Experimental comparison of the comprehensibility of a Z specification and its implementation in Java

Comprehensibility is often raised as a problem with formal notations, yet formal methods practitioners dispute this. In a survey, one interviewee said 'formal specifications are no more difficult to understand than code'. Measurement of comprehension is necessarily comparative and a useful comparison for a specification is against its implementation. Practitioners have an intuitive feel for the comprehension of code. A quantified comparison will transfer this feeling to formal specifications. We performed an experiment to compare the comprehension of a Z specification with that of its implementation in Java. The results indicate there is little difference in comprehensibility between the two. (C) 2004 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Evaluation of agri-environmental and forestry schemes with multiple objectives

The evaluation of EU policy in the area of rural land use management often encounters problems of multiple and poorly articulated objectives. Agri-environmental policy has a range of aims, including natural resource protection, biodiversity conservation and the protection and enhancement of landscape quality. Forestry policy, in addition to production and environmental objectives, increasingly has social aims, including enhancement of human health and wellbeing, lifelong learning, and the cultural and amenity value of the landscape. Many of these aims are intangible, making them hard to define and quantify. This article describes two approaches for dealing with such situations, both of which rely on substantial participation by stakeholders. The first is the Agri-Environment Footprint Index, a form of multi-criteria participatory approach. The other, applied here to forestry, has been the development of ‘multi-purpose’ approaches to evaluation, which respond to the diverse needs of stakeholders through the use of mixed methods and a broad suite of indicators, selected through a participatory process. Each makes use of case studies and involves stakeholders in the evaluation process, thereby enhancing their commitment to the programmes and increasing their sustainability. Both also demonstrate more ‘holistic’ approaches to evaluation than the formal methods prescribed in the EU Common Monitoring and Evaluation Framework.

Deconstruction plan assessment using multi-criteria decision-making methods

The purpose of this paper is to present two multi-criteria decision-making models, including an Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) model and an Analytic Network Process (ANP) model for the assessment of deconstruction plans and to make a comparison between the two models with an experimental case study. Deconstruction planning is under pressure to reduce operation costs, adverse environmental impacts and duration, in the meanwhile to improve productivity and safety in accordance with structure characteristics, site conditions and past experiences. To achieve these targets in deconstruction projects, there is an impending need to develop a formal procedure for contractors to select a most appropriate deconstruction plan. Because numbers of factors influence the selection of deconstruction techniques, engineers definitely need effective tools to conduct the selection process. In this regard, multi-criteria decision-making methods such as AHP have been adopted to effectively support deconstruction technique selection in previous researches. in which it has been proved that AHP method can help decision-makers to make informed decisions on deconstruction technique selection based on a sound technical framework. In this paper, the authors present the application and comparison of two decision-making models including the AHP model and the ANP model for deconstruction plan assessment. The paper concludes that both AHP and ANP are viable and capable tools for deconstruction plan assessment under the same set of evaluation criteria. However, although the ANP can measure relationship among selection criteria and their sub-criteria, which is normally ignored in the AHP, the authors also indicate that whether the ANP model can provide a more accurate result should be examined in further research.