View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Architecture ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs) |  Decision Making Argument Mapping |  Architecture C4 Model |  Architecture arc42 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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. | 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. | 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. | arc42 structures architecture knowledge so teams can document system, decisions, and risks consistently. The template builds a living understanding of the architecture instead of scattered notes. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional | 1-3 h | 1-4 h | 1-2 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | Designers, developers as users, and facilitation | 1-8 | 1-5 | 1-4 |
Formatsame | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Prioritized development tasks, Jointly produced code or pseudocode, Observed difficulties and open design questions, Proposed design revisions | Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale | Context Diagram, Container Diagram, Component Diagram | Architecture Document, Context View, Runtime View, Deployment View |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks | SensemakingDecisionRationale | ArchitectureCommunicationVisualization | ArchitectureDocumentationCommunication |