The efficacy of matching information systems development methodologies with application characteristics – an empirical study

Methodologies for the development of knowledge-based systems, 1982–2002

“…In Sections 3 and 4, we consider eight methodologies for the development of KBSs. This section uses research in methodology assessment, drawing upon the literature from the validation and verification community (Hilal & Soltan, 1991;Howard et al, 1999;Miller, 1990;Mitev, 1994;Nandhakumar & Avison, 1999;Plant, 1997;Preece, 1995;Wasserman & Freman, 1983). 6 We make an empirical evaluation of the rigour and quality of the systems that may be derived from the discussed approaches.…”

“…This research includes development of software architectural styles that pertain to knowledge-based system structure and behaviour (Gamble et al, 1999). The overall aim of KBS research should enable developers to create robust, rigorous and provably correct systems that can be integrated with other systems such that they become a part of "conventional" software development (Howard et al, 1999;Mitev, 1994). However, it is envisioned that the development of methodologies that facilitate flexible, robust and verifiable systems will continue to be a significant research challenge as the breadth and nature of software technologies continues to diversify, each of which may interface with or embed a knowledge-based component.…”

Manufacturing knowledge verification in design support systems

“…Literature dating back to the late 1990's identified the need for KBS research that enables developers to create robust, rigorous and provably correct systems that can be integrated with other systems such that they become a part of "conventional" software development (Howard et al, 1999;Mitev, 1994). A more recent survey ofKBS life cycle methodologies, including MOKA and ComrnonKADS, has gone on to identify the need for totally rigorous frameworks based upon solid theoretical principles, and focused formal mathematical research into knowledge-based design (plant and Gamble, 2003).…”

Software engineering process theory: A multi-method comparison of Sensemaking–Coevolution–Implementation Theory and Function–Behavior–Structure Theory

“…">Related WorkWhile a comprehensive review of theories used in SE is beyond the scope of this paper, Hannay et al [4] identified 40 theories that were experimentally evaluated in studies published between 1993 and 2002. However, only two of these were used in more than one article: 1) the Theory of Cognitive Fit, which posits that the alignment between a task and the presentation of information needed for the task affects task performance [19], [20] and 2) the theory that reading techniques affect software inspection effectiveness [21]-[23].In the following decade, empirical research continued gaining prominence in SE, with, for example, the Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement conference beginning in 2007. However, most empirical work in SE continues either to evaluate specific tools and techniques (e.g., bug prediction approaches [24]) or to investigate specific SE phenomena (e.g., source code clone maintenance [25]).…”