评估协作工具包的技术

P. Dewan
{"title":"评估协作工具包的技术","authors":"P. Dewan","doi":"10.1109/ENABL.2000.883710","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The most reliable approach to evaluating a collaboration toolkit is to carry out field studies. This approach has the problem that it requires each project to be interdisciplinary and create a complete, working system, which seems too costly given the budget for a typical research project and the complexity of a collaboration toolkit; and more important, does not allow a project to converge incrementally towards a complete solution. Based on the lessons learned from our work and that of others on collaboration toolkits, we have identified several lower-cost techniques for evaluating collaboration toolkits including inspecting the design to see if requirements have been met, simulating other systems, implementing complete solutions to standard problems, and performing self and lab studies. This paper discusses these techniques, points out their pros and cons, identifies the influential projects in which they have been used, and shows how they fit together.","PeriodicalId":435283,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings IEEE 9th International Workshops on Enabling Technologies: Infrastructure for Collaborative Enterprises (WET ICE 2000)","volume":"99 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2000-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Techniques for evaluating collaboration toolkits\",\"authors\":\"P. Dewan\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/ENABL.2000.883710\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The most reliable approach to evaluating a collaboration toolkit is to carry out field studies. This approach has the problem that it requires each project to be interdisciplinary and create a complete, working system, which seems too costly given the budget for a typical research project and the complexity of a collaboration toolkit; and more important, does not allow a project to converge incrementally towards a complete solution. Based on the lessons learned from our work and that of others on collaboration toolkits, we have identified several lower-cost techniques for evaluating collaboration toolkits including inspecting the design to see if requirements have been met, simulating other systems, implementing complete solutions to standard problems, and performing self and lab studies. This paper discusses these techniques, points out their pros and cons, identifies the influential projects in which they have been used, and shows how they fit together.\",\"PeriodicalId\":435283,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Proceedings IEEE 9th International Workshops on Enabling Technologies: Infrastructure for Collaborative Enterprises (WET ICE 2000)\",\"volume\":\"99 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2000-06-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Proceedings IEEE 9th International Workshops on Enabling Technologies: Infrastructure for Collaborative Enterprises (WET ICE 2000)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/ENABL.2000.883710\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings IEEE 9th International Workshops on Enabling Technologies: Infrastructure for Collaborative Enterprises (WET ICE 2000)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ENABL.2000.883710","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

评估协作工具包最可靠的方法是进行实地研究。这种方法的问题是,它要求每个项目都是跨学科的,并创建一个完整的、可工作的系统,考虑到典型研究项目的预算和协作工具包的复杂性,这似乎过于昂贵;更重要的是,它不允许一个项目逐渐向一个完整的解决方案靠拢。基于从我们的工作和其他协作工具包的工作中学到的经验教训,我们已经确定了几种低成本的技术,用于评估协作工具包,包括检查设计以查看是否满足需求、模拟其他系统、实现标准问题的完整解决方案,以及执行自我和实验室研究。本文讨论了这些技术,指出了它们的优点和缺点,确定了使用它们的有影响力的项目,并展示了它们是如何结合在一起的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Techniques for evaluating collaboration toolkits
The most reliable approach to evaluating a collaboration toolkit is to carry out field studies. This approach has the problem that it requires each project to be interdisciplinary and create a complete, working system, which seems too costly given the budget for a typical research project and the complexity of a collaboration toolkit; and more important, does not allow a project to converge incrementally towards a complete solution. Based on the lessons learned from our work and that of others on collaboration toolkits, we have identified several lower-cost techniques for evaluating collaboration toolkits including inspecting the design to see if requirements have been met, simulating other systems, implementing complete solutions to standard problems, and performing self and lab studies. This paper discusses these techniques, points out their pros and cons, identifies the influential projects in which they have been used, and shows how they fit together.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信