Advertisement

Using Argumentative, Semantic Grammar for Capture of Design Rationale

  • Raymond McCallEmail author
Conference paper

Abstract

Efforts to use design rationale (DR) to improve design have been frustrated by difficulties in capturing such rationale in a format structured by a DR schema, such as PHI, QOC, or DRL. These difficulties disappear when rationale is captured as unstructured transcripts of communication among collaborating designers, but the lack of structure in such transcripts severely hinders retrieval. This problem can be solved by parsing transcripts of collaborative design using an argumentative, semantic grammar to produce PHI-structured DR. The ASGARD (Argumentative, Semantic Grammar for Analysis of Rationale for Design) software uses this technique to extract structured DR from transcripts of collaborative architectural design. Preliminary tests were made to see if ASGARD could successfully model and parse three collaborative design transcripts. Results of these tests suggest that this approach has promise for automating DR capture.

References

  1. 1.
    Selvin AM, Buckingham Shum SJ, Aakhus M (2010) The practice level in participatory design rationale: studying practitioner moves and choices. Hum Technol 6(1):71–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Fischer G, Grudin J, Lemke A, McCall R, Ostwald J, Reeves B, Shipman F (1992) Supporting indirect collaborative design with integrated knowledge-based design environments. Hum Comput Interact, 7(3):281–314, L. Erlbaum Associated, Hillsdale, NJGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Burge JE, Brown DC (2006) Rationale-based support for software maintenance. In: Dutoit AH, McCall R, Mistrik I, Paech B (eds) Rationale management in software engineering. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 273–296CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hordijk WTB, Wieringa RJ (2006) Reusable rationale blocks: improving quality and efficiency of design choices. In: Dutoit AH, McCall R, Mistrik I, Paech B (eds) Rationale management in software engineering. Springer, London, pp 353–371CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Moran TP, Carroll JM (eds) (1996) Design rationale: concepts, techniques, and use. L. Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dutoit AH, McCall R, Mistrik I, Paech B (eds) (2007) Rationale management in software engineering. Springer, New York NYGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Horner J, Atwood ME (2006) Effective design rationale: understanding the barriers. In: Dutoit AH, McCall R, Mistrik I, Paech B (eds) Rationale management in software engineering. Springer, New York NY, pp 73–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Myers K, Zumel N, Garcia P Automated capture of rationale for the detailed design process. In: Proceedings of the 11th national conference on innovative applications of artificial intelligence, AAAI Press, CA, pp. 876–883Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Shipman FM, McCall R (1997) Integrating different perspectives on design rationale: supporting the emergence of design rationale from design communication. Artif Intell Eng Des Anal Manuf 11:141–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Yu D, Deng L (2015) Automatic speech recognition: a deep learning approach. Springer, LondonzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Watanabe S, Delcroix M, Metze F, Hershey JR (2017) New era for robust speech recognition: exploiting deep learning. Springer, Cham, SwitzerlandCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    McCall R (1991) PHI: a conceptual foundation for design hypermedia. Des Stud 12(1):30–41 (Elsevier)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rittel HWJ (1972) On the planning crisis: systems analysis of the ‘first and second generations’. Bedriftskonomen 8:390–396Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rittel HWJ, Webber M (1973) Dilemmas in a general theory of planning rittel. Policy Sci 4:155–169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kunz W, Rittel HWJ (2010) Issue as elements of information systems. In: Protzen J-P, Harris DJ (eds) The universe of design: Horst Rittel’s theories of design and planning. Routledge, New York NY, pp 181–186Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Moran TP, Carroll JM (eds) (1996) Design rationale: concepts, techniques, and use. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    MacLean A, Young RM, Bellotti VME, Moran TP (1996) Questions, options and criteria: elements of design space analysis. Design rationale: concepts, techniques and use. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ, pp 53–105Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lee J (1991) Extending the Potts and Bruns model for recording design rationale. In: Proceedings of the thirteenth international conference on software engineering, ACM, New York NY, pp. 114–125Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    McCall R (1979) On the structure and use of systems in design. Dissertation, University of California, Berkeley, 1978, University MicrofilmsGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    McCall R (1989) MIKROPLIS: a hypertext system for design. Des Stud 10(4):228–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Conklin J, Begeman M (1988) gIBIS: a hypertext tool for exploratory policy discussion. ACM Trans Off Inf Syst 4:303–331CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    McCall R, Bennett P, d’Oronzio P, Ostwald J, Shipman F, Wallace N (1990) PHIDIAS: integrating CAD graphics into dynamic hypertext. In: Rizk A, Streitz N, Andre J (eds) Hypertext: concepts, systems and applications (Proceedings of the 1990 European Conference on Hypertext: ECHT ‘90). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 152–165Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Pena-Mora F, Vadhavkar S (1997) Augmenting design patterns with design rationale. Artif Intell Eng Des Anal Manufac 11:93–108 (DRIM)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Bracewell RH, Wallace KM (2003) A tool for capturing design rationale. In: International conference on engineering design ICED 03, Stockholm, 19–21 Aug 2003 (DReD)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Buckingham Shum SJ, Selvin AM, Sierhuis M, Conklin J, Haley CB, Nuseibeh B (2006) Hypermedia support for argumentation-based rationale: 15 years on from gIBIS and QOC. In: Dutoit AH, McCall R, Mistrik PB (eds) Rationale management in software enginering. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 111–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Schneider K (2006) Rationale as by-product. In: Dutoit AH, McCall R, Mistrik I, Paech B (eds) Rationale management in software engineering. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 91–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    McCall R. (2013) Critical Conversations: Feedback as a Stimulus to Creativity in Software Design. In: Carroll J. (eds) Creativity and Rationale. Human–Computer Interaction Series, vol 20. Springer, LondonGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Mix K, Jensen CG, Ryskamp J (2010) Automated design rationale capture within the CAx environment. Comput Aided Des Appl 7(3):361–375CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Jurafsky D, Martin J (2009) Speech and language processing. Pearson Education, Upper Saddle River, NJGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Sivanandam SN, Janaki Meena M (2009) Theory of computation. IK International Publishing House, New Delhi, pp 235–236Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of ColoradoBoulderUSA

Personalised recommendations