The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A rational design process: How and why to fake it
Abstract
Many have sought a software design process that allows a program to be derived systematically from a precise statement of requirements. It is proposed that, although designing a real product in that way will not be successful, it is possible to produce documentation that makes it appear that the software was designed by such a process. The ideal process and the documentation that it requires are described. The authors explain why one should attempt to design according to the ideal process and why one should produce the documentation that would have been produced by that process. The contents of each of the required documents are outlined.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Davis, S., & Mermelstein, P. (1980) · IEEE Transactions on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing · doi:10.1109/tassp.1980.1163420 · Cited by 5,465
Cited by
An analysis of the requirements traceability problem
Gotel, O. C. Z., & Finkelstein, C. W. (2002) · Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Requirements Engineering · doi:10.1109/icre.1994.292398 · Cited by 1,246
Iterative and incremental developments. a brief history
Larman, C., & Basili, V. R. (2003) · Computer · doi:10.1109/mc.2003.1204375 · Cited by 1,164
Designing eHealth that Matters via a Multidisciplinary Requirements Development Approach
Van Velsen, L., Wentzel, J., & Van Gemert-Pijnen, J. E. (2013) · JMIR Research Protocols · doi:10.2196/resprot.2547 · Cited by 262
Decision making in software architecture
van Vliet, H., & Tang, A. (2016) · Journal of Systems and Software · doi:10.1016/j.jss.2016.01.017 · Cited by 79
Insolvent: How to Reorient Computing for Just Sustainability
Becker, C. (2023) · doi:10.7551/mitpress/14668.001.0001 · Cited by 56
Metadata
- Authors
- Parnas, D. L., & Clements, P. C.
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering
- Published
- 1986-02
- Volume
- SE-12
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 251-257
- ISSN
- 0098-5589 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-3520
- 2326-3881
- OpenAlex
- W2096360482
- Cited by
- 617
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 51.73
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
