The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Structured design
Abstract
The HIPO Hierarchy chart is being used as an aid during general systems design. The considerations and techniques presented here are useful for evaluating alternatives for thos portions of the system that will be programmed on a computer. The charting technique used here depicts more details about the interfaces than the HIPO Hierarchy chart. This facilitates consideration during general program design of each individual connection and its associated passed parameters. The resulting design can be documented with the HIPO charts. (if the designer decides to have more than one function in any module, the structure chart should show them in the same block. However, the HIPO Hierarchy chart would still show all the functions in separate blocks.) The output of the general program design is the input for the detailed module design. The HIPO input-process-output chart is useful for describing and designing each module.
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
Cited by
Programs, life cycles, and laws of software evolution
Lehman, M. M. (1980) · Proceedings of the IEEE · doi:10.1109/proc.1980.11805 · Cited by 1,181
Subjective evaluation of software evolvability using code smells: An empirical study
Mäntylä, M. V., & Lassenius, C. (2007) · Empirical Software Engineering · doi:10.1007/s10664-006-9002-8 · Cited by 171
Cohesion Metrics for Predicting Maintainability of Service-Oriented Software
Perepletchikov, M., Ryan, C., & Frampton, K. (2007) · Seventh International Conference on Quality Software (QSIC 2007) · doi:10.1109/qsic.2007.4385516 · Cited by 115
The sensemaking-coevolution-implementation theory of software design
Ralph, P. (2015) · Science of Computer Programming · doi:10.1016/j.scico.2014.11.007 · Cited by 60
Practical engineering of knowledge-based systems
Bader, J., Edwards, J., Harris-Jones, C., & Hannaford, D. (1988) · Information and Software Technology · doi:10.1016/0950-5849(88)90019-5 · Cited by 45
Metadata
- Authors
- Stevens, W. P., Myers, G. J., & Constantine, L. L.
- Venue
- IBM Systems Journal
- Publisher
- IBM
- Published
- 1974
- Volume
- 13
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 115-139
- ISSN
- 0018-8670 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2913217271
- Cited by
- 1,185
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 91.53
- 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.
