View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Decision Making Argument Mapping |  Engineering Fault Isolation |  Architecture C4 Model |  Architecture ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When statements, evidence, and counterarguments get mixed up, a debate quickly loses its structure. Argument Mapping breaks a thesis down into its reasoning and makes visible what it really rests on. | In technical failures, the visible symptom often gets mixed up with the actual cause. Fault Isolation narrows the fault space and progressively reduces which part of the system is truly affected. | The C4 Model makes a system legible across several resolution levels, from context down to code. It suits situations where different audiences need to understand the same architecture from different altitudes. | ARID examines how well developers can work with a technical design. It focuses on a part of the system that can still be revised, between the architecture overview and the detailed specification. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-3 h | 30-180 min | 1-4 h | 2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional |
Participantsdifferent | 1-8 | 1-6 | 1-5 | Designers, developers as users, and facilitation |
Formatsame | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale | Fault Isolation Map, Test Log, Excluded Hypotheses, Narrowed Fault Area | Context Diagram, Container Diagram, Component Diagram | Prioritized development tasks, Jointly produced code or pseudocode, Observed difficulties and open design questions, Proposed design revisions |
Tagsno overlap | SensemakingDecisionRationale | TroubleshootingDiagnosisEngineering | ArchitectureCommunicationVisualization | ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks |