Enhanced design checking involving constraints, collaboration and assumptions

Design Computing and Cognition '06

Volumn , Issue , 2006, Pages 655-674

  Burge, Janet ^a   Cross, Valerie ^a   Kiper, James ^a   Maynard Zhang, Pedrito ^a   Cornford, Stephan ^b  

^a MIAMI UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

NASA;

COLLABORATIVE ARGUMENTATIONS; DESIGN ALTERNATIVES; DESIGN CHECKING; DESIGN PROCESS; DESIGN RATIONALE; ENGINEERING DESIGN; SPACECRAFT DESIGN;

DESIGN;

EID: 77952422957     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (48)

1. Andreasen, M and Olesen, J: 1990, The concept of dispositions, Journal of Engineering Design 1(1): 17-36.
2. Andreka, H, Ryan, M and Schobbens, PY: 2002, Operators and laws for combining preference relations, Journal of Logic and Computation 12(1):13-53. (Pubitemid 34239760)
3. Boehm, B and Bose, P: 1994, A collaborative spiral software process model based on theory W, in Proc. of the 3rd International Conf. on the Software Process, IEEE Computer Society Press, CA, pp. 59-68.
4. Bracewell, R, Ahmed, S and Wallace, K: 2004, DREd and design folders, a way of capturing, storing, and passing on knowledge generated during design projects, in Proc. of the ASME 2004 Design Automation Conf. Salt Lake City, USA, pp. 1 -22.
5. Bratthall, L, Johansson, E and Regnel, B: 2000, Is a design rationale vital when predicting change impact? - A controlled experiment on software architecture evolution, in Proc. of the Int. Conf. on Product Focused Software Process Improvement, Finland, pp. 126-139.
6. Brown, DC and Chandrasekaran, B: 1985, Expert systems for a class of mechanical design activity, in J.S. Gero (ed.), Knowledge Engineering in Computer-Aided Design,North Holland, pp. 259-282.
7. Brown, DC: 1993, Intelligent Computer Aided Design, in A Kent and JG Williams (eds), ncyclopedia ofComputer Science and Technology, Marcel Dekker, pp. 28.
8. Burge, J and Brown, DC: 2000, Inferencing over design rationale, in JS Gero (ed), Artificial Intelligence in Design '00, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Netherlands, pp. 611-629.
9. Burge, JE and Brown, DC: 2004, An integrated approach for software design checking using rationale, in JS Gero (ed), Design Computing and Cognition '04,Kluwer Academic Publishers Netherlands 557-576
10. Publishers, Netherlands, pp. 557-576. Burge, JE: 2005, Software Engineering Using design RATionale, PhD Thesis, http://www.wpi.edu/Pubs/ETD/ Available/etd-050205-085625/, WPI.
11. Burge, JE and Brown, DC: 2006, Rationale-based support for software maintenance, in A Dutoit, R McCall, I Mistrik, B Paech (eds), Rationale Management in Software Engineering, Springer (to appear).
12. Cantwell, J: 1998, Resolving conflicting information, Journal of Logic, Language, and Information 7: 191-220.
13. Chandrasekaran B, Goel AK and Iwasaki Y: 1993, Functional representation as design rationale, Computer pp. 48-56.
14. Conklin J and Yakemovic KB: 1991, A process-oriented approach to design rationale, Human-Computer Interaction 6(3-4): 357-393.
15. Conklin, J and Burgess-Yakemovic, K: 1995, A process-oriented approach to design rationale, in T Moran and J Carroll (eds), Design Rationale Concepts, Techniques, and Use, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ, pp. 293-428.
16. Conklin, J: 1996, Capturing organizational memory, GDSS Working Paper, http://www.touchstone.com/tr/wp/CapOrgMem.html
17. Conklin, J, Selvin, A, Buckingham Shum, S and Sierhuis, M: 2003, Keynote address, in H Weigan, G Goldkuhl, A de Moor (eds), Proc. ofthe Language-Action Perspective on Communication Modelling, Tilburg, The Netherlands.
18. Conklin, J, Selvin, A, Buckingham Shum, S and Sierhuis, M: 2001, Facilitated hypertext for collective sensemaking, 15 years on from gIBIS, Technical Report, Knowledge Media Institute, KMI-TR-112.
19. de Kleer, J: 1986, An assumption-based truth maintenance system, Artificial Intelligence 28(2): 127-62.
20. Doyle, J: 1979, A truth maintenance system, Artificial Intelligence 12(3): 231-272.
21. Eris O, Hansen PHK, Mabogunje A and Leifer L: 1999, Toward a pragmatic ontology for product development projects in small teams, Proceedings ofInternational Conference on Engineering Design, Technische Universitat Munchen, Munich, pp. 1645-1950.
22. Fowler, DW, Sleeman, D, Wills, G, Lyon, T and Knott, D: 2004, The designers' workbench: Using ontologies and constraints for configuration, Proc. of The 24th SGAI International Conf. on Innovative Techniques and Applications ofAI, Cambridge, UK, pp. 209-221.
23. Garcia, A, Howard, H and Stefik, M: 1993, Active Design Documents: A New Approach for Supporting Documentation in Preliminary Routine Design, TR 82, Stanford Univ. Center for Integrated Facility Engineering, Stanford, CA.
24. Gero, JS: 1990, Design prototypes: A knowledge representation schema for design, AI Magazine 11(4): 26-36.
25. Gruber, T:1990, Model-Based Explanation ofDesign Rationale, Technical Report KSL 90-33, Knowledge Systems Laboratory, Stanford University.
26. Howard, RA and Matheson, JE: 1984, Influence diagrams, Principles and Applications of Decision Analysis 2:690-718.
27. Hubka, V and Eder, WE: 1996, Design Science, Springer-Verlang, London.
28. Japikse, R, Langdon, PM and Wallace, KM: 2003, Structuring engineering design information using a model of how engineers' intuitively structure design information, Proc. of the, 14th International Conf. on Engineering Design, Sweden, pp. 433-434.
29. Karacapilidis, N and Papadias, D: 2001, Computer supported argumentation and collaborative decision making: The HERMES system, Information Systems 26(4): 259-277. (Pubitemid 33046259)
30. Karsenty, L: 1996, An empirical evaluation of design rationale documents, Proc.ofthe Conf. on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Vancouver, BC, pp. 150-156.
31. King, JMP and Banares-Alcantara, R: 1997, Extending the scope and use of design rationale records, AIEDAM11(2):155-167. (Pubitemid 127588702)
32. Kitamura, Y, Kashiwase, M, Fuse, M and Mizoguchi R: 2004, Deployment of an ontological framework of functional design knowledge, Advanced Engineering Informatics 18 (2): 115-127.
33. Klein, M: 1997, An exception handling approach to enhancing consistency, completeness and correctness in collaborative requirements capture, Concurrent Engineering Research and Applications 5(1): 37-46. (Pubitemid 127679901)
34. Lee, J: 1997, Design rationale systems: understanding the issues, IEEE Expert 12(3): 78-85. (Pubitemid 127782240)
35. Lin, J, Fox, MS and Bilgic, TA: 1996, Requirement ontology for engineering design, Concurrent Engineering: Research and Applications 4(3): 279-291.
36. MacLean, A, Young, RM, Bellotti, V and Moran, TP: 1995, Questions, options and criteria: elements of design space analysis, in T Moran and J Carroll (eds), Design Rationale Concepts, Techniques, and Use, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, NJ, pp. 201-251.
37. Matzkevich, I and Abramson, B: 1992, The topological fusion of Bayes nets, in Proc. UAI'92, pp. 191-198.
38. Maynard-Reid II, P and Chajewska, U: 2001, Aggregating learned probabilistic beliefs, in Proc. of the 17th Conf. on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence (UAI'01), pp. 354-361.
39. Maynard-Reid II, P and Shoham, Y: 2001, Belief fusion: Aggregating pedigreed belief states, Journal of Logic, Language, and Information 10(2): 183-209. (Pubitemid 33808880)
40. Maynard-Zhang, P and Lehmann, D: 2003, Representing and aggregating conflicting beliefs. Journal of Artificial Intelligence (JAIR) 19: 155-203. (Pubitemid 41525919)
41. Oberto, R: 2002, FAIR/DART Option #2, Advanced Projects Design Team, NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory.
42. Pena-Mora, F, Sriram, D and Logcher, R: 1995, Design rationale for computer-supported conflict mitigation, ASCE Journal ofComputing in Civil Engineering 9(1): 57-72.
43. Pennock, DM, Maynard-Reid II, P, Giles, CL and Horvitz, EA: 2000, Normative examination ofensemble learning algorithms, in Proc. ICML'00, pp. 735-742.
44. Sim, S and Duffy, A: 1994, A new perspective to design intent and design rationale, in Artificial Intelligence in Design Workshop Notes for Representing and Using Design Rationale, pp. 4-12.
45. Taura, T and Kubota, A: 1999, A study on engineering history base, in Research in Engineering Design 11(1): 45-54.
46. Tong, C and Sriram, D: 1992, Introduction, in C Tong and D Sriram (eds) Artificial Intelligence in Engineering Design, Volume 1, pp. 1-53.
47. Wellman, M: 1985, Reasoning about Preference Models, Technical Report MIT/LCS/TR- 340, Laboratory forComputerScience, MIT.
48. von Winterfeldt, D and Edwards, W: 1986, Decision Analysis and Behavioral Research, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.