Cited by 160Advanced Software Engineering MethodologiesSoftware Engineering Techniques and PracticesSoftware Engineering Research

10 years of software architecture knowledge management: Practice and future

Open access
Capilla, Rafael, Jansen, Anton, Tang, Antony, Avgeriou, Paris, Babar, Muhammad Ali·2016·Journal of Systems and Software

Abstract

The importance of architectural knowledge (AK) management for software development has been highlighted over the past ten years, where a significant amount of research has been done. Since the first systems using design rationale in the seventies and eighties to the more modern approaches using AK for designing software architectures, a variety of models, approaches, and research tools have leveraged the interests of researchers and practitioners in AK management (AKM). Capturing, sharing, and using AK has many benefits for software designers and maintainers, but the cost to capture this relevant knowledge hampers a widespread use by software companies. However, as the improvements made over the last decade didn't boost a wider adoption of AKM approaches, there is a need to identify the successes and shortcomings of current AK approaches and know what industry needs from AK. Therefore, as researchers and promoters of many of the AK research tools in the early stages where AK became relevant for the software architecture community, and based on our experience and observations, we provide in this research an informal retrospective analysis of what has been done and the challenges and trends for a future research agenda to promote AK use in modern software development practices.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jss.2015.08.054

Cites

103 of 103 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Despite abundant research on architecture knowledge management, little is used in practice to ensure the completeness, up-to-dateness, and traceability of architecture documentation.

    “Despite abundant research on architecture knowledge management [17], little is used in practice to ensure the completeness, upto-dateness, and traceability of architecture documentation.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. Babar, M.A. , Gorton, I. , 2007. A tool for managing software architecture knowledge. In: Proceedings of the 2nd Workshop On Sharing And Reusing Architectural Knowl- edge (ICSE Workshops) .
  2. Koziolek, H. , Domis, D. , Goldschmidt, T. , Vorst, P. , 2013. Measuring architecture sustain- ability. IEEE Software 30 (6), 54-62 .
  3. Kruchten, P., 2011. Games architects play. Available: http://www.cs.rug.nl/ ∼matthias/ pages/workshop _ april _ 18 _ 2011/slides _ kruchten.pdf . (accessed 15.09.15.).
  4. Venters, C.C. , Griffiths, M.K. , Holmes, V. , Ward, R.R. , Cooke, D.J. , Huddersfield, U. , et al. , 2014. The Nebuchadnezzar effect: dreaming of sustainable software through sus- tainable software architectures. In: Proceedings of the Second Workshop on Sus- tainable Software for Science: Practice and Experiences .
  5. Zdun, U. , Capilla, R. , Tran, H. , Zimmermann, O. , 2013. Making architectural design deci- sions sustainable: challenges, solutions, and lessons learned. IEEE Softw. 30, 46-53 .

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Capilla, R., Jansen, A., Tang, A., Avgeriou, P., & Babar, M. A.
Affiliations
  • Universidad Rey Juan Carlos (ES)
  • Philips (Netherlands) (NL)
  • Swinburne University of Technology (AU)
  • University of Groningen (NL)
  • The University of Adelaide (AU)
Corresponding author
Capilla, Rafael
Venue
Journal of Systems and Software
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-06
Volume
116
Pages
191-205
ISSN
0164-1212 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1668578304
Cited by
160
References
103
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 19 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 6
FWCI
13.70
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Systems and Software (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • Adelaide Research & Scholarship (AR&S) (University of Adelaide) (submittedVersion)
  • University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Swinburne figshare (Swinburne University of Technology) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Advanced Software Engineering Methodologies
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Software Engineering Techniques and Practices
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Software Engineering Research
Keywords
architectural knowledge management, software architecture, design rationale, knowledge capture, knowledge sharing, software design, software maintenance, research agenda, industrial adoption

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review