A computational argumentation methodology for capturing and analyzing design rationale arising from multiple perspectives |
| |
| Affiliation: | 1. Department of Environmental Health, College of Public Health, East Tennessee State University, Johnson City, TN, USA;2. Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Colorado at Boulder, Boulder, CO, USA;3. Department of Environmental Health Sciences, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA;4. Department of Environmental Engineering Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA;1. Department of Food Science and Technology, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, NE, USA;2. Department of Agronomy and Horticulture, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, NE, USA |
| |
| Abstract: | Contemporary development methodologies provide for the traceability of design decisions to functional requirements. However, they fail to adequately provide this type of traceability for non-functional requirements. This paper describes a methodology for the computational evaluation of the impact of design decisions on the non-functional requirements of the various stakeholders involved in the development of a system. A design dialog process based upon a design argumentation model is described. The dialog process provides for the capture of design rationale and for their management. Fuzzy inference is used to identify conflicts, to simply arguments, and to measure the favorability of an argument. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
