## 2 Research Background Overview
### Research Problem and Methods  
There are a number of problems that require additional Design Science Research in IS and make it difficult to develop spatial analysis tools that use SP in CSS analysis. User-defined SP have to conform to CSS problems and are critically dependent upon human cognitive (e.g., creativity) and social (e.g., teamwork) abilities to produce effective solutions [1], so SP must be flexible and configurable. The methods and tools are missing understanding of what can be achieved through the deployment of generic tools and what has to be developed which is specific to that discipline, as many of the spatial problems, across domains, have many common features but are distinguished by the different objectives of the units in those sectors [6]. Because of the high levels of connectivity between different entities and subsystems, there is a strong argument for building a very comprehensive model, but the ideal solution is often impractical, and the partial approaches have to be used [6]. Existing spatial analysis methods and tools can only describe and identify user-defined SP in CSS to a very limited extent, as the constructs created by these methods (such as Space Syntax) are too complex and difficult to understand. Although the taxonomy of SP has been studied extensively, there remains a lack of a clear criterion for SP formalization and automatic identification [29]. Though SP can be regarded as abstract types that allow generalization and a better understanding of the spatial entities, there is no single correct way of classifying SP nor identifying SP types [17; 30]. There are already empirically determined urban patterns [20; 21; 22; 31], but the tool, that would let planning and designing practitioners to identify those SP and have various recommendations and indicators for commercial and social objects placement or utility indicators for public and private sector needs, is still missing. In the existing quantitative GIS tools, the preliminary systems analysis and theorizing cannot be done in activities, such as entitation, scale context, spatial representation, model partial-comprehensive, and appropriate conceptualization [6]. There are two main research methods used in this work: Design Science Research in IS [1] and Complex Spatial System Approach [6]. Both of these methods are defined in Table 1, showing how the process and the goal of the Design Science Research in IS can be aligned with the goal and the process of CSS analysis. The main concept of this work is to achieve (to analyze, design and test in computerized manner) the structural approach as it is defined by CSS theorists and formalize it as the methodology (SPDIAM). In a general sense, Design Science Research in IS addresses the problems characterized by unstable requirements and constraints, based on ill-defined environmental contexts, complex interactions among subcomponents of the problem, inherent flexibility to change design processes, and design artifacts, and, here, one repeatedly st \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline  & **Design Science Research in IS [1]** & **Complex Spatial System Approach [1]** \\ \hline Process & 1. & Problem identification and motivation & 1. & Articulation of system of interest \\  & 2. & Definition of objectives & 2. & Theory development for system \\  & 3. & Design and development & & (needs toolkit of concepts to use \\  & 4. & Demonstration & 3. & \\  & 5. & Evaluation & & \\  & 6. & Communication & & theory \\ \hline Goal & Artifacts: & & & \\  & \(\bullet\) & Constructs & System models: & \\  & \(\bullet\) & Models & \(\bullet\) & Functional approach \\  & \(\bullet\) & Instantiations & \(\bullet\) & Structural approach \\  & \(\bullet\) & Better design theories & & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 1: Research methods used to define SP problem in CSS. plex systems and their behavior [1]. CSS approach could be divided into the functional (static) versus structural (dynamic) approaches [6].