The Experts below are selected from a list of 255429 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Timothy J White - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
programmable and adaptive mechanics with liquid crystal polymer networks and elastomers
Nature Materials, 2015Co-Authors: Timothy J WhiteAbstract:Liquid crystals are the basis of a pervasive technology of the modern era. Yet, as the display market becomes commoditized, researchers in industry, government and academia are increasingly examining liquid crystalline materials in a variety of polymeric forms and discovering their fascinating and useful properties. In this Review, we detail the historical Development of liquid crystalline polymeric materials, with emphasis on the thermally and photogenerated macroscale mechanical responses--such as bending, twisting and buckling--and on local-Feature Development (primarily related to topographical control). Within this framework, we elucidate the benefits of liquid crystallinity and contrast them with other stimuli-induced mechanical responses reported for other materials. We end with an outlook of existing challenges and near-term application opportunities.
-
programmable and adaptive mechanics with liquid crystal polymer networks and elastomers
Nature Materials, 2015Co-Authors: Timothy J White, Dirk J BroerAbstract:This Review discusses stimuli-responsive liquid crystalline polymer networks and elastomers as materials with programmable mechanics for use in functional devices. Liquid crystals are the basis of a pervasive technology of the modern era. Yet, as the display market becomes commoditized, researchers in industry, government and academia are increasingly examining liquid crystalline materials in a variety of polymeric forms and discovering their fascinating and useful properties. In this Review, we detail the historical Development of liquid crystalline polymeric materials, with emphasis on the thermally and photogenerated macroscale mechanical responses — such as bending, twisting and buckling — and on local-Feature Development (primarily related to topographical control). Within this framework, we elucidate the benefits of liquid crystallinity and contrast them with other stimuli-induced mechanical responses reported for other materials. We end with an outlook of existing challenges and near-term application opportunities.
Michel R V Chaudron - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
investigating architectural technical debt accumulation and refactoring over time
Information & Software Technology, 2015Co-Authors: Antonio Martini, Jan Bosch, Michel R V ChaudronAbstract:Display Omitted We provide a taxonomy of the causes for Architectural Technical Debt accumulation.Crisis model: shows the increasing accumulation of Architectural Technical Debt.Phases model: shows when Architectural Technical Debt is accumulated and refactored.Refactoring strategies: best and worst case scenarios with respect to crises.We conduct an empirical evaluation of the factors and models. ContextA known problem in large software companies is to balance the prioritization of short-term with long-term Feature delivery speed. Specifically, Architecture Technical Debt is regarded as sub-optimal architectural solutions taken to deliver fast that might hinder future Feature Development, which, in turn, would hinder agility. ObjectiveThis paper aims at improving software management by shedding light on the current factors responsible for the accumulation of Architectural Technical Debt and to understand how it evolves over time. MethodWe conducted an exploratory multiple-case embedded case study in 7 sites at 5 large companies. We evaluated the results with additional cross-company interviews and an in-depth, company-specific case study in which we initially evaluate factors and models. ResultsWe compiled a taxonomy of the factors and their influence in the accumulation of Architectural Technical Debt, and we provide two qualitative models of how the debt is accumulated and refactored over time in the studied companies. We also list a set of exploratory propositions on possible refactoring strategies that can be useful as insights for practitioners and as hypotheses for further research. ConclusionSeveral factors cause constant and unavoidable accumulation of Architecture Technical Debt, which leads to Development crises. Refactorings are often overlooked in prioritization and they are often triggered by Development crises, in a reactive fashion. Some of the factors are manageable, while others are external to the companies. ATD needs to be made visible, in order to postpone the crises according to the strategic goals of the companies. There is a need for practices and automated tools to proactively manage ATD.
-
architecture technical debt understanding causes and a qualitative model
Software Engineering and Advanced Applications, 2014Co-Authors: Antonio Martini, Jan Bosch, Michel R V ChaudronAbstract:A known problem in large software companies is to balance the prioritization of short-term with long-term responsiveness. Specifically, architecture violations (Architecture Technical Debt) taken to deliver fast might hinder future Feature Development, which would hinder agility. We conducted a multiple-case embedded case study in 7 sites at 5 large companies in order to shed light on the current causes for the accumulation of Architectural Technical Debt that causes effort. We provide a taxonomy of the factors and their influence in the accumulation of debt, and we provide a qualitative model of how the debt is accumulated and recovered over time.
Antonio Martini - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
investigating architectural technical debt accumulation and refactoring over time
Information & Software Technology, 2015Co-Authors: Antonio Martini, Jan Bosch, Michel R V ChaudronAbstract:Display Omitted We provide a taxonomy of the causes for Architectural Technical Debt accumulation.Crisis model: shows the increasing accumulation of Architectural Technical Debt.Phases model: shows when Architectural Technical Debt is accumulated and refactored.Refactoring strategies: best and worst case scenarios with respect to crises.We conduct an empirical evaluation of the factors and models. ContextA known problem in large software companies is to balance the prioritization of short-term with long-term Feature delivery speed. Specifically, Architecture Technical Debt is regarded as sub-optimal architectural solutions taken to deliver fast that might hinder future Feature Development, which, in turn, would hinder agility. ObjectiveThis paper aims at improving software management by shedding light on the current factors responsible for the accumulation of Architectural Technical Debt and to understand how it evolves over time. MethodWe conducted an exploratory multiple-case embedded case study in 7 sites at 5 large companies. We evaluated the results with additional cross-company interviews and an in-depth, company-specific case study in which we initially evaluate factors and models. ResultsWe compiled a taxonomy of the factors and their influence in the accumulation of Architectural Technical Debt, and we provide two qualitative models of how the debt is accumulated and refactored over time in the studied companies. We also list a set of exploratory propositions on possible refactoring strategies that can be useful as insights for practitioners and as hypotheses for further research. ConclusionSeveral factors cause constant and unavoidable accumulation of Architecture Technical Debt, which leads to Development crises. Refactorings are often overlooked in prioritization and they are often triggered by Development crises, in a reactive fashion. Some of the factors are manageable, while others are external to the companies. ATD needs to be made visible, in order to postpone the crises according to the strategic goals of the companies. There is a need for practices and automated tools to proactively manage ATD.
-
towards prioritizing architecture technical debt information needs of architects and product owners
Software Engineering and Advanced Applications, 2015Co-Authors: Antonio Martini, Jan BoschAbstract:Architectural Technical Debt is a metaphor for representing sub-optimal architectural solutions that might cause an interest, in terms of effort or quality, to be paid by the organization in the long run. Such metaphor has been regarded as useful for communicating risks of suboptimal solutions between technical and non-technical stakeholders. However, it's fundamental to understand the information needs of the involved stakeholders in order to produce technical debt measurements that would allow proper communication and informed prioritization. We have investigated, through a combination of interviews, observations and a survey, what key information is needed by agile product owners and software architects in order to prioritize the refactoring of risky architectural technical debt items with respect to Feature Development.
-
architecture technical debt understanding causes and a qualitative model
Software Engineering and Advanced Applications, 2014Co-Authors: Antonio Martini, Jan Bosch, Michel R V ChaudronAbstract:A known problem in large software companies is to balance the prioritization of short-term with long-term responsiveness. Specifically, architecture violations (Architecture Technical Debt) taken to deliver fast might hinder future Feature Development, which would hinder agility. We conducted a multiple-case embedded case study in 7 sites at 5 large companies in order to shed light on the current causes for the accumulation of Architectural Technical Debt that causes effort. We provide a taxonomy of the factors and their influence in the accumulation of debt, and we provide a qualitative model of how the debt is accumulated and recovered over time.
Dirk J Broer - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
programmable and adaptive mechanics with liquid crystal polymer networks and elastomers
Nature Materials, 2015Co-Authors: Timothy J White, Dirk J BroerAbstract:This Review discusses stimuli-responsive liquid crystalline polymer networks and elastomers as materials with programmable mechanics for use in functional devices. Liquid crystals are the basis of a pervasive technology of the modern era. Yet, as the display market becomes commoditized, researchers in industry, government and academia are increasingly examining liquid crystalline materials in a variety of polymeric forms and discovering their fascinating and useful properties. In this Review, we detail the historical Development of liquid crystalline polymeric materials, with emphasis on the thermally and photogenerated macroscale mechanical responses — such as bending, twisting and buckling — and on local-Feature Development (primarily related to topographical control). Within this framework, we elucidate the benefits of liquid crystallinity and contrast them with other stimuli-induced mechanical responses reported for other materials. We end with an outlook of existing challenges and near-term application opportunities.
Jan Bosch - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
investigating architectural technical debt accumulation and refactoring over time
Information & Software Technology, 2015Co-Authors: Antonio Martini, Jan Bosch, Michel R V ChaudronAbstract:Display Omitted We provide a taxonomy of the causes for Architectural Technical Debt accumulation.Crisis model: shows the increasing accumulation of Architectural Technical Debt.Phases model: shows when Architectural Technical Debt is accumulated and refactored.Refactoring strategies: best and worst case scenarios with respect to crises.We conduct an empirical evaluation of the factors and models. ContextA known problem in large software companies is to balance the prioritization of short-term with long-term Feature delivery speed. Specifically, Architecture Technical Debt is regarded as sub-optimal architectural solutions taken to deliver fast that might hinder future Feature Development, which, in turn, would hinder agility. ObjectiveThis paper aims at improving software management by shedding light on the current factors responsible for the accumulation of Architectural Technical Debt and to understand how it evolves over time. MethodWe conducted an exploratory multiple-case embedded case study in 7 sites at 5 large companies. We evaluated the results with additional cross-company interviews and an in-depth, company-specific case study in which we initially evaluate factors and models. ResultsWe compiled a taxonomy of the factors and their influence in the accumulation of Architectural Technical Debt, and we provide two qualitative models of how the debt is accumulated and refactored over time in the studied companies. We also list a set of exploratory propositions on possible refactoring strategies that can be useful as insights for practitioners and as hypotheses for further research. ConclusionSeveral factors cause constant and unavoidable accumulation of Architecture Technical Debt, which leads to Development crises. Refactorings are often overlooked in prioritization and they are often triggered by Development crises, in a reactive fashion. Some of the factors are manageable, while others are external to the companies. ATD needs to be made visible, in order to postpone the crises according to the strategic goals of the companies. There is a need for practices and automated tools to proactively manage ATD.
-
towards prioritizing architecture technical debt information needs of architects and product owners
Software Engineering and Advanced Applications, 2015Co-Authors: Antonio Martini, Jan BoschAbstract:Architectural Technical Debt is a metaphor for representing sub-optimal architectural solutions that might cause an interest, in terms of effort or quality, to be paid by the organization in the long run. Such metaphor has been regarded as useful for communicating risks of suboptimal solutions between technical and non-technical stakeholders. However, it's fundamental to understand the information needs of the involved stakeholders in order to produce technical debt measurements that would allow proper communication and informed prioritization. We have investigated, through a combination of interviews, observations and a survey, what key information is needed by agile product owners and software architects in order to prioritize the refactoring of risky architectural technical debt items with respect to Feature Development.
-
architecture technical debt understanding causes and a qualitative model
Software Engineering and Advanced Applications, 2014Co-Authors: Antonio Martini, Jan Bosch, Michel R V ChaudronAbstract:A known problem in large software companies is to balance the prioritization of short-term with long-term responsiveness. Specifically, architecture violations (Architecture Technical Debt) taken to deliver fast might hinder future Feature Development, which would hinder agility. We conducted a multiple-case embedded case study in 7 sites at 5 large companies in order to shed light on the current causes for the accumulation of Architectural Technical Debt that causes effort. We provide a taxonomy of the factors and their influence in the accumulation of debt, and we provide a qualitative model of how the debt is accumulated and recovered over time.
