mirror of
https://github.com/13hannes11/bachelor_thesis.git
synced 2024-09-04 01:11:00 +02:00
add literature
This commit is contained in:
hannes.kuchelmeister
@@ -66,7 +66,7 @@
|
||||
title = {A {{Design Science Research Methodology}} for {{Information Systems Research}}},
|
||||
volume = {24},
|
||||
issn = {0742-1222, 1557-928X},
|
||||
abstract = {The paper motivates, presents, demonstrates in use, and evaluates a methodology for conducting design science (DS) research in information systems (IS). DS is of importance in a discipline oriented to the creation of successful artifacts. Several researchers have pioneered DS research in IS, yet over the past 15 years, little DS research has been done within the discipline. The lack of a methodology to serve as a commonly accepted framework for DS research and of a template for its presentation may have contributed to its slow adoption. The design science research methodology (DSRM) presented here incorporates principles, practices, and procedures required to carry out such research and meets three objectives: it is consistent with prior literature, it provides a nominal process model for doing DS research, and it provides a mental model for presenting and evaluating DS research in IS. The DS process includes six steps: problem identification and motivation, definition of the objectives for a solution, design and development, demonstration, evaluation, and communication. We demonstrate and evaluate the methodology by presenting four case studies in terms of the DSRM, including cases that present the design of a database to support health assessment methods, a software reuse measure, an Internet video telephony application, and an IS planning method. The designed methodology effectively satisfies the three objectives and has the potential to help aid the acceptance of DS research in the IS discipline.},
|
||||
abstract = {The paper motivates, presents, demonstrates in use, and evaluates a methodology for conducting design science (DS) research in information systems (IS). DS is of importance in a discipline oriented to the creation of successful artifacts. Several researchers have pioneered DS research in IS, yet over the past 15 years, little DS research has been done within the discipline. The lack of a methodology to serve as a commonly accepted framework for DS research and of a template for its presentation may have contributed to its slow adoption. The design science research methodology (DSRM) presented here incorporates principles, practices, and procedures required to carry out such research and meets three objectives: it is consistent with prior literature, it provides a nominal process model for doing DS research, and it provides a mental model for presenting and evaluating DS research in IS. The DS process includes six steps: problem identification and motivation, definition of the objectives for a solution, design and development, demonstration, evaluation, and communication. We demonstrate and evaluate the methodology by presenting four case studies in terms of the DSRM, including cases that present the design of a database to support health assessment methods, a software reuse measure, an Internet video telephony application, and an IS planning method. The designed methodology effectively satisfies the three objectives and has the potential to help aid the acceptance of DS research in the IS discipline.},
|
||||
number = {3},
|
||||
journaltitle = {Journal of Management Information Systems},
|
||||
shortjournal = {Journal of Management Information Systems},
|
||||
@@ -133,7 +133,7 @@
|
||||
@inproceedings{felfernigOpenConfiguration2014,
|
||||
langid = {english},
|
||||
title = {Towards {{Open Configuration}}},
|
||||
abstract = {Configuration technologies are typically applied in closed settings where one (or a small group of) knowledge engineer(s) is in charge of knowledge base development and maintenance. In such settings it is also assumed that only single users configure the corresponding products and services. Nowadays, a couple of scenarios exist that require more openness: it should be possible to cooperatively develop knowledge bases and to jointly configure products and services, even by adding new features or constraints in a flexible fashion. We denote this integration of groups of users into configuration-related tasks as open configuration. In this paper we introduce features of open configuration environments and potential approaches to implement these features.},
|
||||
abstract = {Configuration technologies are typically applied in closed settings where one (or a small group of) knowledge engineer(s) is in charge of knowledge base development and maintenance. In such settings it is also assumed that only single users configure the corresponding products and services. Nowadays, a couple of scenarios exist that require more openness: it should be possible to cooperatively develop knowledge bases and to jointly configure products and services, even by adding new features or constraints in a flexible fashion. We denote this integration of groups of users into configuration-related tasks as open configuration. In this paper we introduce features of open configuration environments and potential approaches to implement these features.},
|
||||
eventtitle = {Configuration {{Workshop}}},
|
||||
date = {2014},
|
||||
pages = {89-94},
|
||||
@@ -144,7 +144,7 @@
|
||||
@inproceedings{felfernigGroupDecisionSupport2011,
|
||||
langid = {english},
|
||||
title = {Group {{Decision Support}} for {{Requirements Negotiation}}},
|
||||
abstract = {Requirements engineering is one of the most critical phases in software development. Requirements verbalize decision alternatives that are negotiated by stakeholders. In this paper we present the results of an empirical analysis of the effects of applying group recommendation technologies to requirements negotiation. This analysis has been conducted within the scope of software development projects at our university where development teams were supported with group recommendation technologies when deciding which requirements should be implemented. A major result of the study is that group recommendation technologies can improve the perceived usability (in certain cases) and the perceived quality of decision support. Furthermore, it is not recommended to disclose preferences of individual group members at the beginning of a decision process – this could lead to an insufficient exchange of decision-relevant information.},
|
||||
abstract = {Requirements engineering is one of the most critical phases in software development. Requirements verbalize decision alternatives that are negotiated by stakeholders. In this paper we present the results of an empirical analysis of the effects of applying group recommendation technologies to requirements negotiation. This analysis has been conducted within the scope of software development projects at our university where development teams were supported with group recommendation technologies when deciding which requirements should be implemented. A major result of the study is that group recommendation technologies can improve the perceived usability (in certain cases) and the perceived quality of decision support. Furthermore, it is not recommended to disclose preferences of individual group members at the beginning of a decision process – this could lead to an insufficient exchange of decision-relevant information.},
|
||||
eventtitle = {International {{Conference}} on {{User Modeling}}, {{Adaptation}}, and {{Personalization}}},
|
||||
date = {2011},
|
||||
pages = {105-116},
|
||||
@@ -346,7 +346,7 @@ OCLC: 935904837}
|
||||
issn = {03601315},
|
||||
url = {https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0360131515001074},
|
||||
doi = {10.1016/j.compedu.2015.04.006},
|
||||
abstract = {Online discourse reading plays a very important role in collaborative discussions. However, not many studies have examined the influence of group configuration on online discourse note reading. The current study examined note reading workloads and participants' perceptions of the three group configurations (large whole class, small whole class, large with subgroups) in online graduate-level courses from one institute. In this mixed-methods study, we analyzed tracking logs from 25 graduate-level online courses (25 instructors and 341 students) and interviews from 10 instructors and 12 graduate students with diverse backgrounds. Findings suggest that all three configurations had their own advantages and disadvantages in fostering online discourse reading. However, our analysis suggests that the advantages of subgroup discussions in supporting note reading outweigh those of the Small and Large configurations. The overload effects in information reading due to large class sizes can be minimized by dividing students into small groups for discussion purposes. Group configuration into proper-size groups may reduce students' reading loads. Interviewees felt that the waving of small groups into large classes benefited their collaborative discussions. We conclude this paper with a list of pedagogical recommendations and new software features that may help group configuration and enhance learning in online courses. This study may have implications for both practitioners and researchers to seek optimal group configurations to achieve more fruitful online discussions through note reading.},
|
||||
abstract = {Online discourse reading plays a very important role in collaborative discussions. However, not many studies have examined the influence of group configuration on online discourse note reading. The current study examined note reading workloads and participants' perceptions of the three group configurations (large whole class, small whole class, large with subgroups) in online graduate-level courses from one institute. In this mixed-methods study, we analyzed tracking logs from 25 graduate-level online courses (25 instructors and 341 students) and interviews from 10 instructors and 12 graduate students with diverse backgrounds. Findings suggest that all three configurations had their own advantages and disadvantages in fostering online discourse reading. However, our analysis suggests that the advantages of subgroup discussions in supporting note reading outweigh those of the Small and Large configurations. The overload effects in information reading due to large class sizes can be minimized by dividing students into small groups for discussion purposes. Group configuration into proper-size groups may reduce students' reading loads. Interviewees felt that the waving of small groups into large classes benefited their collaborative discussions. We conclude this paper with a list of pedagogical recommendations and new software features that may help group configuration and enhance learning in online courses. This study may have implications for both practitioners and researchers to seek optimal group configurations to achieve more fruitful online discussions through note reading.},
|
||||
journaltitle = {Computers \& Education},
|
||||
shortjournal = {Computers \& Education},
|
||||
urldate = {2019-10-23},
|
||||
@@ -359,7 +359,7 @@ OCLC: 935904837}
|
||||
@article{atasLiquidDemocracyGroupbased,
|
||||
langid = {english},
|
||||
title = {Liquid {{Democracy}} in {{Group}}-Based {{Configuration}}},
|
||||
abstract = {Group-based configuration systems support scenarios where a group of users configures a product/service. In those groupbased configuration scenarios where the knowledge of some group members regarding items is insufficient, an advice of experts is necessary in order to help members to evaluate products or services. This paper introduces a novel approach which takes advantage of the concept of liquid democracy that allows the delegation of group member votes to experts. Concerning the application of liquid democracy, we propose a new approach based on Multi-attribute Utility theory (MAUT)-based evaluation used to calculate the utility of configurable items. Compared to the traditional approach, the proposed MAUT-based evaluation focuses on the role of experts by assigning higher weights to them. Additionally, the respective expertise level of the experts is taken into account. Consequently, the main contribution of this paper consists in the improvement of group-based configuration by taking liquid democracy aspects into consideration.},
|
||||
abstract = {Group-based configuration systems support scenarios where a group of users configures a product/service. In those groupbased configuration scenarios where the knowledge of some group members regarding items is insufficient, an advice of experts is necessary in order to help members to evaluate products or services. This paper introduces a novel approach which takes advantage of the concept of liquid democracy that allows the delegation of group member votes to experts. Concerning the application of liquid democracy, we propose a new approach based on Multi-attribute Utility theory (MAUT)-based evaluation used to calculate the utility of configurable items. Compared to the traditional approach, the proposed MAUT-based evaluation focuses on the role of experts by assigning higher weights to them. Additionally, the respective expertise level of the experts is taken into account. Consequently, the main contribution of this paper consists in the improvement of group-based configuration by taking liquid democracy aspects into consideration.},
|
||||
pages = {5},
|
||||
author = {Atas, Muesluem and Tran, Thi Ngoc Trang and Samer, Ralph and Felfernig, Alexander and Stettinger, Martin and Fucci, Davide},
|
||||
file = {C\:\\Users\\Hannes.Kuchelmeister\\Zotero\\storage\\95YRVV9G\\Atas et al. - Liquid Democracy in Group-based Configuration.pdf}
|
||||
@@ -394,7 +394,7 @@ OCLC: 935904837}
|
||||
@article{andrzejakSoftwareConfigurationDiagnosis,
|
||||
langid = {english},
|
||||
title = {Software {{Configuration Diagnosis}} – {{A Survey}} of {{Existing Methods}} and {{Open Challenges}}},
|
||||
abstract = {As software systems become more complex and featurerich, configuration mechanisms are needed to adapt them to different execution environments and usage profiles. As a consequence, failures due to erroneous configuration settings are becoming more common, calling for effective mechanisms for diagnosis, repair, and prevention of such issues. In this paper, we survey approaches for diagnosing software configuration errors, methods for debugging these errors, and techniques for testing against such issues. In addition, we outline current challenges of isolating and fixing faults in configuration settings, including improving fault localization, handling the case of multi-stack systems, and configuration verification at runtime.},
|
||||
abstract = {As software systems become more complex and featurerich, configuration mechanisms are needed to adapt them to different execution environments and usage profiles. As a consequence, failures due to erroneous configuration settings are becoming more common, calling for effective mechanisms for diagnosis, repair, and prevention of such issues. In this paper, we survey approaches for diagnosing software configuration errors, methods for debugging these errors, and techniques for testing against such issues. In addition, we outline current challenges of isolating and fixing faults in configuration settings, including improving fault localization, handling the case of multi-stack systems, and configuration verification at runtime.},
|
||||
pages = {8},
|
||||
author = {Andrzejak, Artur and Friedrich, Gerhard and Wotawa, Franz},
|
||||
file = {C\:\\Users\\Hannes.Kuchelmeister\\Zotero\\storage\\9Z76QC7P\\Andrzejak et al. - Software Configuration Diagnosis – A Survey of Exis.pdf}
|
||||
@@ -411,7 +411,7 @@ OCLC: 935904837}
|
||||
@article{thumProductConfigurationWild,
|
||||
langid = {english},
|
||||
title = {Product {{Configuration}} in the {{Wild}}: {{Strategies}} for {{Conflicting Decisions}} in {{Web Configurators}}},
|
||||
abstract = {Customization is omnipresent in our everyday live. There are web configurators to customize cars, trucks, bikes, computers, clothes, furniture, and food. At first glance, customization using configurators appears trivial; we simply select the configuration options that we want. However, in practice, options are usually dependent on each other. Reasons for dependencies are manifold and are typically specific for the particular domain. Dependencies can be simple, such as one option requiring or excluding another option, but also arbitrarily complex, involving numerous options. In this study, we aim to understand how today’s web configurators support users in their decision making process. In particular, we are interested in understanding how configurators handle decisions that are in conflict with dependencies. To abstract from different visualizations, we classify the existing strategies of web configurators and discuss advantages and disadvantages of them. While we identified eight strategies, a single configurator typically uses several of those strategies.},
|
||||
abstract = {Customization is omnipresent in our everyday live. There are web configurators to customize cars, trucks, bikes, computers, clothes, furniture, and food. At first glance, customization using configurators appears trivial; we simply select the configuration options that we want. However, in practice, options are usually dependent on each other. Reasons for dependencies are manifold and are typically specific for the particular domain. Dependencies can be simple, such as one option requiring or excluding another option, but also arbitrarily complex, involving numerous options. In this study, we aim to understand how today’s web configurators support users in their decision making process. In particular, we are interested in understanding how configurators handle decisions that are in conflict with dependencies. To abstract from different visualizations, we classify the existing strategies of web configurators and discuss advantages and disadvantages of them. While we identified eight strategies, a single configurator typically uses several of those strategies.},
|
||||
pages = {8},
|
||||
author = {Thüm, Thomas and Krieter, Sebastian and Schaefer, Ina},
|
||||
file = {C\:\\Users\\Hannes.Kuchelmeister\\Zotero\\storage\\TR78W9RU\\Thüm et al. - Product Configuration in the Wild Strategies for C.pdf}
|
||||
@@ -420,7 +420,7 @@ OCLC: 935904837}
|
||||
@article{samerGroupDecisionSupport,
|
||||
langid = {english},
|
||||
title = {Group {{Decision Support}} for {{Requirements Management Processes}}},
|
||||
abstract = {Requests for proposal (RFP) trigger company-internal requirements management (RM) processes in order to assure that offers comply with a given set of customer requirements. As traditional RM approaches require a deep involvement of the requirements managers of a RM project especially when it comes to assigning suitable stakeholders to requirements, the quality of the decisions and the time effort for making correct decisions mainly depends on these experts. In this paper, we present a novel stakeholder assignment approach that reduces the overall involvement of these experts and also limits the uncertainty of overseeing suitable stakeholders at the same time. The assignment of responsible stakeholders is represented as a group decision task expressed in the form of a basic configuration problem. The outcome of such a task is a configuration which is represented in terms of an assignment of responsible stakeholders to corresponding requirements.},
|
||||
abstract = {Requests for proposal (RFP) trigger company-internal requirements management (RM) processes in order to assure that offers comply with a given set of customer requirements. As traditional RM approaches require a deep involvement of the requirements managers of a RM project especially when it comes to assigning suitable stakeholders to requirements, the quality of the decisions and the time effort for making correct decisions mainly depends on these experts. In this paper, we present a novel stakeholder assignment approach that reduces the overall involvement of these experts and also limits the uncertainty of overseeing suitable stakeholders at the same time. The assignment of responsible stakeholders is represented as a group decision task expressed in the form of a basic configuration problem. The outcome of such a task is a configuration which is represented in terms of an assignment of responsible stakeholders to corresponding requirements.},
|
||||
pages = {6},
|
||||
author = {Samer, R and Atas, M and Felfernig, A and Stettinger, M and Falkner, A and Schenner, G},
|
||||
file = {C\:\\Users\\Hannes.Kuchelmeister\\Zotero\\storage\\7CZIDRDJ\\Samer et al. - Group Decision Support for Requirements Management.pdf}
|
||||
@@ -491,7 +491,7 @@ OCLC: 935904837}
|
||||
url = {https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0957417407002928},
|
||||
doi = {10.1016/j.eswa.2007.07.047},
|
||||
shorttitle = {Evaluation of Recommender Systems},
|
||||
abstract = {It is difficult to deny that comparison between recommender systems requires a common way for evaluating them. Nevertheless, at present, they have been evaluated in many, often incompatible, ways. We affirm this problem is mainly due to the lack of a common framework for recommender systems, a framework general enough so that we may include the whole range of recommender systems to date, but specific enough so that we can obtain solid results. In this paper, we propose such a framework, attempting to extract the essential features of recommender systems. In this framework, the most essential feature is the objective of the recommender system. What is more, in this paper, recommender systems are viewed as applications with the following essential objective. Recommender systems must: (i) choose which (of the items) should be shown to the user, (ii) decide when and how the recommendations must be shown. Next, we will show that a new metric emerges naturally from this framework. Finally, we will conclude by comparing the properties of this new metric with the traditional ones. Among other things, we will show that we may evaluate the whole range of recommender systems with this single metric.},
|
||||
abstract = {It is difficult to deny that comparison between recommender systems requires a common way for evaluating them. Nevertheless, at present, they have been evaluated in many, often incompatible, ways. We affirm this problem is mainly due to the lack of a common framework for recommender systems, a framework general enough so that we may include the whole range of recommender systems to date, but specific enough so that we can obtain solid results. In this paper, we propose such a framework, attempting to extract the essential features of recommender systems. In this framework, the most essential feature is the objective of the recommender system. What is more, in this paper, recommender systems are viewed as applications with the following essential objective. Recommender systems must: (i) choose which (of the items) should be shown to the user, (ii) decide when and how the recommendations must be shown. Next, we will show that a new metric emerges naturally from this framework. Finally, we will conclude by comparing the properties of this new metric with the traditional ones. Among other things, we will show that we may evaluate the whole range of recommender systems with this single metric.},
|
||||
number = {3},
|
||||
journaltitle = {Expert Systems with Applications},
|
||||
shortjournal = {Expert Systems with Applications},
|
||||
@@ -502,4 +502,59 @@ OCLC: 935904837}
|
||||
file = {C\:\\Users\\Hannes.Kuchelmeister\\Zotero\\storage\\B5DFYUDA\\Hernández del Olmo und Gaudioso - 2008 - Evaluation of recommender systems A new approach.pdf}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@article{herrera-viedmaConsensusSupportSystem2005,
|
||||
langid = {english},
|
||||
title = {A {{Consensus Support System Model}} for {{Group Decision}}-{{Making Problems With Multigranular Linguistic Preference Relations}}},
|
||||
volume = {13},
|
||||
issn = {1063-6706},
|
||||
url = {http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/1516155/},
|
||||
doi = {10.1109/TFUZZ.2005.856561},
|
||||
abstract = {The group decision-making framework with linguistic preference relations is studied. In this context, we assume that there exist several experts who may have different background and knowledge to solve a particular problem and, therefore, different linguistic term sets (multigranular linguistic information) could be used to express their opinions. The aim of this paper is to present a model of consensus support system to assist the experts in all phases of the consensus reaching process of group decision-making problems with multigranular linguistic preference relations. This consensus support system model is based on i) a multigranular linguistic methodology, ii) two consensus criteria, consensus degrees and proximity measures, and iii) a guidance advice system. The multigranular linguistic methodology permits the unification of the different linguistic domains to facilitate the calculus of consensus degrees and proximity measures on the basis of experts’ opinions. The consensus degrees assess the agreement amongst all the experts’ opinions, while the proximity measures are used to find out how far the individual opinions are from the group opinion. The guidance advice system integrated in the consensus support system model acts as a feedback mechanism, and it is based on a set of advice rules to help the experts change their opinions and to find out which direction that change should follow in order to obtain the highest degree of consensus possible. There are two main advantages provided by this model of consensus support system. Firstly, its ability to cope with group decision-making problems with multigranular linguistic preference relations, and, secondly, the figure of the moderator, traditionally presents in the consensus reaching process, is replaced by the guidance advice system, and in such a way, the whole group decision-making process is automated.},
|
||||
number = {5},
|
||||
journaltitle = {IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems},
|
||||
shortjournal = {IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst.},
|
||||
urldate = {2019-10-29},
|
||||
date = {2005-10},
|
||||
pages = {644-658},
|
||||
author = {Herrera-Viedma, E. and Martinez, L. and Mata, F. and Chiclana, F.},
|
||||
file = {C\:\\Users\\Hannes.Kuchelmeister\\Zotero\\storage\\9RI7MLEU\\Herrera-Viedma et al. - 2005 - A Consensus Support System Model for Group Decisio.pdf}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@article{charnessGroupsMakeBetter2012,
|
||||
langid = {english},
|
||||
title = {Groups {{Make Better Self}}-{{Interested Decisions}}},
|
||||
volume = {26},
|
||||
issn = {0895-3309},
|
||||
url = {http://pubs.aeaweb.org/doi/10.1257/jep.26.3.157},
|
||||
doi = {10.1257/jep.26.3.157},
|
||||
number = {3},
|
||||
journaltitle = {Journal of Economic Perspectives},
|
||||
shortjournal = {Journal of Economic Perspectives},
|
||||
urldate = {2019-10-29},
|
||||
date = {2012-08},
|
||||
pages = {157-176},
|
||||
keywords = {group-decisions},
|
||||
author = {Charness, Gary and Sutter, Matthias},
|
||||
file = {C\:\\Users\\Hannes.Kuchelmeister\\Zotero\\storage\\43PXHXSK\\Charness und Sutter - 2012 - Groups Make Better Self-Interested Decisions.pdf}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@article{sniezekGroupsUncertaintyExamination1992,
|
||||
langid = {english},
|
||||
title = {Groups under Uncertainty: {{An}} Examination of Confidence in Group Decision Making},
|
||||
volume = {52},
|
||||
issn = {07495978},
|
||||
url = {https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/074959789290048C},
|
||||
doi = {10.1016/0749-5978(92)90048-C},
|
||||
shorttitle = {Groups under Uncertainty},
|
||||
number = {1},
|
||||
journaltitle = {Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes},
|
||||
shortjournal = {Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes},
|
||||
urldate = {2019-10-29},
|
||||
date = {1992-06},
|
||||
pages = {124-155},
|
||||
keywords = {group-decisions},
|
||||
author = {Sniezek, Janet A},
|
||||
file = {C\:\\Users\\Hannes.Kuchelmeister\\Zotero\\storage\\FB7B7PIK\\Sniezek - 1992 - Groups under uncertainty An examination of confid.pdf}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -66,7 +66,7 @@
|
||||
title = {A {{Design Science Research Methodology}} for {{Information Systems Research}}},
|
||||
volume = {24},
|
||||
issn = {0742-1222, 1557-928X},
|
||||
abstract = {The paper motivates, presents, demonstrates in use, and evaluates a methodology for conducting design science (DS) research in information systems (IS). DS is of importance in a discipline oriented to the creation of successful artifacts. Several researchers have pioneered DS research in IS, yet over the past 15 years, little DS research has been done within the discipline. The lack of a methodology to serve as a commonly accepted framework for DS research and of a template for its presentation may have contributed to its slow adoption. The design science research methodology (DSRM) presented here incorporates principles, practices, and procedures required to carry out such research and meets three objectives: it is consistent with prior literature, it provides a nominal process model for doing DS research, and it provides a mental model for presenting and evaluating DS research in IS. The DS process includes six steps: problem identification and motivation, definition of the objectives for a solution, design and development, demonstration, evaluation, and communication. We demonstrate and evaluate the methodology by presenting four case studies in terms of the DSRM, including cases that present the design of a database to support health assessment methods, a software reuse measure, an Internet video telephony application, and an IS planning method. The designed methodology effectively satisfies the three objectives and has the potential to help aid the acceptance of DS research in the IS discipline.},
|
||||
abstract = {The paper motivates, presents, demonstrates in use, and evaluates a methodology for conducting design science (DS) research in information systems (IS). DS is of importance in a discipline oriented to the creation of successful artifacts. Several researchers have pioneered DS research in IS, yet over the past 15 years, little DS research has been done within the discipline. The lack of a methodology to serve as a commonly accepted framework for DS research and of a template for its presentation may have contributed to its slow adoption. The design science research methodology (DSRM) presented here incorporates principles, practices, and procedures required to carry out such research and meets three objectives: it is consistent with prior literature, it provides a nominal process model for doing DS research, and it provides a mental model for presenting and evaluating DS research in IS. The DS process includes six steps: problem identification and motivation, definition of the objectives for a solution, design and development, demonstration, evaluation, and communication. We demonstrate and evaluate the methodology by presenting four case studies in terms of the DSRM, including cases that present the design of a database to support health assessment methods, a software reuse measure, an Internet video telephony application, and an IS planning method. The designed methodology effectively satisfies the three objectives and has the potential to help aid the acceptance of DS research in the IS discipline.},
|
||||
number = {3},
|
||||
journaltitle = {Journal of Management Information Systems},
|
||||
shortjournal = {Journal of Management Information Systems},
|
||||
@@ -133,7 +133,7 @@
|
||||
@inproceedings{felfernigOpenConfiguration2014,
|
||||
langid = {english},
|
||||
title = {Towards {{Open Configuration}}},
|
||||
abstract = {Configuration technologies are typically applied in closed settings where one (or a small group of) knowledge engineer(s) is in charge of knowledge base development and maintenance. In such settings it is also assumed that only single users configure the corresponding products and services. Nowadays, a couple of scenarios exist that require more openness: it should be possible to cooperatively develop knowledge bases and to jointly configure products and services, even by adding new features or constraints in a flexible fashion. We denote this integration of groups of users into configuration-related tasks as open configuration. In this paper we introduce features of open configuration environments and potential approaches to implement these features.},
|
||||
abstract = {Configuration technologies are typically applied in closed settings where one (or a small group of) knowledge engineer(s) is in charge of knowledge base development and maintenance. In such settings it is also assumed that only single users configure the corresponding products and services. Nowadays, a couple of scenarios exist that require more openness: it should be possible to cooperatively develop knowledge bases and to jointly configure products and services, even by adding new features or constraints in a flexible fashion. We denote this integration of groups of users into configuration-related tasks as open configuration. In this paper we introduce features of open configuration environments and potential approaches to implement these features.},
|
||||
eventtitle = {Configuration {{Workshop}}},
|
||||
date = {2014},
|
||||
pages = {89-94},
|
||||
@@ -144,7 +144,7 @@
|
||||
@inproceedings{felfernigGroupDecisionSupport2011,
|
||||
langid = {english},
|
||||
title = {Group {{Decision Support}} for {{Requirements Negotiation}}},
|
||||
abstract = {Requirements engineering is one of the most critical phases in software development. Requirements verbalize decision alternatives that are negotiated by stakeholders. In this paper we present the results of an empirical analysis of the effects of applying group recommendation technologies to requirements negotiation. This analysis has been conducted within the scope of software development projects at our university where development teams were supported with group recommendation technologies when deciding which requirements should be implemented. A major result of the study is that group recommendation technologies can improve the perceived usability (in certain cases) and the perceived quality of decision support. Furthermore, it is not recommended to disclose preferences of individual group members at the beginning of a decision process – this could lead to an insufficient exchange of decision-relevant information.},
|
||||
abstract = {Requirements engineering is one of the most critical phases in software development. Requirements verbalize decision alternatives that are negotiated by stakeholders. In this paper we present the results of an empirical analysis of the effects of applying group recommendation technologies to requirements negotiation. This analysis has been conducted within the scope of software development projects at our university where development teams were supported with group recommendation technologies when deciding which requirements should be implemented. A major result of the study is that group recommendation technologies can improve the perceived usability (in certain cases) and the perceived quality of decision support. Furthermore, it is not recommended to disclose preferences of individual group members at the beginning of a decision process – this could lead to an insufficient exchange of decision-relevant information.},
|
||||
eventtitle = {International {{Conference}} on {{User Modeling}}, {{Adaptation}}, and {{Personalization}}},
|
||||
date = {2011},
|
||||
pages = {105-116},
|
||||
@@ -346,7 +346,7 @@ OCLC: 935904837}
|
||||
issn = {03601315},
|
||||
url = {https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0360131515001074},
|
||||
doi = {10.1016/j.compedu.2015.04.006},
|
||||
abstract = {Online discourse reading plays a very important role in collaborative discussions. However, not many studies have examined the influence of group configuration on online discourse note reading. The current study examined note reading workloads and participants' perceptions of the three group configurations (large whole class, small whole class, large with subgroups) in online graduate-level courses from one institute. In this mixed-methods study, we analyzed tracking logs from 25 graduate-level online courses (25 instructors and 341 students) and interviews from 10 instructors and 12 graduate students with diverse backgrounds. Findings suggest that all three configurations had their own advantages and disadvantages in fostering online discourse reading. However, our analysis suggests that the advantages of subgroup discussions in supporting note reading outweigh those of the Small and Large configurations. The overload effects in information reading due to large class sizes can be minimized by dividing students into small groups for discussion purposes. Group configuration into proper-size groups may reduce students' reading loads. Interviewees felt that the waving of small groups into large classes benefited their collaborative discussions. We conclude this paper with a list of pedagogical recommendations and new software features that may help group configuration and enhance learning in online courses. This study may have implications for both practitioners and researchers to seek optimal group configurations to achieve more fruitful online discussions through note reading.},
|
||||
abstract = {Online discourse reading plays a very important role in collaborative discussions. However, not many studies have examined the influence of group configuration on online discourse note reading. The current study examined note reading workloads and participants' perceptions of the three group configurations (large whole class, small whole class, large with subgroups) in online graduate-level courses from one institute. In this mixed-methods study, we analyzed tracking logs from 25 graduate-level online courses (25 instructors and 341 students) and interviews from 10 instructors and 12 graduate students with diverse backgrounds. Findings suggest that all three configurations had their own advantages and disadvantages in fostering online discourse reading. However, our analysis suggests that the advantages of subgroup discussions in supporting note reading outweigh those of the Small and Large configurations. The overload effects in information reading due to large class sizes can be minimized by dividing students into small groups for discussion purposes. Group configuration into proper-size groups may reduce students' reading loads. Interviewees felt that the waving of small groups into large classes benefited their collaborative discussions. We conclude this paper with a list of pedagogical recommendations and new software features that may help group configuration and enhance learning in online courses. This study may have implications for both practitioners and researchers to seek optimal group configurations to achieve more fruitful online discussions through note reading.},
|
||||
journaltitle = {Computers \& Education},
|
||||
shortjournal = {Computers \& Education},
|
||||
urldate = {2019-10-23},
|
||||
@@ -359,7 +359,7 @@ OCLC: 935904837}
|
||||
@article{atasLiquidDemocracyGroupbased,
|
||||
langid = {english},
|
||||
title = {Liquid {{Democracy}} in {{Group}}-Based {{Configuration}}},
|
||||
abstract = {Group-based configuration systems support scenarios where a group of users configures a product/service. In those groupbased configuration scenarios where the knowledge of some group members regarding items is insufficient, an advice of experts is necessary in order to help members to evaluate products or services. This paper introduces a novel approach which takes advantage of the concept of liquid democracy that allows the delegation of group member votes to experts. Concerning the application of liquid democracy, we propose a new approach based on Multi-attribute Utility theory (MAUT)-based evaluation used to calculate the utility of configurable items. Compared to the traditional approach, the proposed MAUT-based evaluation focuses on the role of experts by assigning higher weights to them. Additionally, the respective expertise level of the experts is taken into account. Consequently, the main contribution of this paper consists in the improvement of group-based configuration by taking liquid democracy aspects into consideration.},
|
||||
abstract = {Group-based configuration systems support scenarios where a group of users configures a product/service. In those groupbased configuration scenarios where the knowledge of some group members regarding items is insufficient, an advice of experts is necessary in order to help members to evaluate products or services. This paper introduces a novel approach which takes advantage of the concept of liquid democracy that allows the delegation of group member votes to experts. Concerning the application of liquid democracy, we propose a new approach based on Multi-attribute Utility theory (MAUT)-based evaluation used to calculate the utility of configurable items. Compared to the traditional approach, the proposed MAUT-based evaluation focuses on the role of experts by assigning higher weights to them. Additionally, the respective expertise level of the experts is taken into account. Consequently, the main contribution of this paper consists in the improvement of group-based configuration by taking liquid democracy aspects into consideration.},
|
||||
pages = {5},
|
||||
author = {Atas, Muesluem and Tran, Thi Ngoc Trang and Samer, Ralph and Felfernig, Alexander and Stettinger, Martin and Fucci, Davide},
|
||||
file = {C\:\\Users\\Hannes.Kuchelmeister\\Zotero\\storage\\95YRVV9G\\Atas et al. - Liquid Democracy in Group-based Configuration.pdf}
|
||||
@@ -394,7 +394,7 @@ OCLC: 935904837}
|
||||
@article{andrzejakSoftwareConfigurationDiagnosis,
|
||||
langid = {english},
|
||||
title = {Software {{Configuration Diagnosis}} – {{A Survey}} of {{Existing Methods}} and {{Open Challenges}}},
|
||||
abstract = {As software systems become more complex and featurerich, configuration mechanisms are needed to adapt them to different execution environments and usage profiles. As a consequence, failures due to erroneous configuration settings are becoming more common, calling for effective mechanisms for diagnosis, repair, and prevention of such issues. In this paper, we survey approaches for diagnosing software configuration errors, methods for debugging these errors, and techniques for testing against such issues. In addition, we outline current challenges of isolating and fixing faults in configuration settings, including improving fault localization, handling the case of multi-stack systems, and configuration verification at runtime.},
|
||||
abstract = {As software systems become more complex and featurerich, configuration mechanisms are needed to adapt them to different execution environments and usage profiles. As a consequence, failures due to erroneous configuration settings are becoming more common, calling for effective mechanisms for diagnosis, repair, and prevention of such issues. In this paper, we survey approaches for diagnosing software configuration errors, methods for debugging these errors, and techniques for testing against such issues. In addition, we outline current challenges of isolating and fixing faults in configuration settings, including improving fault localization, handling the case of multi-stack systems, and configuration verification at runtime.},
|
||||
pages = {8},
|
||||
author = {Andrzejak, Artur and Friedrich, Gerhard and Wotawa, Franz},
|
||||
file = {C\:\\Users\\Hannes.Kuchelmeister\\Zotero\\storage\\9Z76QC7P\\Andrzejak et al. - Software Configuration Diagnosis – A Survey of Exis.pdf}
|
||||
@@ -411,7 +411,7 @@ OCLC: 935904837}
|
||||
@article{thumProductConfigurationWild,
|
||||
langid = {english},
|
||||
title = {Product {{Configuration}} in the {{Wild}}: {{Strategies}} for {{Conflicting Decisions}} in {{Web Configurators}}},
|
||||
abstract = {Customization is omnipresent in our everyday live. There are web configurators to customize cars, trucks, bikes, computers, clothes, furniture, and food. At first glance, customization using configurators appears trivial; we simply select the configuration options that we want. However, in practice, options are usually dependent on each other. Reasons for dependencies are manifold and are typically specific for the particular domain. Dependencies can be simple, such as one option requiring or excluding another option, but also arbitrarily complex, involving numerous options. In this study, we aim to understand how today’s web configurators support users in their decision making process. In particular, we are interested in understanding how configurators handle decisions that are in conflict with dependencies. To abstract from different visualizations, we classify the existing strategies of web configurators and discuss advantages and disadvantages of them. While we identified eight strategies, a single configurator typically uses several of those strategies.},
|
||||
abstract = {Customization is omnipresent in our everyday live. There are web configurators to customize cars, trucks, bikes, computers, clothes, furniture, and food. At first glance, customization using configurators appears trivial; we simply select the configuration options that we want. However, in practice, options are usually dependent on each other. Reasons for dependencies are manifold and are typically specific for the particular domain. Dependencies can be simple, such as one option requiring or excluding another option, but also arbitrarily complex, involving numerous options. In this study, we aim to understand how today’s web configurators support users in their decision making process. In particular, we are interested in understanding how configurators handle decisions that are in conflict with dependencies. To abstract from different visualizations, we classify the existing strategies of web configurators and discuss advantages and disadvantages of them. While we identified eight strategies, a single configurator typically uses several of those strategies.},
|
||||
pages = {8},
|
||||
author = {Thüm, Thomas and Krieter, Sebastian and Schaefer, Ina},
|
||||
file = {C\:\\Users\\Hannes.Kuchelmeister\\Zotero\\storage\\TR78W9RU\\Thüm et al. - Product Configuration in the Wild Strategies for C.pdf}
|
||||
@@ -420,7 +420,7 @@ OCLC: 935904837}
|
||||
@article{samerGroupDecisionSupport,
|
||||
langid = {english},
|
||||
title = {Group {{Decision Support}} for {{Requirements Management Processes}}},
|
||||
abstract = {Requests for proposal (RFP) trigger company-internal requirements management (RM) processes in order to assure that offers comply with a given set of customer requirements. As traditional RM approaches require a deep involvement of the requirements managers of a RM project especially when it comes to assigning suitable stakeholders to requirements, the quality of the decisions and the time effort for making correct decisions mainly depends on these experts. In this paper, we present a novel stakeholder assignment approach that reduces the overall involvement of these experts and also limits the uncertainty of overseeing suitable stakeholders at the same time. The assignment of responsible stakeholders is represented as a group decision task expressed in the form of a basic configuration problem. The outcome of such a task is a configuration which is represented in terms of an assignment of responsible stakeholders to corresponding requirements.},
|
||||
abstract = {Requests for proposal (RFP) trigger company-internal requirements management (RM) processes in order to assure that offers comply with a given set of customer requirements. As traditional RM approaches require a deep involvement of the requirements managers of a RM project especially when it comes to assigning suitable stakeholders to requirements, the quality of the decisions and the time effort for making correct decisions mainly depends on these experts. In this paper, we present a novel stakeholder assignment approach that reduces the overall involvement of these experts and also limits the uncertainty of overseeing suitable stakeholders at the same time. The assignment of responsible stakeholders is represented as a group decision task expressed in the form of a basic configuration problem. The outcome of such a task is a configuration which is represented in terms of an assignment of responsible stakeholders to corresponding requirements.},
|
||||
pages = {6},
|
||||
author = {Samer, R and Atas, M and Felfernig, A and Stettinger, M and Falkner, A and Schenner, G},
|
||||
file = {C\:\\Users\\Hannes.Kuchelmeister\\Zotero\\storage\\7CZIDRDJ\\Samer et al. - Group Decision Support for Requirements Management.pdf}
|
||||
@@ -491,7 +491,7 @@ OCLC: 935904837}
|
||||
url = {https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0957417407002928},
|
||||
doi = {10.1016/j.eswa.2007.07.047},
|
||||
shorttitle = {Evaluation of Recommender Systems},
|
||||
abstract = {It is difficult to deny that comparison between recommender systems requires a common way for evaluating them. Nevertheless, at present, they have been evaluated in many, often incompatible, ways. We affirm this problem is mainly due to the lack of a common framework for recommender systems, a framework general enough so that we may include the whole range of recommender systems to date, but specific enough so that we can obtain solid results. In this paper, we propose such a framework, attempting to extract the essential features of recommender systems. In this framework, the most essential feature is the objective of the recommender system. What is more, in this paper, recommender systems are viewed as applications with the following essential objective. Recommender systems must: (i) choose which (of the items) should be shown to the user, (ii) decide when and how the recommendations must be shown. Next, we will show that a new metric emerges naturally from this framework. Finally, we will conclude by comparing the properties of this new metric with the traditional ones. Among other things, we will show that we may evaluate the whole range of recommender systems with this single metric.},
|
||||
abstract = {It is difficult to deny that comparison between recommender systems requires a common way for evaluating them. Nevertheless, at present, they have been evaluated in many, often incompatible, ways. We affirm this problem is mainly due to the lack of a common framework for recommender systems, a framework general enough so that we may include the whole range of recommender systems to date, but specific enough so that we can obtain solid results. In this paper, we propose such a framework, attempting to extract the essential features of recommender systems. In this framework, the most essential feature is the objective of the recommender system. What is more, in this paper, recommender systems are viewed as applications with the following essential objective. Recommender systems must: (i) choose which (of the items) should be shown to the user, (ii) decide when and how the recommendations must be shown. Next, we will show that a new metric emerges naturally from this framework. Finally, we will conclude by comparing the properties of this new metric with the traditional ones. Among other things, we will show that we may evaluate the whole range of recommender systems with this single metric.},
|
||||
number = {3},
|
||||
journaltitle = {Expert Systems with Applications},
|
||||
shortjournal = {Expert Systems with Applications},
|
||||
@@ -502,4 +502,59 @@ OCLC: 935904837}
|
||||
file = {C\:\\Users\\Hannes.Kuchelmeister\\Zotero\\storage\\B5DFYUDA\\Hernández del Olmo und Gaudioso - 2008 - Evaluation of recommender systems A new approach.pdf}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@article{herrera-viedmaConsensusSupportSystem2005,
|
||||
langid = {english},
|
||||
title = {A {{Consensus Support System Model}} for {{Group Decision}}-{{Making Problems With Multigranular Linguistic Preference Relations}}},
|
||||
volume = {13},
|
||||
issn = {1063-6706},
|
||||
url = {http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/1516155/},
|
||||
doi = {10.1109/TFUZZ.2005.856561},
|
||||
abstract = {The group decision-making framework with linguistic preference relations is studied. In this context, we assume that there exist several experts who may have different background and knowledge to solve a particular problem and, therefore, different linguistic term sets (multigranular linguistic information) could be used to express their opinions. The aim of this paper is to present a model of consensus support system to assist the experts in all phases of the consensus reaching process of group decision-making problems with multigranular linguistic preference relations. This consensus support system model is based on i) a multigranular linguistic methodology, ii) two consensus criteria, consensus degrees and proximity measures, and iii) a guidance advice system. The multigranular linguistic methodology permits the unification of the different linguistic domains to facilitate the calculus of consensus degrees and proximity measures on the basis of experts’ opinions. The consensus degrees assess the agreement amongst all the experts’ opinions, while the proximity measures are used to find out how far the individual opinions are from the group opinion. The guidance advice system integrated in the consensus support system model acts as a feedback mechanism, and it is based on a set of advice rules to help the experts change their opinions and to find out which direction that change should follow in order to obtain the highest degree of consensus possible. There are two main advantages provided by this model of consensus support system. Firstly, its ability to cope with group decision-making problems with multigranular linguistic preference relations, and, secondly, the figure of the moderator, traditionally presents in the consensus reaching process, is replaced by the guidance advice system, and in such a way, the whole group decision-making process is automated.},
|
||||
number = {5},
|
||||
journaltitle = {IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems},
|
||||
shortjournal = {IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst.},
|
||||
urldate = {2019-10-29},
|
||||
date = {2005-10},
|
||||
pages = {644-658},
|
||||
author = {Herrera-Viedma, E. and Martinez, L. and Mata, F. and Chiclana, F.},
|
||||
file = {C\:\\Users\\Hannes.Kuchelmeister\\Zotero\\storage\\9RI7MLEU\\Herrera-Viedma et al. - 2005 - A Consensus Support System Model for Group Decisio.pdf}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@article{charnessGroupsMakeBetter2012,
|
||||
langid = {english},
|
||||
title = {Groups {{Make Better Self}}-{{Interested Decisions}}},
|
||||
volume = {26},
|
||||
issn = {0895-3309},
|
||||
url = {http://pubs.aeaweb.org/doi/10.1257/jep.26.3.157},
|
||||
doi = {10.1257/jep.26.3.157},
|
||||
number = {3},
|
||||
journaltitle = {Journal of Economic Perspectives},
|
||||
shortjournal = {Journal of Economic Perspectives},
|
||||
urldate = {2019-10-29},
|
||||
date = {2012-08},
|
||||
pages = {157-176},
|
||||
keywords = {group-decisions},
|
||||
author = {Charness, Gary and Sutter, Matthias},
|
||||
file = {C\:\\Users\\Hannes.Kuchelmeister\\Zotero\\storage\\43PXHXSK\\Charness und Sutter - 2012 - Groups Make Better Self-Interested Decisions.pdf}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@article{sniezekGroupsUncertaintyExamination1992,
|
||||
langid = {english},
|
||||
title = {Groups under Uncertainty: {{An}} Examination of Confidence in Group Decision Making},
|
||||
volume = {52},
|
||||
issn = {07495978},
|
||||
url = {https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/074959789290048C},
|
||||
doi = {10.1016/0749-5978(92)90048-C},
|
||||
shorttitle = {Groups under Uncertainty},
|
||||
number = {1},
|
||||
journaltitle = {Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes},
|
||||
shortjournal = {Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes},
|
||||
urldate = {2019-10-29},
|
||||
date = {1992-06},
|
||||
pages = {124-155},
|
||||
keywords = {group-decisions},
|
||||
author = {Sniezek, Janet A},
|
||||
file = {C\:\\Users\\Hannes.Kuchelmeister\\Zotero\\storage\\FB7B7PIK\\Sniezek - 1992 - Groups under uncertainty An examination of confid.pdf}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
BIN
02_Proposal/proposal.synctex.gz_old
Normal file
BIN
02_Proposal/proposal.synctex.gz_old
Normal file
Binary file not shown.
Reference in New Issue
Block a user