View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Knowledge Modeling Feynman Technique |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |  Architecture C4 Model |  Knowledge Modeling IBIS |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | The Feynman Technique checks understanding by explaining a topic so that it stays easy for others to understand. It makes knowledge gaps visible before they become costly in everyday work. | An ADR permanently records an architecture decision with context, trade-offs, and consequence. It creates continuity for later changes because the decision path stays traceable. | 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. | IBIS structures thinking about complex questions as a sequence of issues, ideas, and arguments. The method keeps discussions open without forcing them into premature consensus. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Low | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 20-60 min | 15-45 min | 1-4 h | 1-3 h |
Participantsdifferent | 1 | 1-3 | 1-5 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Async | Async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Plain-language Explanation, Knowledge Gaps, Study Notes | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale | Context Diagram, Container Diagram, Component Diagram | Issue Map, Positions, Argument Notes |
Tagsno overlap | LearningKnowledgeUnderstanding | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | ArchitectureCommunicationVisualization | RationaleKnowledgeDecision |