Software Development using the Knowledge Insight Approach.

Abstract

Software development processes currently in use often result in the production of low-quality software. The earlier the properties such as quality, security, safety and reliability are addressed during the software development life cycle, the lower is the development cost and the greater is the probability that the end product functions with no unintended consequences. Unclear and inadequate requirements, unexpected problems during implementation, unwise decisions made in the beginning stages of the projects are some of the reasons, due to which changes may be required in the later stages of the project. A good software development model is one which accommodates changes, has the ability to adapt well to them and minimizes budget and schedule overruns.

The Knowledge Insight Model (KIM) is an iterative software development process. It is flexible enough to accommodate changes at any point during the software development life cycle. KIM is also a higher abstraction of many of the existing software development processes. It consists of four related models, namely, the Framer, the Maker, the Sharer and the Finder. The Framer is responsible for planning the course of action to be taken and defining the strategies, activities and tasks that are required for developing software. The Maker creates a design from the plan formulated by the Framer, which is implemented by the Finder. The Sharer defines the ways in which the activities of the Maker and the Finder can be tracked and monitored. In this way, it implements organized activity and separation of duties very effectively.

The purpose of this thesis is to perform a comparative analysis of the Knowledge Insight Model with some other commonly used models, namely, the Waterfall Model, the Spiral model, the Rational Unified Process (RUP) and Extreme Programming (XP). These models are representatives of various classes of models. By studying each one of them, an understanding of the classes to which they belong, may be developed. The criteria for comparing them are based on the various aspects such as their structure and usability and the system's products, property and success models. This analysis serves to evaluate KIM. The results of this analysis show that the KIM is very flexible. It is also suitable for use as a software development model when evolutionary prototyping is required for all sizes of projects.