The vision of on-demand architectural knowledge systems as a decision-making companion
References
[1]
Abebe Surafel Lemma, Tonella Paolo, Natural language parsing of program element names for concept extraction, in: 2010 IEEE 18th International Conference on Program Comprehension, IEEE, 2010, pp. 156–159.
[2]
Ahmad Arshad, Feng Chong, Khan Muzammil, Khan Asif, Ullah Ayaz, Nazir Shah, Tahir Adnan, A systematic literature review on using machine learning algorithms for software requirements identification on stack overflow, Secur. Commun. Netw. 2020 (2020).
[3]
Al Omran, Fouad Nasser A., Treude, Christoph., 2017. Choosing an NLP library for analyzing software documentation: A systematic literature review and a series of experiments. In: 2017 IEEE/ACM 14th International Conference on Mining Software Repositories. MSR, pp. 187–197.
[4]
Alavi Maryam, Leidner Dorothy E., Knowledge management and knowledge management systems: Conceptual foundations and research issues, MIS Q. (2001) 107–136.
[5]
Alslaity Alaa, Tran Thomas, Towards persuasive recommender systems, in: 2019 IEEE 2nd International Conference on Information and Computer Technologies, ICICT, IEEE, 2019, pp. 143–148.
[6]
Antoniou Grigoris, Van Harmelen Frank, A Semantic Web Primer, MIT Press, 2004.
[7]
Arnott David, Cognitive biases and decision support systems development: A design science approach, Inf. Syst. J. 16 (2006) 55–78.
[8]
Arnott David, Gao Shijia, Behavioral economics for decision support systems researchers, Decis. Support Syst. 122 (2019).
[9]
Arnott David, Pervan Graham, A critical analysis of decision support systems research revisited: The rise of design science, in: Enacting Research Methods in Information Systems, Springer, 2016.
[10]
Aurum Aybüke, Wohlin Claes, The fundamental nature of requirements engineering activities as a decision-making process, Inf. Softw. Technol. 45 (2003) 945–954.
[11]
Avgeriou Paris, Kruchten Philippe, Lago Patricia, Grisham Paul, Perry Dewayne, Architectural knowledge and rationale – issues, trends, challenges, in: ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes, 2007, pp. 41–46.
[12]
Babar, Muhammad Ali, de Boer, Remco C., Dingsøyr, Torgeir, Farenhorst, Rik, 2007. Architectural Knowledge Management Strategies: Approaches in Research and Industry. In: Second Workshop on SHAring and Reusing Architectural Knowledge - Architecture, Rationale, and Design Intent. SHARK/ADI 2007.
[13]
Babar Muhammed Ali, Dingsøyr T., Lago P., van Vliet Hans (Eds.), Software Architecture Knowledge Management: Theory and Practice, Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, 2009.
[14]
Babb Jeffry, Hoda Rashina, Norbjerg Jacob, Embedding reflection and learning into agile software development, IEEE Software 31 (2014) 51–57.
[15]
Bakar Noor Hasrina, Kasirun Zarinah M., Salleh Norsaremah, Feature extraction approaches from natural language requirements for reuse in software product lines: A systematic literature review, J. Syst. Softw. 106 (2015) 132–149.
[16]
Balasubramanian Srinivasan, Chavet Laurent, Qi Runping, System, method, and service for collaborative focused crawling of documents on a network, 2009, Google Patents.
[17]
Banerjee Sanchayan, John Peter, Nudge plus: Incorporating reflection into behavioral public policy, Behav. Public Policy (2020) 1–16.
[18]
Bauer Christine, Schedl Markus, Introducing surprise and opposition by design in recommender systems, in: Adjunct Publication of the 25th Conference on User Modeling, Adaptation and Personalization, 2017, pp. 350–353.
[19]
Bedjeti Adriatik, Lago Patricia, Lewis Grace, de Boer Remco C., Hilliard Rich, Modeling context with an architecture viewpoint, in: 1st International Conference on Software Architecture, IEEE, Gothenburg, Sweden, 2017.
[20]
Bhat Manoj, Shumaiev Klym, Biesdorf Andreas, Hohenstein Uwe, Hassel Michael, Matthes Florian, An ontology-based approach for software architecture recommendations, 2017.
[21]
Bhat Manoj, Shumaiev Klym, Hohenstein Uwe, Biesdorf Andreas, Matthes Florian, The evolution of architectural decision making as a key focus area of software architecture research: A semi-systematic literature study, in: 2020 IEEE International Conference on Software Architecture, ICSA, IEEE, 2020, pp. 69–80.
[22]
Bhat Manoj, Tinnes Christof, Shumaiev Klym, Biesdorf Andreas, Hohenstein Uwe, Matthes Florian, ADeX: A tool for automatic curation of design decision knowledge for architectural decision recommendations, in: 2019 IEEE International Conference on Software Architecture Companion, ICSA-C, IEEE, 2019, pp. 158–161.
[23]
Bi Tingting, Liang Peng, Tang Antony, Xia Xin, Mining architecture tactics and quality attributes knowledge in stack overflow, J. Syst. Software (2021).
[24]
Bi Tingting, Liang Peng, Tang Antony, Yang Chen, A systematic mapping study on text analysis techniques in software architecture, J. Syst. Softw. 144 (2018) 533–558.
[25]
Bontcheva Kalina, Rout Dominic, Making sense of social media streams through semantics: A survey, Semantic Web 5 (2014) 373–403.
[26]
Bosse Tibor, Jonker Catholijn M., Treur Jan, Reasoning by assumption: formalisation and analysis of human reasoning traces, in: International Work-Conference on the Interplay Between Natural and Artificial Computation, Springer, 2005, pp. 427–436.
[27]
Brandner, Klaus, Mayer, Benjamin, Weinreich, Rainer, 2019. Software architecture knowledge sharing with the architecture knowledge base (AKB). In: Proceedings of the 13th European Conference on Software Architecture-Volume 2. pp. 30–33.
[28]
Burge Janet, Brown David C., Reasoning with design rationale, in: Artificial Intelligence in Design’00, Springer, 2000.
[29]
Cambridge U.P., Introduction to information retrieval, 2009.
[30]
Cao, Huanhuan, Hu, Derek Hao, Shen, Dou, Jiang, Daxin, Sun, Jian-Tao, Chen, Enhong, Yang, Qiang, 2009. Context-aware query classification. In: Proceedings of the 32nd International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval. pp. 3–10.
[31]
Capilla Rafael, Jansen Anton, Tang Antony, Avgeriou Paris, Ali Babar Muhammad, 10 Years of software architecture knowledge management: Practice and future, J. Syst. Softw. 116 (2016) 191–205.
[32]
Capilla Rafael, Jolak Rodi, Chaudron Michel R.V., Carrillo Carlos, Design Decisions By Voice: The Next Step of Software Architecture Knowledge Management, Springer International Publishing, Cham, 2020, pp. 166–177.
[33]
Caraban Ana, Karapanos Evangelos, Gonçalves Daniel, Campos Pedro, 23 Ways to nudge: A review of technology-mediated nudging in human-computer interaction, in: Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Association for Computing Machinery, Glasgow, Scotland Uk, 2019, Paper 503.
[34]
Carpineto Claudio, Osiński Stanislaw, Romano Giovanni, Weiss Dawid, A survey of web clustering engines, ACM Comput. Surv. 41 (2009) 1–38.
[35]
Casamayor Agustin, Godoy Daniela, Campo Marcelo, Functional grouping of natural language requirements for assistance in architectural software design, Knowl.-Based Syst. 30 (2012) 78–86.
[36]
Charette Robert N., Why software fails [software failure], IEEE Spectr. 42 (2005) 42–49.
[37]
Chattopadhyay, Souti, Nelson, Nicholas, Nam, Thien, Calvert, McKenzie, Sarma, Anita, 2018. Context in programming: An investigation of how programmers create context. In: Proceedings of the 11th International Workshop on Cooperative and Human Aspects of Software Engineering. pp. 33–36.
[38]
Chen Jim Q., Lee Sang M., An exploratory cognitive DSS for strategic decision making, Decis. Support Syst. 36 (2003) 147–160.
[39]
Chklovski Timothy Anatolievich, using Analogy to Acquire Commonsense Knowledge from Human Contributors, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2003.
[40]
Christiaans Henri, Almendra Rita Assoreira, Accessing decision-making in software design, Des. Stud. 31 (2010) 641–662.
[41]
Chuderski Adam, Jastrzębski Jan, Much ado about aha!: Insight problem solving is strongly related to working memory capacity and reasoning ability, J. Exp. Psychol. [Gen.] 147 (257) (2018).
[42]
Coelho, Jailton, Valente, Marco Tulio, 2017. Why modern open source projects fail. In: Proceedings of the 2017 11th Joint Meeting on Foundations of Software Engineering. pp. 186–196.
[43]
Cohen Paul R., Feigenbaum Edward A., The Handbook of Artificial Intelligence, 3, Butterworth-Heinemann, 2014.
[44]
Conklin, J., Begeman, M., 1988. gIBIS: A hypertext tool for exploratory policy discussion. In: Proceedings of the 1988 ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work. pp. 140–152.
[45]
da Cunha José Adson O.G., da Silva Fabio Q.B., de Moura Hermano P., Vasconcellos Francisco J.S., Decision-making in software project management: A qualitative case study of a private organization, in: 2016 IEEE/ACM Cooperative and Human Aspects of Software Engineering, CHASE, IEEE, 2016, pp. 26–32.
[46]
Davis Fred D., Kottemann Jeffrey E., User perceptions of decision support effectiveness: Two production planning experiments, Decision Sci. 25 (1994) 57–76.
[47]
de Graaf K.A., Liang P., Tang A., van Hage W.R., van Vliet H., An exploratory study on ontology engineering for software architecture documentation, Comput. Ind. (2014).
[48]
de Graaf K.A., Liang P., Tang A., van Vliet H., How organisation of architecture documentation affects architectural knowledge retrieval, Sci. Comput. Program. 121 (2016) 75–99.
[49]
Diekema Anne R., Yilmazel Ozgur, Chen Jiangping, Harwell Sarah, He Lan, Liddy Elizabeth D., Finding answers to complex questions, 2004.
[50]
Dijksterhuis Ap, Meurs Teun, Where creativity resides: The generative power of unconscious thought, Conscious. Cogn. 15 (2006) 135–146.
[51]
Dijksterhuis Ap, Van Olden Zeger, On the benefits of thinking unconsciously: Unconscious thought can increase post-choice satisfaction, J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 42 (2006) 627–631.
[52]
Ding, W., Liang, P., Tang, A., van Vliet, H., Shahin, M., 2014. How do open source communities document software architecture: An exploratory survey. In: 9th International Conference on Engineering of Complex Computer Systems. ICECCS, Tianjin.
[53]
Dorneich Michael C., Whitlow Stephen D., Ververs Patricia May, Rogers William H., Mitigating cognitive bottlenecks via an augmented cognition adaptive system, in: SMC’03 Conference Proceedings. 2003 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics. Conference Theme-System Security and Assurance (Cat. No. 03CH37483), IEEE, 2003, pp. 937–944.
[54]
Dorst Kees, Co-evolution and emergence in design, Des. Stud. 65 (2019) 60–77.
[55]
Dube-Rioux Laurette, Russo J. Edward, An availability bias in professional judgment, J. Behav. Decis. Mak. 1 (1988) 223–237.
[56]
Dutoit A., Peach B., Rationale management in software engineering, in: Handbook of Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering, 2000.
[57]
Dybå, Tore, Sjøberg, Dag I.K., Cruzes, Daniela S., 2012. What works for whom, Where, when, and Why? On the Role of Context in Empirical Software Engineering. In: Proceedings of the ACM-IEEE International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement. pp. 19–28.
[58]
Eliëns Ramon, Eling Katrin, Gelper Sarah, Langerak Fred, Rational versus intuitive gatekeeping: Escalation of commitment in the front end of NPD, J. Prod. Innov. Manage. 35 (2018) 890–907.
[59]
Engin Ayşegül, Vetschera Rudolf, Information representation in decision making: The impact of cognitive style and depletion effects, Decis. Support Syst. 103 (2017) 94–103.
[60]
Epstein Seymour, Pacini Rosemary, Denes-Raj Veronika, Heier Harriet, Individual differences in intuitive–experiential and analytical–rational thinking styles, J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 71 (390) (1996).
[61]
Feldman Ronen, Techniques and applications for sentiment analysis, Commun. ACM 56 (2013) 82–89.
[62]
Forwood Suzanna E., Ahern Amy L., Marteau Theresa M., Jebb Susan A., Offering within-category food swaps to reduce energy density of food purchases: A study using an experimental online supermarket, Int. J. Behav. Nutr. Phys. Activity 12 (2015) 1–10.
[63]
Gallupe R. Brent, Dennis Alan R., Cooper William H., Valacich Joseph S., Bastianutti Lana M., Nunamaker Jay F. Jr., Electronic brainstorming and group size, Acad. Manag. J. 35 (1992) 350–369.
[64]
George Joey F., Duffy Kevin, Ahuja Manju, Countering the anchoring and adjustment bias with decision support systems, Decis. Support Syst. 29 (2000) 195–206.
[65]
Gorton Ian, Xu Rouchen, Yang Yiming, Liu Hanxiao, Zheng Guoqing, Experiments in curation: Towards machine-assisted construction of software architecture knowledge bases, in: 2017 IEEE International Conference on Software Architecture, ICSA, IEEE, 2017, pp. 79–88.
[66]
Graaf Klaas Andries de, Liang Peng, Tang Antony, van Vliet Hans, The impact of prior knowledge on searching in software documentation, in: Proceedings of the 2014 ACM Symposium on Document Engineering, ACM, Fort Collins, Colorado, USA, 2014, pp. 189–198.
[67]
Greenwald Anthony G., Carnot Catherine.G., Beach Rebecca, Young Barbara, Increasing voting behavior by asking people if they expect to vote, J. Appl. Psychol. 72 (315) (1987).
[68]
Happel Hans-Jörg, Seedorf Stefan, Applications of ontologies in software engineering, in: Proc. of Workshop on Sematic Web Enabled Software Engineering(SWESE) on the ISWC, Citeseer, 2006, pp. 5–9.
[69]
Harbach, Marian, Hettig, Markus, Weber, Susanne, Smith, Matthews, 2014. Using personal examples to improve risk communication for security & privacy decisions. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. pp. 2647–2656.
[70]
Harman Mark, McMinn Phil, De Souza Jerffeson Teixeira, Yoo Shin, ’Search based software engineering: Techniques, taxonomy, tutorial, in: Empirical Software Engineering and Verification, Springer, 2010.
[71]
Harper K.E., Jiang Zheng, Exploring software architecture context, in: Software Architecture (WICSA), 2015 12th Working IEEE/IFIP Conference on, 2015, pp. 123–126.
[72]
Hearst Marti A., Clustering versus faceted categories for information exploration, Commun. ACM 49 (2006) 59–61.
[73]
Hodgkinson Gerard P., Sadler-Smith Eugene, The dynamics of intuition and analysis in managerial and organizational decision making, Acad. Manag. Perspect. 32 (2018) 473–492.
[74]
Horrocks Ian, Patel-Schneider Peter F., Van Harmelen Frank, From SHIQ and RDF to OWL: The making of a web ontology language, Web Semant.: Sci., Serv. Agents World Wide Web 1 (2003) 7–26.
[75]
Hu, Jian, Wang, Gang, Lochovsky, Fred, Sun, Jian-tao, Chen, Zheng, 2009. Understanding user’s query intent with wikipedia. In: Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on World Wide Web. pp. 471–480.
[76]
Huang Hsieh-Hong, Hsu Jack Shih-Chieh, Ku Cheng-Yuan, Understanding the role of computer-mediated counter-argument in countering confirmation bias, Decis. Support Syst. 53 (2012) 438–447.
[77]
Hübner Paul, Paech Barbara, Interaction-based creation and maintenance of continuously usable trace links between requirements and source code, Empir. Softw. Eng. 25 (2020) 4350–4377.
[78]
ISO/IEC25010:2011, Systems and Software Engineering—Systems and Software Product Quality Re-Quirements and Evaluation (SQuaRE)—System and Software Quality Models, International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, 2011.
[79]
Jansen, Anton, Bosch, Jan, 2005. Software Architecture as a Set of Architectural Design Decisions. In: Proceedings 5th IEEE/IFIP Working Conference on Software Architecture. pp. 109–120.
[80]
Jesse Mathias, Jannach Dietmar, Digital nudging with recommender systems: Survey and future directions, Comput. Hum. Behav. Rep. 3 (2021).
[81]
Jia, Jingdong, Zhang, Pengnan, Capretz, Luiz Fernandos, 2016. Environmental factors influencing individual decision-making behavior in software projects: A systematic literature review. In: Proceedings of the 9th International Workshop on Cooperative and Human Aspects of Software Engineering. pp. 86–92.
[82]
Jones Donald R., Wheeler Patrick, Appan Radha, Saleem Naveed, Understanding and attenuating decision bias in the use of model advice and other relevant information, Decis. Support Syst. 42 (2006) 1917–1930.
[83]
Kahneman Daniel, Thinking, Fast and Slow, Penguin, 2011.
[84]
Kahneman Daniel, Klein Gary, Conditions for intuitive expertise: A failure to disagree, Am. Psychol. 64 (2009) 515.
[85]
Kahneman Daniel, Tversky Amos, Slovic Paul, Judgment under Uncertainty Heuristics and Biases, Cambridge University Press, New York, 1982.
[86]
Kampffmeyer Holger, Zschaler Steffen, Finding the pattern you need: The design pattern intent ontology, in: International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems, Springer, 2007, pp. 211–225.
[87]
Keren Gideon, Cognitive aids and debiasing methods: Can cognitive pills cure cognitive ills?, Adv. Psychol. 68 (1990) 523–552.
[88]
Khatri Naresh, Ng H. Alvin, The role of intuition in strategic decision making, Hum. Relat. 53 (2000) 57–86.
[89]
Kleebaum, Anja, Paech, Barbara, Johanssen, Jan Ole, Bruegge, Bernd, 2021. Continuous Rationale Identification in Issue Tracking and Version Control Systems. In: 9th Working Conference on Software Visualization. VISSOFT 2021.
[90]
Klein Gary, Naturalistic decision making, Hum. Factors: J. Hum. Factors Ergon. Soc. 50 (2008) 456–460.
[91]
Klein Gary, Streetlights and Shadows: Searching for the Keys to Adaptive Decision Making, The MIT Press, 2009.
[92]
Konrad Sascha, Goldsby Heather, Lopez Karli, Cheng Betty H.C., Visualizing requirements in UML models, in: 2006 First International Workshop on Requirements Engineering Visualization, REV’06-RE’06 Workshop, IEEE, 2006, p. 1.
[93]
Kottemann Jeffrey E., Davis Fred D., Remus William E., Computer-assisted decision making: Performance, beliefs, and the illusion of control, Organ. Behav. Hum. Decision Process. 57 (1994) 26–37.
[94]
Kruchten P., The 4+1 view model of architecture, IEEE Software 12 (1995) 42–50.
[95]
Kruchten, P., 2004. An ontology of architectural design decisions in software-intensive systems. In: 2nd Groningen Workshop on Software Variability Management.
[96]
Kruchten P., What do software architects really do?, J. Syst. Softw. 81 (2008) 2413–2416.
[97]
Kruchten P., Lago P., van Vliet H., Building up and reasoning about architectural knowledge, in: Quality of Software Architecture, QoSA, Springer-Verlag, 2006, pp. 43–58.
[98]
Kuhn Adrian, Ducasse Stéphane, Gírba Tudor, Semantic clustering: Identifying topics in source code, Inf. Softw. Technol. 49 (2007) 230–243.
[99]
Kunz W., Rittel H., Issues As Elements of Information Systems, Center for Planning and Development Research, University of California at Berkeley, 1970.
[100]
Lassing N., Rijsenbrij D., Van Vliet H., Viewpoints on modifiability, Int. J. Software Eng. Knowl. Eng. 11 (2001) 453–478.
[101]
Lee, Uichin, Liu, Zhenyu, Cho, Junghoo, 2005. Automatic identification of user goals in web search. In: Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on World Wide Web. pp. 391–400.
[102]
Li Tong, Chen Zhishuai, An ontology-based learning approach for automatically classifying security requirements, J. Syst. Softw. 165 (2020).
[103]
Lonsdale Deryle, Embley David W., Ding Yihong, Xu Li, Hepp Martin, Reusing ontologies and language components for ontology generation, Data Knowl. Eng. 69 (2010) 318–330.
[104]
López Claudia, Codocedo Víctor, Astudillo Hernán, Cysneiros Luiz Marcio, Bridging the gap between software architecture rationale formalisms and actual architecture documents: An ontology-driven approach, Sci. Comput. Programm. 77 (2012) 66–80.
[105]
Maclean A., Young R., Bellotti V., Moran T., Questions, options and criteria: Elements of design space analysis, in: Moran T., Carroll J. (Eds.), Design Rationale - Concepts, Techniques, and Use, Lawrence Erlbaum, New Jersey, 1996.
[106]
Maher Mary Lou, Poon Josiah, Boulanger Sylvie, Formalising design exploration as co-evolution: A combined gene approach, in: Key Centre of Design Computing, University of Sydney, Sydney, 1996.
[107]
Mahesh Kavi, Helmreich Stephen, Wilson Lori, Ontology Development for Machine Translation: Ideology and Methodology, Citeseer, 1996.
[108]
Mangano, Nicolas, LaToza, Thomas D., Petre, Marian, van der Hoek, André, 2014. Supporting informal design with interactive whiteboards. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. pp. 331–340.
[109]
Maule A. John, Can computers help overcome limitations in human decision making?, Intl. J. Hum.–Comput. Interaction 26 (2010) 108–119.
[110]
McCall Raymond, Critical conversations: Feedback as a stimulus to a creativity in software design, Hum. Technol. 6 (2010) 11–37.
[111]
Medhat Walaa, Hassan Ahmed, Korashy Hoda, Sentiment analysis algorithms and applications: A survey, Ain Shams Eng. J. 5 (2014) 1093–1113.
[112]
Mendes Fabiana Freitas, Mendes Emilia, Salleh Norsaremah, The relationship between personality and decision-making: A systematic literature review, Inf. Softw. Technol. 111 (2019) 50–71.
[113]
Menezes Júlio, Gusmão Cristine, Moura Hermano, Risk factors in software development projects: A systematic literature review, Softw. Qual. J. 27 (2019) 1149–1174.
[114]
Mohan Kannan, Jain Radhika, Using traceability to mitigate cognitive biases in software development, Commun. ACM 51 (2008) 110–114.
[115]
Mohanani Rahul, Ralph Paul, Shreeve Ben, Requirements fixation, in: Proceedings of the 36th International Conference on Software Engineering, ACM, 2014, pp. 895–906.
[116]
Mohanani Rahul, Salman Iflaah, Turhan Burak, Rodríguez Pilar, Ralph Paul, Cognitive biases in software engineering: A systematic mapping study, IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. (2018).
[117]
Mooney Raymond J., Bunescu Razvan, Mining knowledge from text using information extraction, ACM SIGKDD Explor. Newsl. 7 (2005) 3–10.
[118]
Moraes Rodrigo, Valiati João Francisco, Neto Wilson P. GaviãO, Document-level sentiment classification: An empirical comparison between SVM and ANN, Expert Syst. Appl. 40 (2013) 621–633.
[119]
Mussweiler Thomas, Strack Fritz, Pfeiffer Tim, Overcoming the inevitable anchoring effect: Considering the opposite compensates for selective accessibility, Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 26 (2000) 1142–1150.
[120]
Nelson Katherine, Language in Cognitive Development: The Emergence of the Mediated Mind, (Cambridge University Press), 1998.
[121]
Nızam Alı, Software project failure process definition, IEEE Access 10 (2022) 34428–34441.
[122]
Noy N.F., McGuinness D.L., Ontology Development 101: A Guide to Creating Your First Ontology, Stanford University, 2001.
[123]
Nuseibeh, Bashar, 2004. Crosscutting requirements. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Aspect-Oriented Software Development. pp. 3–4.
[124]
Nuseibeh, Bashar, Kramer, Jeff, Finkelstein, Anthony, 2003. ViewPoints: Meaningful relationships are difficult!. In: The 25th International Conference on Software Engineering. pp. 676–681.
[125]
Oddy R.N., Information retrieval through man-machine dislogue, J. Doc. 33 (1977) 1–14.
[126]
Pappas Nikolaos, Katsimpras Georgios, Stamatatos Efstathios, An agent-based focused crawling framework for topic-and genre-related web document discovery, in: 2012 IEEE 24th International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence, IEEE, 2012, pp. 508–515.
[127]
Parnas D., Clements P., A rational design process: How and why to fake it, IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 12 (1985) 251–257.
[128]
Perry D.E., Wolf A.L., Foundation for the study of software architecture, ACM SIGSOFT Software Eng. Not. 17 (1992) 40–52.
[129]
Poort, Eltjo R., van Vliet, Hans, 2011. Architecting as a Risk- and Cost Management Discipline. In: Proceedings of the Ninth IEEE/IFIP Working Conference on Software Architecture. pp. 2–11.
[130]
Prana Gede Artha Azriadi, Treude Christoph, Thung Ferdian, Atapattu Thushari, Lo David, Categorizing the content of github readme files, Empir. Softw. Eng. 24 (2019) 1296–1327.
[131]
Pretorius Carianne, Razavian Maryam, Eling Katrin, Langerak Fred, Towards a dual processing perspective of software architecture decision making, in: 2018 IEEE International Conference on Software Architecture Companion, ICSA-C, IEEE, 2018, pp. 48–51.
[132]
Purao Sandeep, Rossi Matti, Bush Ashley, Towards an understanding of the use of problem and design spaces during object-oriented system development, Inf. Organ. 12 (2002) 249–281.
[133]
Ralph Paul, The sensemaking-coevolution-implementation theory of software design, Sci. Comput. Programm. 101 (2015) 21–41.
[134]
Razavian Maryam, Tang Antony, Capilla Rafael, Lago Patricia, In two minds: How reflections influence software design thinking, J. Software: Evol. Process 28 (2016) 394–426.
[135]
Razavian, M., Tang, A., Capilla, R., Lago, P., 2016b. Reflective Approach for Software Design Decision Making. In: 2016 Qualitative Reasoning About Software Architectures. QRASA, pp. 19–26.
[136]
Rizvi Buturab, Bagheri Ebrahim, Gasevic Dragan, A systematic review of distributed agile software engineering, J. Software: Evol. Process 27 (2015) 723–762.
[137]
Robillard Martin P., Marcus Andrian, Treude Christoph, Bavota Gabriele, Chaparro Oscar, Ernst Neil, Gerosa Marco Aurélio, Godfrey Michael, Lanza Michele, Linares-Vásquez Mario, On-demand developer documentation, in: 2017 IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance and Evolution, ICSME, IEEE, 2017, pp. 479–483.
[138]
Rose, Daniel E., Levinson, Danny, 2004. Understanding user goals in web search. In: Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on World Wide Web. pp. 13–19.
[139]
Sánchez-Gordón Mary, Colomo-Palacios Ricardo, Taking the emotional pulse of software engineering—A systematic literature review of empirical studies, Inf. Softw. Technol. 115 (2019) 23–43.
[140]
Scanniello Giuseppe, D’Amico Anna, D’Amico Carmela, D’Amico Teodora, Using the kleinberg algorithm and vector space model for software system clustering, in: 2010 IEEE 18th International Conference on Program Comprehension, IEEE, 2010, pp. 180–189.
[141]
Schneider Christoph, Weinmann Markus, Brocke Jan Vom, Digital nudging: Guiding online user choices through interface design, Commun. ACM 61 (2018) 67–73.
[142]
Schön Donald A., The Reflective Practitioner : How Professionals Think in Action, Basic Books, Nueva York, EUA, 1983.
[143]
Schön Donald A., Problems, frames and perspectives on designing, Des. Stud. 5 (1984) 132–136.
[144]
Schön Donald A., Designing as reflective conversation with the materials of a design situation, Knowl.-Based Syst. 5 (1992) 3–14.
[145]
Schueler Bernhard, Sizov Sergej, Staab Steffen, Management of meta knowledge for rdf repositories, in: International Conference on Semantic Computing, ICSC 2007, IEEE, 2007, pp. 543–550.
[146]
Senker Jacqueline, Tacit knowledge and models of innovation, Ind. Corp. Change 4 (1995) 425–447.
[147]
Sim S. Elliott, Clarke Charles L.A., Holt Richard C., Cox Anthony M., Browsing and searching software architectures, in: Proceedings IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance-1999 (ICSM’99).’software Maintenance for Business Change’(Cat. No. 99CB36360), IEEE, 1999, pp. 381–390.
[148]
Simon Herbert A., The structure of ill structured problems, Artificial Intelligence 4 (1973) 181–201.
[149]
Simon Herbert, Models of Bounded Rationality, MIT Press Cambridge, Mass, 1982.
[150]
Simon Herbert A., The Sciences of the Artificial, The MIT Press, 1996.
[151]
Simon Herbert, Newell Allen, Human Problem Solving: The State of the Theory in 1970, Carnegie-Mellon University, 1972.
[152]
Sonntag Daniel, Ontologies and Adaptivity in Dialogue for Question Answering, IOS Press, 2010.
[153]
Souza Jerffeson, Araújo Allysson Allex, Saraiva Raphael, Soares Pamella, Maia Camila, A Preliminary Systematic Mapping Study of Human Competitiveness of SBSE, Springer International Publishing, Cham, 2018, pp. 131–146.
[154]
Stacy Webb, MacMillan Jean, Cognitive bias in software engineering, Commun. ACM 38 (1995) 57–63.
[155]
Su Moon Ting, Hirsch Christian, Hosking John, Kaitorobase: Visual exploration of software architecture documents, in: 2009 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering, IEEE, 2009, pp. 657–659.
[156]
Taboada Maite, Brooke Julian, Tofiloski Milan, Voll Kimberly, Stede Manfred, Lexicon-based methods for sentiment analysis, Comput. Linguist. 37 (2011) 267–307.
[157]
Talby David, Hazzan Orit, Dubinsky Yael, Keren Arie, Reflections on reflection in agile software development, in: AGILE 2006, AGILE’06, IEEE, 2006, pp. 11–112.
[158]
Tamburri Damian A., Palomba Fabio, Kazman Rick, Success and failure in software engineering: A followup systematic literature review, IEEE Trans. Eng. Manage. 68 (2020) 599–611.
[159]
Tang Antony, Software designers, are you biased?, in: Proceeding of the 6th international workshop on SHAring and Reusing architectural Knowledge, ACM, Waikiki, Honolulu, HI, USA, 2011, pp. 1–8.
[160]
Tang A., Avgeriou P., Jansen A., Capilla R., Babar M. Ali, A comparative study of architecture knowledge management tools, J. Syst. Software (2010) 352–370,.
[161]
Tang Antony, Babar Muhammad Ali, Gorton Ian, Han Jun., A survey of the use and documentation of architecture design rationale, in: Software Architecture, 2005. WICSA 2005. 5th Working IEEE/IFIP Conference on, IEEE, 2005, pp. 89–98.
[162]
Tang Antony, Bex Floris, Schriek Courtney, van der Werf Jan Martijn E.M., Improving software design reasoning–A reminder card approach, J. Syst. Softw. 144 (2018) 22–40.
[163]
Tang Antony, Lau Man F., Software architecture review by association, J. Syst. Softw. 88 (2014) 87–101.
[164]
Tang Antony, Liang Peng, Clerc Viktor, van Vliet Hans, Supporting co-evolving architectural requirements and design through traceability and reasoning, in: Avgeriou Paris, Lago Patricia, Grundy John, Mistrik Ivan (Eds.), Relating Software Requiremens and Software Architecture, 2011.
[165]
Tang Antony, Liang Peng, Van Vliet Hans, Software architecture documentation: The road ahead, in: 2011 Ninth Working IEEE/IFIP Conference on Software Architecture, IEEE, 2011, pp. 252–255.
[166]
Tang Antony, Vliet Hans, Software architecture design reasoning, in: Babar Muhammad Ali, Dingsøyr Torgeir, Lago Patricia, Vliet Hans (Eds.), Software Architecture Knowledge Management, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2009.
[167]
Tang A., van Vliet H., Design strategy and software design effectiveness, IEEE Softw. 29 (2012) 51–55.
[168]
Tang Antony, van Vliet Hans, Software designers satisfice, in: Weyns Danny, Mirandola Raffaela, Crnkovic Ivica (Eds.), Software Architecture, Springer International Publishing, 2015.
[169]
Taylor P., He Ze, Bilgrien Noah, Siegelmann Hava T., Human strategies for multitasking, search, and control improved via real-time memory aid for gaze location, Front. ICT 2 (2015) 15.
[170]
Thaler Richard, Sunstein Cass, Nudge, Penguin, New York, USA, 2008.
[171]
The Standish Group, Chaos report on software projects, in: Project Smart, 2014.
[172]
Treude Christoph, Robillard Martin P., Dagenais Barthélémy, Extracting development tasks to navigate software documentation, IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 41 (2014) 565–581.
[173]
Tversky A., Kahneman D., Judgement under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases, in: Connolly T., Arkes H.R., Hammond K.R. (Eds.), Judgement and Decision Making: An Interdisiplinary Reader, Cambridge University Press, 2000.
[174]
van Heesch Uwe, Avgeriou Paris, Hilliard Rich, Forces on architecture decisions-a viewpoint, in: Software Architecture (WICSA) and European Conference on Software Architecture (ECSA), 2012 Joint Working IEEE/IFIP Conference on, IEEE, 2012, pp. 101–110.
[175]
Van Manen Max, Linking ways of knowing with ways of being practical, Curric. Inq. 6 (1977) 205–228.
[176]
Van Vliet Hans, Software architecture knowledge management, in: 19th Australian Conference on Software Engineering, ASWEC 2008, IEEE, 2008, pp. 24–31.
[177]
van Vliet Hans, Tang Antony, Decision making in software architecture, J. Syst. Softw. 117 (2016) 638–644.
[178]
Wang, Yang, Leon, Pedro Giovanni, Acquisti, Alessandro, Cranor, Lorrie Faith, Forget, Alain, Sadeh, Norman, 2014. A field trial of privacy nudges for facebook. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. pp. 2367–2276.
[179]
Weinmann Markus, Schneider Christoph, Vom Brocke Jan, Digital nudging, Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng. 58 6 (Dec. 2016) (2016) 433–436.
[180]
Weinreich Rainer, Groher Iris, Miesbauer Cornelia, An expert survey on kinds, influence factors and documentation of design decisions in practice, Fut. Gener. Comput Syst. 47 (2015) 145–160.
[181]
Wijerathna Laksri, Aleti Aldeida, Bi Tingting, Tang Antony, Mining and relating design contexts and design patterns from stack overflow, Empir. Softw. Eng. 27 (2021) 8.
[182]
Xu Zhuoming, Ni Yuyan, He Wenjie, Lin Lili, Yan Qin, Automatic extraction of OWL ontologies from UML class diagrams: A semantics-preserving approach, World Wide Web 15 (2012) 517–545.
[183]
Yuan Eric, Malek Sam, Mining software component interactions to detect security threats at the architectural level, in: 2016 13th Working IEEE/IFIP Conference on Software Architecture, WICSA, IEEE, 2016, pp. 211–220.
[184]
Zamir Oren, Etzioni Oren., Grouper: A dynamic clustering interface to web search results, Comput. Netw. 31 (1999) 1361–1374.
[185]
Zhong Yinghong, The framework of total decision support based on knowledge management, in: 2008 International Seminar on Future Information Technology and Management Engineering, IEEE, 2008, pp. 516–520.
[186]
Zimmermann Olaf, Miksovic Christoph, Decisions required vs. decisions made: Connecting enterprise architects and solution architects via guidance models, in: Aligning Enterprise, System, and Software Architectures, IGI Global, 2013.
[187]
Zimmermann Olaf, Wegmann Lukas, Koziolek Heiko, Goldschmidt Thomas, Architectural decision guidance across projects-problem space modeling, decision backlog management and cloud computing knowledge, in: Software Architecture (WICSA), 2015 12th Working IEEE/IFIP Conference on, IEEE, 2015, pp. 85–94.
Index Terms
- The vision of on-demand architectural knowledge systems as a decision-making companion
Index terms have been assigned to the content through auto-classification.
Recommendations
Using systematic mapping to explore software architecture knowledge
SHARK '10: Proceedings of the 2010 ICSE Workshop on Sharing and Reusing Architectural KnowledgeSoftware architectures have played a significant role in determining the success of software systems. In this perspective, a lot of work have been conducted and considerable knowledge in the software architecture area has been accumulated. In another ...
Empirical evaluation of a process to increase consensus in group architectural decision making
ContextMany software architectural decisions are group decisions rather than decisions made by individuals. Consensus in a group of decision makers increases the acceptance of a decision among decision makers and their confidence in that decision. ...
Learning from Each Other: How Are Architectural Mistakes Communicated in Industry?
Software ArchitectureAbstractContext. Own experiences and faulty decisions can be an important source of information for software architects. The experiences and mistakes of other architects can also be valuable information sources. Goal. Under the assumption that the ...
Comments
Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
The Authors.
Publisher
Elsevier Science Inc.
United States
Publication History
Published: 01 April 2023
Author Tags
Qualifiers
- Research-article
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- 0Total Citations
- 0Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)0
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 14 Sep 2024
Other Metrics
Citations
View Options
View options
Get Access
Login options
Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.
Sign in