Common ground and differences of the KADS and strong-problem-solving-shell approach

Gappa, Ute; Poeck, Karsten

doi:10.1007/3-540-55546-3_35

Cited by 6 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore, we did not try to get a representative classification by regarding several approaches and aggregating them but we try to take a close view on two different paradigm by choosing two prototypical instances as input for a detailed case study. 1 Our study continues [GaP92] who implicitly compared KADS and their role-limiting method approach by describing how the later can be described using the further one. This is the one of the few approaches which investigates how role-limiting methods can be re-expressed in terms of the general methodological framework of KADS and therefore bridging the dichotomy between methodological and tool-oriented approaches.…”

Section: Configurable Role-limiting Methods (Crlm)mentioning

confidence: 97%

“…This is the one of the few approaches which investigates how role-limiting methods can be re-expressed in terms of the general methodological framework of KADS and therefore bridging the dichotomy between methodological and tool-oriented approaches. Compared to our study [GaP92] is much more focused as it asks how to represent a role-limiting method in terms of the KADS model of expertise.…”

Section: Configurable Role-limiting Methods (Crlm)mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A comparison of two approaches to model-based knowledge acquisition

Fensel¹,

Poeck

1994

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. This paper discusses and compares two different approaches to model-based knowledge acquisition. That is, we regard the Model-based and Incremental Knowledge Engineering (MIKE) approach and the Configurable Role-limiting Method approach (CRLM). MIKE is based on the distinction of different phases in the software development process. It uses the formal and operational knowledge specification language KARL allowing a precise and unique description of a model of expertise which is the outcome of the analysis phase. CRLM is based on the rolelimiting method approach. Role limiting shells are implementations of strong problem-solving methods and substantially simplify knowledge acquisition through guidance by predefined models of problem-solving and by sophisticated graphical user interfaces. The main disadvantages, namely inflexibility and brittleness, are to some degree overcome by the CRLM where the shell's problem-solving methods are split into smaller parts, which can then be reconfigured allowing the integration of new methods or other method combinations. Although these two approaches are often discussed as contradictory, we, however, experienced that both approaches complete each other very well. As an outcome of our comparison, we outline topics of future research for both approaches.

show abstract

Section: Configurable Role-limiting Methods (Crlm)mentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Configurable Role-limiting Methods (Crlm)mentioning

confidence: 99%