A Fresh Look at Codification Approaches for SAKM: A Systematic Literature Review

  • Rainer Weinreich
  • Iris Groher
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8627)


The last 10 years have seen a rise of approaches for Software Architecture Knowledge Management (SAKM), with a focus on codification of architecture knowledge. Still there is no common meta-model for describing architectural knowledge nor is there a common terminology for the main concepts of such a model. While this might lead to the question whether such a common meta-model is even possible, it is certainly desirable. We decided to tackle this question based on the results of 10 years of research in this area. As part of a systematic literature survey we analyzed and compared model-based approaches for SAKM. Specifically we analyzed the models of SAKM approaches with the highest-rated evidence for different knowledge management activities like capturing, maintaining, reuse, sharing, and using. As a result we identified important aims and elements of proven SAKM approaches, which could be used as a driver for the next generation of AK codification approaches.


Architecture Knowledge Management (AKM) AKM Codification Approaches AKM Models AKM Activities 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Bosch, J.: Software architecture: The next step. In: Oquendo, F., Warboys, B.C., Morrison, R. (eds.) EWSA 2004. LNCS, vol. 3047, pp. 194–199. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Tyree, J., Akerman, A.: Architecture decisions: Demystifying architecture. IEEE Software 22(2), 19–27 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Weinreich, R., Buchgeher, G.: Towards supporting the software architecture life cycle. Journal of Systems and Software 85(3), 546–561 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kitchenham, B.A., Charters, S.: Guidelines for performing systematic literature reviews in software engineering. Technical report, Software Engineering Group, School of Computer Science and Mathematics, Keele University, UK, and Department of Computer Science, University of Durham, Durham, UK (July 2007)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Davenport, T.H., Prusak, L.: Working knowledge: How organizations manage what they know. Harvard Business School Press, Boston (1998)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Alavi, M., Leidner, D.E.: Review: Knowledge management and knowledge management systems: Conceptual foundations and research issues. MIS Quarterly, 107–136 (2001)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fleiss, J.L.: Measuring nominal scale agreement among many raters. Psychological Bulletin 76(5), 378 (1971)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Landis, J.R., Koch, G.G.: The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33(1), 159–174 (1977)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Goodman, L.A.: Snowball sampling. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 148–170 (1961)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Weyns, D., Ahmad, T.: Claims and evidence for architecture-based self-adaptation: A systematic literature review. In: Drira, K. (ed.) ECSA 2013. LNCS, vol. 7957, pp. 249–265. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Li, Z., Liang, P., Avgeriou, P.: Application of knowledge-based approaches in software architecture: A systematic mapping study. Information and Software Technology (2012)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Babar, M.A., Northway, A., Gorton, I., Heuer, P., Nguyen, T.: Introducing tool support for managing architectural knowledge: An experience report. In: 15th Conference on the Engineering of Computer Based Systems, pp. 105–113. IEEE (2008)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Babar, M.A., Capilla, R.: Capturing and using quality attributes knowledge in software architecture evaluation process. In: First International Workshop on Managing Requirements Knowledge, MARK 2008, pp. 53–62. IEEE (2008)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    van Heesch, U., Avgeriou, P., Hilliard, R.: A documentation framework for architecture decisions. Journal of Systems and Software 85(4), 795–820 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    van Heesch, U., Avgeriou, P., Tang, A.: Does decision documentation help junior designers rationalize their decisions?-a comparative multiple-case study. Journal of Systems and Software (2013)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    van Heesch, U., Avgeriou, P., Hilliard, R.: Forces on architecture decisions-a viewpoint. In: 2012 Joint Working IEEE/IFIP Conference on Software Architecture (WICSA) and European Conference on Software Architecture (ECSA), pp. 101–110. IEEE (2012)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Cui, X., Sun, Y., Xiao, S., Mei, H.: Architecture design for the large-scale software-intensive systems: A decision-oriented approach and the experience. In: 2009 14th IEEE International Conference on Engineering of Complex Computer Systems, pp. 30–39. IEEE (2009)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Cui, X., Sun, Y., Mei, H.: Towards automated solution synthesis and rationale capture in decision-centric architecture design. In: Seventh Working IEEE/IFIP Conference on Software Architecture, pp. 221–230. IEEE (2008)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Jansen, A., Avgeriou, P., van der Ven, J.S.: Enriching software architecture documentation. Journal of Systems and Software 82(8), 1232–1248 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Jansen, A., de Vries, T., Avgeriou, P., van Veelen, M.: Sharing the architectural knowledge of quantitative analysis. In: Becker, S., Plasil, F., Reussner, R. (eds.) QoSA 2008. LNCS, vol. 5281, pp. 220–234. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Weinreich, R., Buchgeher, G.: Integrating requirements and design decisions in architecture representation. In: Babar, M.A., Gorton, I. (eds.) ECSA 2010. LNCS, vol. 6285, pp. 86–101. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Zimmermann, O., Gschwind, T., Küster, J., Leymann, F., Schuster, N.: Reusable architectural decision models for enterprise application development. In: Overhage, S., Ren, X.-M., Reussner, R., Stafford, J.A. (eds.) QoSA 2007. LNCS, vol. 4880, pp. 15–32. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    López, C., Codocedo, V., Astudillo, H., Cysneiros, L.M.: Bridging the gap between software architecture rationale formalisms and actual architecture documents: An ontology-driven approach. Science of Computer Programming 77(1), 66–80 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    López, C., Inostroza, P., Cysneiros, L.M., Astudillo, H.: Visualization and comparison of architecture rationale with semantic web technologies. Journal of Systems and Software 82(8), 1198–1210 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Che, M., Perry, D.E.: Scenario-based architectural design decisions documentation and evolution. In: 2011 18th IEEE International Conference and Workshops on Engineering of Computer Based Systems, ECBS 2011, pp. 216–225. IEEE (2011)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kruchten, P.: An ontology of architectural design decisions in software intensive systems. In: 2nd Groningen Workshop on Software Variability, pp. 54–61 (2004)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Capilla, R., Nava, F., Dueas, J.C.: Modeling and documenting the evolution of architectural design decisions. In: Second Workshop on Sharing and Reusing Architectural Knowledge- Architecture, Rationale, and Design Intent, SHARK/ADI 2007: ICSE Workshops 2007, p. 9. IEEE (2007)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Easterbrook, S., Singer, J., Storey, M.A.A., Damian, D.: Selecting empirical methods for software engineering research. In: Guide to advanced empirical software engineering, pp. 285–311. Springer (2008)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Tang, A., Avgeriou, P., Jansen, A., Capilla, R., Babar, M.A.: A comparative study of architecture knowledge management tools. Journal of Systems and Software 83(3), 352–370 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Tofan, D., Galster, M., Avgeriou, P., Schuitema, W.: Past and future of software architectural decisions–a systematic mapping study. Information and Software Technology (2014)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Shahin, M., Liang, P., Khayyambashi, M.R.R.: Architectural design decision: Existing models and tools. In: Joint Working IEEE/IFIP Conference on Software Architecture, 2009 & European Conference on Software Architecture, WICSA/ECSA 2009, pp. 293–296. IEEE (2009)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rainer Weinreich
    • 1
  • Iris Groher
    • 1
  1. 1.Johannes Kepler University LinzAustria

Personalised recommendations