Intelligent systems ought to be distinguished as a special type of systems that require distinctive engineering processes. While this distinction is informally acknowledged by some, practical systems engineering (SE) methodologies for intelligent systems remain primarily rooted in traditional SE paradigms centered around component aggregation. Initially, this dissertation posits that the traditional approach is grounded in the notion of open systems as the fundamental precept, whereas engineering intelligent systems necessitates an alternative approach founded on the principles of closed systems. This dissertation endeavors to identify potential gaps within the current SE foundations concerning the accommodation of the unique characteristics of intelligent systems, such as continuous learning and sensitivity to environmental changes. Furthermore, it argues for the mitigation of these gaps through the formalization of closed systems precepts. It adopts a systems-theoretic perspective to elucidate the phenomena of closed systems and their intricate interplay with engineering intelligent systems. This research contends that, given the intricate coupling between intelligent systems and their environments, the incorporation of closed systems precepts into SE represents a pivotal pathway to construct engineered intelligence. In pursuit of this objective, this dissertation establishes a formal foundation to delineate closed systems precepts and other fundamental practices. Subsequently, it provides formalism to discern two important categories of closed systems, informationally and functionally closed systems, and their relevance in the domains of engineering and design across diverse levels of system abstraction. Additionally, it explores the practical application of the closed systems precepts through the novel paradigm of core and periphery, followed by its examination within real-world contexts. This dissertation is organizes as follows: Chapter 1 initiates the dissertation by presenting the problem formulation and motivation. It subsequently delves into a thorough literature review and outlines the research's scope and objectives, contributing to the essence of this work. In Chapter 2, a narrative unfolds, elucidating the contributions of the provided papers to the objectives outlined in Chapter 1. This chapter illuminates how each paper aligns with and furthers the overarching goals set forth in the Chapter 1. Chapter 3 serves as a culmination, offering a summary of the accomplishments, acknowledging limitations, and delineating potential avenues for future research within this domain. Paper A is devoted to substantiating the closed notion of intelligence property. In the realm of artificial intelligence (AI), systems are often expected to exert influence upon their environments and, reciprocally, to be influenced by their surroundings. Consequently, a profound interdependence exists between the system and its environment, transcending the confines of conventional input-output relations. In this regard, Paper A postulates that the engineering of intelligent systems mandates an approach that elevates closed systems as foundational precepts for characterizing intelligence as a property contingent upon the system's relationship with its context. The ensuing discussion will juxtapose the viewpoints of open and closed systems, illustrating the limitations of the open system perspective in representing intelligence as a relational property. In response, this paper will advocate for the adoption of the closed system view to establish intelligence as an inherent relational property arising from the system's dynamic interactions with its environment. Paper B is dedicated to the formalization of the closed systems paradigm within SE. In this paper, formalism is proffered for the closed systems precepts, drawing upon systems theory, cybernetics, and information theory. A comprehensive comparison of two closure types, informational and functional closure, within closed systems is presented, underpinned by a common systems-theoretic formal framework. This dissertation contends that by grounding these initiatives in the core and periphery concept, we can facilitate the design and engineering of intelligent systems across multiple levels of abstraction. These levels may span a spectrum from informational closure to a synthesis of informational and functional openness. It posits that this approach represents a versatile, method-agnostic solution to some of the principal challenges encountered when engineering multiple tiers of intelligence for complex systems. Paper C delves into the rise of the concept of core-periphery from some cybernetics principles, such as variety and "The Law of Requisite Variety" and provides a formalism that is a derivation of the mentioned principles in Cybernetics. Later, it elaborates on the practical implications of such concepts in intelligent systems from biological systems and entails an engagement with a CNN model to explore the core and periphery concept within AI-enabled systems. Paper D proposes the practical implementation of the closed systems doctrine in SE, offering frameworks that rigorously define the boundaries between closed systems and their environment. These frameworks are meticulously designed to account for stakeholder requirements and the inherent design constraints of the system. This paper illustrates practical applications of informational and functional closure within SE processes, leveraging a hypothetical example for elucidation. It focuses on two aspects of engineering intelligence, scope and scale to provide a platform for the utilization of closed systems precepts. / Doctor of Philosophy / There has been a longstanding call within the Systems Engineering (SE) community for the development of a comprehensive SE theory. This endeavor seeks to bestow upon the field of SE the requisite credibility to stand autonomously as an engineering discipline, capable of addressing the contemporary engineering challenges that confront us. In the pursuit of establishing SE as a distinct engineering field, it becomes imperative to furnish precise and formal definitions for the fundamental concepts that underpin SE processes. Presently, the absence of concrete formalism and clear distinctions surrounding certain core concepts introduces ambiguity into various SE practices. Until recently, the immediate necessity for such foundational formalism was not universally acknowledged or appreciated, as engineers predominantly relied on established practices to design traditional engineered systems. These conventional SE practices had withstood the test of time, until the emergence of a new generation of complex systems characterized by distinctive features. Among these emergent systems, Artificial Intelligent (AI) systems have garnered significant attention, bearing unique attributes that call into question the adequacy of the current SE practices in supporting their development. Consequently, it has been asserted that intelligent systems necessitate the incorporation of new characteristics that render them incompatible with conventional SE practices. This assertion underscores the need for a thorough reevaluation of SE, potentially entailing an expansion of the formalism underpinning its fundamental principles. However, despite these pressing concerns, SE currently lacks a solid theoretical foundation capable of facilitating a paradigm shift away from current practices. The primary objective of this dissertation is to identify the existing gaps responsible for the misalignment between the characteristics of AI systems and prevailing SE practices. Additionally, it seeks to propose innovative methodologies to bridge these gaps effectively. In alignment with this objective, the dissertation provides formalism for these methodologies. Finally, this dissertation aims to provide practical implication of such formalism to validate their applicability. In summary, the central research question, along with the ensuing objectives of this dissertation, can be articulated as follows: What aspects of SE are insufficient for engineering the new characteristics demanded by intelligent systems? What specific actions need to be undertaken to rectify the gaps within SE for intelligent systems? What theoretical foundation and formalism are essential to address these deficiencies within the SE process? What are the practical implications of these efforts for SE processes, as exemplified by real-world scenarios?

近年來台灣製造業委外代工至大陸已是十分普遍的現象。從國外購買中間財貨、到國外設立跨國公司、購買國外製成品以國內的品牌進行銷售、或到國外找尋特殊投資關係合夥人等，都包含在委外代工的定義內。委外代工帶來了二個值得探討的議題：第一是委外代工對勞動市場的影響，包括失業問題和相對薪資的變化；第二，委外代工和經濟邊緣化問題之間存在尚未澄清的關聯，例如委外代工是不是會導致台灣經濟邊緣化、產業空洞化？因此，本論文分成兩大獨立的結構分別討論上述問題。 關於委外代工對勞動市場的影響，文獻上大多觀察下列現象（Feenstra and Hanson, 1995; Wood,1995）：製造業的就業規模是否縮減、整體製造業的技術勞動就業比例是否逐漸增加、整體製造業的非技術勞動就業比例是否逐漸下降、以及技術勞動和非技術勞動之間的薪資差距是否也逐漸擴大（反應出就業比例的改變）。本文對台灣的勞動市場進行研究，的確發現上述現象的產生。根據研究結果顯示，政府沒有理由限制傳統產業外移到大陸，反而要創造更好的高科技環境，積極地留住台灣的高科技產業。亦即，不同的產業需要不同的產業政策加以因應，雙向產業政策將是需要的。例如傳統產業，政府可以將政策提升到「委外代工國」的立場考量，讓獲利率低、生產不效率的產業委由大陸製造；對高科技產業政策政府則可試著採取「被委外代工國」的立場，積極創造更科技的產業環境，留住台灣科技產業和保住台灣科技產業代工王國的版圖。 對委外代工與台灣邊緣化議題的探討，主要源起於泛藍和泛綠在兩次總統大選中的兩岸政策的爭議─是否要「三通」。事實上，針對台灣是否會被邊緣化兩大陣營均尚未整理出一個完整的說明。透過Krugman and Venables（1995）模型闡述可以清楚地了解：邊緣化只是運輸成本下降的一個過程，不會是最終的結果。同時，運輸成本的下降並不是會造成邊緣化的唯一決定因子。產業關聯性和產品之間的替代程度都扮演相當重要的角色。因此，對不同產業設定特定政策才能達到抗邊緣化的效果。 / Outsourcing is the current trend between Taiwan and Mainland China in recent decade. Inclusive of importing intermediate inputs, setting up multinational firms, purchasing final goods produced abroad, outsourcing brings two topics worthy to discuss. My thesis is structured into two independent projects: one is to discuss the effects of outsourcing on unemployment and changes in relative wages, and the other focuses on the issue of whether outsourcing leads to Taiwan deindustrialization. The main findings in the first project are consistent with the major conclusions suggested by several studies（Feenstra and Hanson, 1995; Wood,1995）that: declining share of manufacturing employment in total employment, increasing share of skilled workers’ in total manufacturing employment and in total wage bill, while the converse in unskilled workers. Therefore, we have no reasons to limit the unprofitable and traditional industries to move out. What we should do is to develop and expand the higher-skilled sector and to encourage high-technology industries to upgrade the production with the most comparative advantage. Different industrial policies applicable to different features of each industry are necessary. To announce a rough and uniform policy will probably do more harms than goods. What unearthed from the second project is that concerns of economic periphery voiced by Pan-KMT and Pan-DPP alliances did not tell the full story. Krugman and Venables（1995）can be applied to show that economic periphery is just one of the points in the process of a dynamic development with reducing transportation cost. Besides, transportation cost is not the only contributor to “core and periphery” pattern. Share of intermediate input and elasticity of substitution for manufactured goods are also playing important roles. Therefore, different industries should be applicable for different policy arrangement.