bounds of certainty in any complex system within which different behaviors may occur. Scientific evidence that there exists no absolute bounds of certainty in any complex system within which different behaviors may occur is an object of the present invention.
A priori optionality posits that the bounds within which different behaviors occur in a complex system change based on the evolving adaptation of the system itself resulting from continuous systems of systems interactions with the environment in which it exists. Scientific evidence that all systems evolve based on systems of systems interactions is an object of the present invention.
Thus, no system ever stands alone or remains unaffected by the space, i. Scientific evidence that no system ever stands alone or remains unaffected by the space is an object of the present invention. The reassessment of the fundamental rule sets bounding the behavior of a complex system is accomplished through the use of continuing multidisciplinary team analysis, the conduct of subsequent immersions, the use of computer modeling and the real world operational use and testing of the risk and benefit applications of the decision support systems resulting from the Phase 1.
CSM Method business process. Scientific evidence that the fundamental rule sets of complex systems must be continually reassessed based on systems of systems interactions is an object of the present invention. Table 1. Fundamental rule 1. Simulation of real and 1. Continuing reassessment sets at t 1 driving a hypothetical events of fundamental rules complex system's 2. The outcomes of different 2. Subsequent immersions to behavior decision at critical decision revalidate and update best 2.
Initial conditions points decision options affecting the 3. Decision fault trees showing 3. Decision templates fundamental rule outcomes and extended order and results of Phase 1. Identification of 4. Multidisciplinary analysis during world events. Participant cognitive assessments 4. Range of scenarios at t 2 , t 3 , t 4 and of learning styles, team so on using different interaction styles, conflict combinations of initial handling conditions to disturb system 6.
Multidisciplinary consensus on equilibrium and observe best decision options outcomes and determine event 7. Consensus on best decision sequences options and supporting rationale 5. For risk applications, an 8. Decision maps, models, 6.
For benefit applications, the computer visualization tools to early indicators of impending support the Mangment of opportunity analogous real world events 7. The early warnings of impending Validation of indicators of adverse events benefit and warnings of adverse 8. Data collection impending events strategies including data Consensus decisions on data mining to look for the early collection strategies to look for indicators of opportunity the early indicators of and the early warnings of opportunity and the early adverse events.
Critical Decision points for A CSM Method business process scenarios knowledgebase of repeatable Optimum Decision sets information and data that All data structured for successive immersions. To demonstrate the present invention, a prototype capability was designed to show in concrete and tangible form how the CSM Method business process model can be applied to structure data and create a CSM knowledgebase that supports Phases 2.
The example presented here demonstrates only one of many potential automated applications of the CSM Method. As depicted in Table The network architecture used is common to all CSM Method automated applications. Tailored risk management software applications dealing with a range of critical infrastructures ranging from energy, transportation, communications, public health and safety, etc.
These software packages provide functionality for the client to: 1 geospatially and otherwise to visualize the external and internal critical nodes of their operations; 2 gather and structure data concerning these critical nodes; 3 as appropriate, determine compliance with safety, security, regulatory and best business practices for each critical node; 4 simulate modifications to existing system design to reduce the risks associated with man-made and natural events affecting their critical nodes; 5 use visualization platforms to monitor in real time changes to the risks associated with their critical nodes.
It is here that the critical nodes of different critical infrastructure systems are identified and subjected to deep systems analysis and reverse engineered using the CSM Method risk management business process. Consistent with Phase 1. The data is structured and archived in the CriTQ knowledgebase. For example, the means and methods associated with different attack scenarios and the consequences associated with a successful attack or natural event involving a critical infrastructure system and a system behavior are structured and archived in the knowledgebase.
The indicators of benefit opportunities and warnings of an impending attack or natural event are analogously determined using the CSM Method. The use of analogous methods to derive the indicators of benefit opportunities and warnings of an impending adverse or natural event is an object of the present invention.
The use of data mining techniques to continuously scan open sources for the indicators of opportunity as derived using the CSM Method is an object of the present invention. These indicators of business opportunity are actively displayed on computer visualization platforms. For risk management applications the CriTQ knowledgebase constantly scans the open source environment for the warnings of adverse events as scientifically derived using CSM Method business process.
These threat warnings are actively displayed on computer visualization platforms. See FIGS. The use of data mining techniques to continuously scan open sources for the warnings of adverse events as derived using the CSM Method is an object of the present invention. These warnings of adverse events are actively displayed on computer visualization platforms. In this case, the risk management concern involves the potential for malevolent attacks by adversaries against modern commercial buildings and the range of natural phenomenon that can affect building operations and safety.
Today's modern commercial buildings are examples of complex adaptive systems of systems. From heating, ventilation and air conditioning systems that must respond to changes in temperature and weather conditions, to wind dampening systems to prevent the excessive swaying of tall buildings, to power loading for the most efficient use of electricity, to fire suppression systems and so on, modern buildings represent a complex interweaving web of systems of systems that must continuously respond to changing conditions.
In Phase 1. Step 1. First, the fundamental rules that bound the range of potential malevolent attacks against the building are derived. Ask yourself the following question: What causes a traffic jam? You call for the AI Email Bot. You edit the email draft and send it. Benefits Automation of repetitive e-mails Automatically reply to emails with fast and personalized answers.
Our integrations Learn more. Learn more. What are typical use cases: Recurring questions to a help desk. Customer inquiries regarding delivery times and shipping costs. Approval process of purchased orders. Requests for quotation validity.
For example, the Group Policy settings and registry subkeys can be used to resolve issues that are related to macros in. However, if users view Help files from an unknown source, the computer will be put at more risk if they enable these policies or these settings. Therefore, you should use caution when you decide whether to implement the application-compatibility workarounds that are described in this section. Use the following questions to determine whether to install WinHlp Do you have to have the applications and the functionality that are affected by the removal of WinHlp How many applications require WinHlp How many applications are affected by the functionality changes?
How important are these applications? What are your security requirements and security capabilities? Which is more important: That you can use the WinHlp Do external security measures, such as a local or a corporate firewall, give you sufficient confidence that you can install WinHlp If you are in an organization, does your organization deliver content in the.
Can you modify the program or the contents so that they do not have to use WinHlp For example, can you convert the help content that is currently in the. Does your organization store. Can you install these files locally instead? After you install the WinHelp For more information about this issue, see the " Known issues " section.
This section contains steps to re-enable these macros by modifying a registry key. If your computer is in a managed environment, do not follow these steps without first consulting with your IT department. IT departments may decide not to re-enable macros or they may decide to re-enable them by using group policies. IT departments should read this article in its entirety before you continue.
Warning This article offers information about how to work around issues that are caused by changes in this release of Windows Help. However, Microsoft makes no specific recommendations about which registry keys and which values are right for your unique environment. If you are in a managed environment, your IT department is the best judge of how to weigh the advantages of these workarounds against the risks of using them.
The safer course is to use no registry workarounds at all. Note To perform the steps in this task, you must be logged on to the computer by using an administrator account.
By using an administrator account, you can make changes to your computer that you cannot make with any other account, such as a standard account. To log on by using an administrator account, you must know the password for an administrator account on your computer. If you are performing these steps on your personal computer, you are likely already logged on by using an administrator account. If you are performing these steps on a computer at work, you might have to ask the system administrator for help.
Important Follow the steps in this section carefully. Serious problems might occur if you modify the registry incorrectly.
Before you modify it, back up the registry for restoration in case problems occur. To enable macros on a single computer after you install WinHelp
0コメント