DOCSLIB.ORG

Software Development Lifecycle Models

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Software Development Lifecycle Models ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes Page 8 May 2010 Volume 35 Number 3 SDLC, then, is a conceptual framework or process that consid- ers the structure of the stages involved in the development of an application from its initial feasibility study through to its deploy- ment in the field and maintenance. There are several models that describe various approaches to the SDLC process. An SDLC model is generally used to describe the steps that are followed within the life-cycle framework. It is necessary to bear in mind that a model is different from a methodology in the sense that the former describes what to do whereas the latter, in addition, describes how to do it. So a model is descriptive whilst a methodology is prescriptive. As a result, we consider SDLC models in this article in terms of their relev- ance to particular types of software projects. This approach re- cognizes the context in which a SDLC model is used. For example, the waterfall model may be the best model to use when developing an enterprise relational database but it may not be the optimum model when developing a web-based application. I therefore consider the models for three distinct use cases, or soft- ware categories, in order to provide a context for their applica- tion, as follows: Software Development Lifecycle Category 1.Software that provides back-end functionality. Models Typically, this is software that provides a service to Nayan B. Ruparelia other applications. Hewlett-Packard Enterprise Services Category 2. Software that provides a service to an end-user or to < [email protected] > an end-user application. Typically, this would be DOI: 10.1145/1764810.1764814 software that encapsulates business logic or formats http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1764810.1764814 data to make it more understandable to an end-user. Category 3.Software that provides a visual interface to an end- Abstract user. Typically, this is a front-end application that is a graphical user interface (GUI). This history column article provides a tour of the main soft- SDLC models, also, may be categorized as falling under three ware development life cycle (SDLC) models. (A lifecycle covers broad groups: linear, iterative and a combination of linear and all the stages of software from its inception with requirements iterative models. A linear model is a sequential one where one definition through to fielding and maintenance.) System devel- stage, upon its completion, irrevocably leads to the initiation of opment lifecycle models have drawn heavily on software and so the next stage. An iterative model, on the other hand, ensures that the two terms can be used interchangeably in terms of SDLC, all the stages of the model shall be revisited in future; the idea especially since software development in this respect encom- being that development remains a constant endeavor for im- passes software systems development. Because the merits of se- provement throughout its lifecycle. A combined model recognizes lecting and using an SDLC vary according to the environment in that the iterative development process can be halted at a certain which software is developed as well as its application, I discuss stage. three broad categories for consideration when analyzing the rela- Although there is an abundance of SDLC models in existence, tive merits of SDLC models. I consider the waterfall model be- we shall consider the most important ones or those that have fore the other models because it has had a profound effect on gained popularity. These include: the waterfall, spiral, unified, software development, and has additionally influenced many incrementing, rapid application development, the v and the w SDLC models prevalent today. Thereafter, I consider some of the models. mainstream models and finish with a discussion of what the fu- ture could hold for SDLC models. Waterfall Model Keywords: SDLC, SEN History Column, Waterfall, Spiral, The waterfall model, also known as the cascade model, was Wheel-and-spoke, Unified, RAD, Incremental, B-model, V- first documented by Benington [1] in 1956 and modified by model. Winston Royce [2] in 1970. It has underpinned all other models Introduction since it created a firm foundation for requirements to be defined SDLC is an acronym that is used to describe either software or and analyzed prior to any design or development. systems development life-cycles. Although the concepts between The original cascade model of Bennington recommended that the two are the same, one refers to the life-cycle of software whe- software be developed in stages: operational analysisĺ RSHU a- reas the other to that of a system that encompasses software de- tional specification ĺGHVLJQ and coding specifications ĺGHYH l- velopment. In this article, software development is emphasized opment ĺWHVWLQJĺGHSOR\PHQWĺHYDOXDWLRQ%\UHFRJQL]LQJ although the same principles can be transmuted to systems. Also, that there could be unforeseen design difficulties when a baseline most of the innovation and thought leadership in terms of devis- is created at the end of each stage, Royce enhanced this model by ing models and concepts has come from software development, providing a feedback loop so that each preceding stage could be and systems development has borrowed heavily from software revisited. This iteration is shown in Figure 1 using red arrows for development as a result. ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes Page 9 May 2010 Volume 35 Number 3 the process flow; this allowed for the stages to overlap in addition The waterfall model is the most efficient way for creating to the preceding stage to be revisited. But Royce also felt that this software in category 1 discussed earlier. Examples for this would arrangement could prove inadequate since the iteration may need be relational databases, compilers or secure operating systems. to transcend the succeeding-preceding stage pair’s iteration. This would be the case at the end of the evaluation (or testing) stage B-Model when you may need to iterate to the design stage bypassing the In 1988, Birrell and Ould discussed an extension to the water- development stage or at the end of the design stage where you fall model that they called the b-model [3]. By extending the op- may need to revisit the requirements definition stage bypassing erational life-cycle (denoted as the maintenance cycle) and then the analysis stage. That way, the design and the requirements, attaching it to the waterfall model, they devised the b-model as respectively, are redefined should the testing or the design war- shown in Figure 2. This was done to ensure that constant im- rant. This is illustrated in Figure 1 by the dashed arrows that show provement of the software or system would become part of the a more complex feedback loop. Further, Royce suggested that a development stages. Also, they felt that an alternative to obsoles- preliminary design stage could be inserted between the require- cence needed to be captured so that enhanced or even newer sys- ments and analysis stages. He felt that this would address the cen- tems could be developed as spin-offs from the initial system. tral role that the design phase plays in minimizing risks by being re-visited several times as the complex feedback loop of Figure 1 shows. Figure 1: Waterfall model with Royce’s iterative feedback. When referring to the waterfall model in this article, I shall mean Royce’s modified version of Benington’s cascade model. One aspect of the waterfall model is its requirement for docu- mentation. Royce suggested that at least six distinct types of doc- ument be produced: 1) Requirements document during the requirements stage. 2) Preliminary design specification during the preliminary design stage. 3) Interface design specification during the design stage. Figure 2: The b-model extends the waterfall model. 4) Final design specification that is actively revised and up- In a sense, the b-model was an attempt to modify the waterfall dated over each visit of the design stage; this is further up- by creating an evolutionary enhancement process that was cap- dated during the development and validation stages. tured by the spiral model that we shall discuss later. The b-model, 5) Test plan during the design stage; this is later updated however, is more suitable to the development of category 1 soft- with test results during the validation or testing stage. ware like its cousin, the waterfall. 6) Operations manual or instructions during the deployment stage. Incremental Model Quality assurance is built into the waterfall model by splitting The incremental model, also known as the iterative waterfall each stage in two parts: one part performs the work as the stage’s model, can be viewed as a three dimensional representation of the name suggests and the other validates or verifies it. For instance, waterfall model. The z-axis contains a series of waterfall models the design stage incorporates verification (to assess whether it is to represent the number of iterations that would be made in order fit for purpose), the development stage has unit and integration to improve the functionality of the end product incrementally. testing, and the validation stage contains system testing as its part The incremental model, in this sense, is a modification to the wa- and parcel. terfall that approaches the spiral model. ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes Page 10 May 2010 Volume 35 Number 3 The main strengths of this model are: the spiral model adds user involvement during its risk reduction i. Feedback from earlier iterations can be incorporated in activities whereas the v and the waterfall models incorporate it the current iteration. during the initial requirements definition phase. Additionally, the ii. Stakeholders can be involved through the iterations, and risks and opportunities feature of the vee+ mean that certain stag- so helps to identify architectural risks earlier.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Sysml Distilled: a Brief Guide to the Systems Modeling Language
    ptg11539604 Praise for SysML Distilled “In keeping with the outstanding tradition of Addison-Wesley’s techni- cal publications, Lenny Delligatti’s SysML Distilled does not disappoint. Lenny has done a masterful job of capturing the spirit of OMG SysML as a practical, standards-based modeling language to help systems engi- neers address growing system complexity. This book is loaded with matter-of-fact insights, starting with basic MBSE concepts to distin- guishing the subtle differences between use cases and scenarios to illu- mination on namespaces and SysML packages, and even speaks to some of the more esoteric SysML semantics such as token flows.” — Jeff Estefan, Principal Engineer, NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory “The power of a modeling language, such as SysML, is that it facilitates communication not only within systems engineering but across disci- plines and across the development life cycle. Many languages have the ptg11539604 potential to increase communication, but without an effective guide, they can fall short of that objective. In SysML Distilled, Lenny Delligatti combines just the right amount of technology with a common-sense approach to utilizing SysML toward achieving that communication. Having worked in systems and software engineering across many do- mains for the last 30 years, and having taught computer languages, UML, and SysML to many organizations and within the college setting, I find Lenny’s book an invaluable resource. He presents the concepts clearly and provides useful and pragmatic examples to get you off the ground quickly and enables you to be an effective modeler.” — Thomas W. Fargnoli, Lead Member of the Engineering Staff, Lockheed Martin “This book provides an excellent introduction to SysML.
    [Show full text]
  • Applications of Reinforcement Learning to Routing and Virtualization in Computer Networks
    Applications of Reinforcement Learning to Routing and Virtualization in Computer Networks by Soroush Haeri B. Eng., Multimedia University, Malaysia, 2010 Dissertation Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the School of Engineering Science Faculty of Applied Science © Soroush Haeri 2016 SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY Spring 2016 All rights reserved. However, in accordance with the Copyright Act of Canada, this work may be reproduced without authorization under the conditions for “Fair Dealing.” Therefore, limited reproduction of this work for the purposes of private study, research, criticism, review and news reporting is likely to be in accordance with the law, particularly if cited appropriately. Abstract Computer networks and reinforcement learning algorithms have substantially advanced over the past decade. The Internet is a complex collection of inter-connected networks with a numerous of inter-operable technologies and protocols. Current trend to decouple the network intelligence from the network devices enabled by Software-Defined Networking (SDN) provides a centralized implementation of network intelligence. This offers great computational power and memory to network logic processing units where the network intelligence is implemented. Hence, reinforcement learning algorithms viable options for addressing a variety of computer networking challenges. In this dissertation, we propose two applications of reinforcement learning algorithms in computer networks. We first investigate the applications of reinforcement learning for deflection routing in buffer- less networks. Deflection routing is employed to ameliorate packet loss caused by contention in buffer-less architectures such as optical burst-switched (OBS) networks. We present a framework that introduces intelligence to deflection routing (iDef).
    [Show full text]
  • Collaboration Analytics Need More Comprehensive Models and Methods. an Opinion Paper Areum Han1, Florian Krieger2, Samuel Greiff3
    Volume 8(1), 13–29. http://doi.org/10.18608/jla.2021.7288 Collaboration Analytics Need More Comprehensive Models and Methods. An Opinion Paper Areum Han1, Florian Krieger2, Samuel Greiff3 Abstract As technology advances, learning analytics is expanding to include students’ collaboration settings. Despite their increasing application in practice, some types of analytics might not fully capture the comprehensive educational contexts in which students’ collaboration takes place (e.g., when data is collected and processed without predefined models, which forces users to make conclusions without sufficient contextual information). Furthermore, existing definitions and perspectives on collaboration analytics are incongruent. In light of these circumstances, this opinion paper takes a collaborative classroom setting as context and explores relevant comprehensive models for collaboration analytics. Specifically, this paper is based on Pei-Ling Tan and Koh’s ecological lens (2017, Situating learning analytics pedagogically: Towards an ecological lens. Learning: Research and Practice, 3(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/23735082.2017.1305661), which illustrates the co-emergence of three interactions among students, teachers, and content interwoven with time. Moreover, this paper suggests several factors to consider in each interaction when executing collaboration analytics. Agendas and recommendations for future research are also presented. Notes for Practice • Studies of educational contexts using collaboration analytics are being implemented, but some analytics practices may unintentionally fail to fully capture the comprehensive context (e.g., when users without sufficient contextual information must make final decisions based on data collected without predefined learning models). Furthermore, definitions and perspectives on collaboration analytics vary across disciplines and underlying perspectives on collaboration.
    [Show full text]
  • A Feature-Based Survey of Model View Approaches Hugo Bruneliere, Erik Burger, Jordi Cabot, Manuel Wimmer
    A Feature-based Survey of Model View Approaches Hugo Bruneliere, Erik Burger, Jordi Cabot, Manuel Wimmer To cite this version: Hugo Bruneliere, Erik Burger, Jordi Cabot, Manuel Wimmer. A Feature-based Survey of Model View Approaches. Software and Systems Modeling, Springer Verlag, 2019, 18 (3), pp.1931-1952. 10.1007/s10270-017-0622-9. hal-01590674 HAL Id: hal-01590674 https://hal.inria.fr/hal-01590674 Submitted on 19 Sep 2017 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Software and Systems Modeling (SoSyM) manuscript No. (will be inserted by the editor) A Feature-based Survey of Model View Approaches Hugo Bruneliere · Erik Burger · Jordi Cabot · Manuel Wimmer Received: date / Accepted: date Abstract When dealing with complex systems, information is very often frag- mented across many different models expressed within a variety of (modeling) languages. To provide the relevant information in an appropriate way to dif- ferent kinds of stakeholders, (parts of) such models have to be combined and potentially revamped by focusing on concerns of particular interest for them. This work has been partially funded by the MoNoGe national collaborative project (French FUI #15), the Electronic Component Systems for European Leadership (ECSEL) Joint Un- dertaking & the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research/innovation program under grant agreement No.
    [Show full text]
  • Software Development Methods and Usability : a Systematic Literature Review
    Linköping University | IDA 30 hp/Master Thesis |Computer Science Autumn term 2017 | LIU-IDA/LITH-EX-A—17/055--SE Software Development Methods and Usability : A Systematic Literature Review Prabhu Raj Prem Kumar Tutor, Johan Åberg, Linköpings universitet Examiner, Kristian Sandahl, Linköpings universitet 2 Final Thesis Software Development Methods and Usability: A Systematic Literature Review by Prabhu Raj Prem Kumar [email protected] Supervisor: Johan Åberg, Linköpings universitet Examiner: Kristian Sandahl, Linköpings universitet Linköping, 4th December, 2017 3 Upphovsrätt Detta dokument hålls tillgängligt på Internet – eller dess framtida ersättare – under en längre tid från publiceringsdatum under förutsättning att inga extra-ordinära omständigheter uppstår. Tillgång till dokumentet innebär tillstånd för var och en att läsa, ladda ner, skriva ut enstaka kopior för enskilt bruk och att använda det oförändrat för ickekommersiell forskning och för undervisning. Överföring av upphovsrätten vid en senare tidpunkt kan inte upphäva detta tillstånd. All annan användning av dokumentet kräver upphovsmannens medgivande. För att garantera äktheten, säkerheten och tillgängligheten finns det lösningar av teknisk och administrativ art. Upphovsmannens ideella rätt innefattar rätt att bli nämnd som upphovsman i den omfattning som god sed kräver vid användning av dokumentet på ovan beskrivna sätt samt skydd mot att dokumentet ändras eller presenteras i sådan form eller i sådant sammanhang som är kränkande för upphovsmannens litterära eller konstnärliga anseende eller egenart. För ytterligare information om Linköping University Electronic Press se förlagets hemsida http://www.ep.liu.se/ Copyright The publishers will keep this document online on the Internet - or its possible replacement - for a considerable time from the date of publication barring exceptional circumstances.
    [Show full text]
  • Adopting Agile Project Management Methods in Software Projects Involving Outsourcing
    Adopting Agile Project Management Methods in Software Projects Involving Outsourcing By Nivarthana Warnakulasooriya A thesis submitted to the Victoria University of Wellington In partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Commerce Victoria University of Wellington 2016 Abstract With the evolvement of how software was built, how quickly the initial requirements change, how fast new technologies were appearing in tech world and evolving innovation needs of dynamic businesses, the software industry was feeling the need for a better way of managing projects. In 2002 a group of well-known software professionals got together to develop a set of industry guidelines now known as ‘The Agile Manifesto’ to help standardize this new way of managing projects which helped lay foundations to now widely used ‘The Agile Project Management methodology’. While Agile was gaining momentum, the software development world saw the rise of another way of developing software which is known as outsourcing. Outsourcing in commonly referred form involves two or more geographically dispersed teams collaborating to develop the same software. However the fusion of agile methodology with outsourcing opens up new challenges which includes cultural, geographical and time barriers. This study tries to understand how well agile works with outsourced projects using a quantitative approach. The study will also look at how factors physical distance, time and culture impact success of agile in outsourced projects using a quantitative approach. Identifying factor/factors which has the biggest impact on success of agile in outsourced project will also help identify and prioritize which principles and practices need to be fixed first.
    [Show full text]
  • A Feature-Based Survey of Model View Approaches Hugo Bruneliere, Erik Burger, Jordi Cabot, Manuel Wimmer
    A Feature-based Survey of Model View Approaches Hugo Bruneliere, Erik Burger, Jordi Cabot, Manuel Wimmer To cite this version: Hugo Bruneliere, Erik Burger, Jordi Cabot, Manuel Wimmer. A Feature-based Survey of Model View Approaches. Software and Systems Modeling, Springer Verlag, 2019, 18 (3), pp.1931-1952. 10.1007/s10270-017-0622-9. hal-01590674 HAL Id: hal-01590674 https://hal.inria.fr/hal-01590674 Submitted on 19 Sep 2017 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Software and Systems Modeling (SoSyM) manuscript No. (will be inserted by the editor) A Feature-based Survey of Model View Approaches Hugo Bruneliere · Erik Burger · Jordi Cabot · Manuel Wimmer Received: date / Accepted: date Abstract When dealing with complex systems, information is very often frag- mented across many different models expressed within a variety of (modeling) languages. To provide the relevant information in an appropriate way to dif- ferent kinds of stakeholders, (parts of) such models have to be combined and potentially revamped by focusing on concerns of particular interest for them. This work has been partially funded by the MoNoGe national collaborative project (French FUI #15), the Electronic Component Systems for European Leadership (ECSEL) Joint Un- dertaking & the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research/innovation program under grant agreement No.
    [Show full text]
  • IDEF5 Method Report
    Information Integration for Concurrent Engineering (IICE) IDEF5 Method Report Prepared for: Armstrong Laboratory AL/HRGA Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio 45433 Prepared by: Knowledge Based Systems, Inc. 1408 University Drive East College Station, Texas 77840 (409) 260-5274 Revision Date: September 21, 1994 Contract Number: F33615-C-90-0012 Information Integration for Concurrent Engineering (IICE) IDEF5 Method Report This document was prepared by the IDEF5 Method Development Team for the IICE Methods Engineering Thrust. Contributors: Perakath C. Benjamin, Ph.D. Christopher P. Menzel, Ph.D. Richard J. Mayer, Ph.D. Florence Fillion Michael T. Futrell Paula S. deWitte, Ph.D. Madhavi Lingineni Date: September 21, 1994 i Preface This document provides a comprehensive description of the IDEF5 Ontology Description Capture Method. The IDEF5 method was developed under the Information Integration for Concurrent Engineering (IICE) project, F33615-90-C-0012, funded by Armstrong Laboratory, Logistics Research Division, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio 45433, under the technical direction of Captain JoAnn Sartor and Mr. James McManus. The prime contractor for IICE is Knowledge Based Systems, Inc. (KBSI), College Station, Texas. The authors wish to acknowledge and extend special thanks to the following people who helped compose this document: Julie Holden James MacDougall Richard McGuire ii Table of Contents Preface ............................................................................................................................................ii
    [Show full text]
  • Educational Specifications 2650 Capacity
    Prince George’s County Public Schools Northern Adelphi Area High School with Northern Career and Technical Education (CTE) Hub Educational Specifications 2650 Capacity March 2021 Draft v3 pg. 1 PGCPS Table of Contents General Planning Considerations………………………………………………………………………….. 3 Environmental Performance Requirements…………………………………………………………. 14 Capacity Calculation…………………………………………………………………………………………….. 19 Space Requirements Tables…………………………………………………………………………………. 20 Academic Core Space…………………………………………………………………………………………….. 29 Administration Space Requirements………………………………………………………………………… 52 Health Suite Space Requirements………………………………………………………………………… 74 Maintenance & Custodial Space Requirements……………………………………………………… 80 Performing Arts Space Requirements……………………………………………………………………. 94 Physical Education Space Requirements………………………………………………………………. 110 Student Dining & Food Service Space Requirements……………………………………………. 121 Visual Arts Space Specifications……………………………………………………………………………. 128 Athletic Fields Space Specifications……………………………………………………………………… 133 Career and Technology Hub ………………………… ……………………………………………… 138 Construction and Development Transportation Technologies Barbering and Cosmetology Business Early Childhood Education/Teacher Academy Culinary Arts Health and Biosciences Information Technology Interactive, Media and Communication Manufacturing, Engineering and Technology APPENDIX A (Special Education)…………………...……………………..………………………. 202 APPENDIX B (Health Clinic)…………………………………………………………………………… 209 Northern Adelphi Area High School Educational
    [Show full text]
  • Ontology-Based Modelling of Architectural Styles
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by University of Limerick Institutional Repository Ontology-based Modelling of Architectural Styles Claus Pahla, Simon Gieseckeb, Wilhelm Hasselbringc aDublin City University, School of Computing, Dublin 9, Ireland bBTC Business Technology Consulting AG, Kurf¨ustendamm 33, D-10719 Berlin, Germany cUniversity of Kiel, Software Engineering Group, D-24118 Kiel, Germany Abstract The conceptual modelling of software architectures is of central importance for the quality of a software system. A rich modelling language is required to integrate the different aspects of architecture modelling, such as architectural styles, structural and behavioural modelling, into a coherent framework. Ar- chitectural styles are often neglected in software architectures. We propose an ontological approach for architectural style modelling based on descrip- tion logic as an abstract, meta-level modelling instrument. We introduce a framework for style definition and style combination. The application of the ontological framework in the form of an integration into existing architectural description notations is illustrated. Key words: Software architecture modelling; architecture ontology; architectural style; description logics. 1. Introduction Architecture descriptions are used as conceptual models in the software development process, capturing central structural and behavioural properties of a system at design stage [8]. The architecture of a software system is a crucial factor for the quality of a system implementation. The architecture influences a broad variety of properties such as the maintainability, depend- ability or the performance of a system [11]. While architecture description Email addresses: [email protected] (Claus Pahl), [email protected] (Simon Giesecke), [email protected] (Wilhelm Hasselbring) languages (ADLs) exist [23], these are not always suitable to support rich conceptual modelling of architectures [13].
    [Show full text]
  • Business Process Modeling As a Method of Requirements Engineering
    We analyze and visualize your business processes www.ibissoft.se Tutorial on: Business Process Modeling as a Method of Requirements Engineering Prepared for Instructor: Ilia Bider (Director R&D) IbisSoft AB Email: [email protected] IbisSoft AB Box 19567 Fax: 08-15 10 50 Fabriksgatan 10 104 32 Stockholm 412 50 Göteborg Tel: 08-15 10 10 www.ibissoft.se Tel: 031-711 74 80 We analyze and visualize your processes www.ibissoft.se Extended abstract Today, at least half of the industrial software – Reaching an agreement in business development is connected to business application negotiations. development. During the past ten years, – Discharging a patient from the hospital in a requirements on functionality of business (relatively) healthy state. applications have been slowly changing. This shift – Closing a sale. consists of moving from the command-based applications to the applications of workflow and Each process engages a number of participants that groupware type. In other words, the shift can be can be roughly divided into two categories: passive described as moving from the traditional, “human- participants, and active participants. Passive assisting” systems, to a new generation of “human- participants are the participants that are consumed, assisted” systems. produced or changed during the execution of activities, for example, a document being written, a A human-assisting system helps a human being car being assembled, a patient being treated in the only to perform certain activities, e.g. to write a hospital, an organization being reorganized. Active letter, to print an invoice, to complete a transaction, participants, or agents, are those participants that etc.
    [Show full text]
  • Download(8MB)
    378.147:004(043.3) І І І ІІ І І І 13.00.04 – , . – 2016 2 І ……………………………………………………….…...4 …………………………………………………………………………...………5 І 1. І І І І ІІ І І І 1.1. ……………………………….…….…12 1.2. …..……….………………………………………………………………..…27 1.3. ……….…………..…………39 1…………………………………………………………………55 І 2. ІІ І І І ІІ І І І 2.1. …………………………………………………………………………………..….…58 2.2. , , …….…………………………………..……...……...74 2.3. - ……………………………………………………………………………93 2……………………………………………………………..…125 3 І 3. Ь І І І І І ІІ І І І 3.1. …....128 3.2. ………………….………….135 3.3. ……………..……………………………………………………………………...…170 3……….……………………………………………..…….......183 ЬІ ……………………………………………………………186 ………………………………..……......190 …………………………………………………………………….………227 4 І Ь Є є - - - - 5 ьь . , , . « » , , є . є - . , : (. . [216], . [168], . [270], . є [239] .); - (. [41], . [118], . [157], . [183], . [234], . [237] .); - (. [136], . [73], . [227], . [260] .); (. [107], . [46], . [52], . [64], . [109], . [155], . [198], . [293] .); (. , . , . [217], . [182] .); (. [120], . [122], . [221], . [248], . [264]); (. [203], . [284] .). , , : . [31], . [253], . [275] . 6 : є - , є ; - ; - .
    [Show full text]