25,805 research outputs found

    Developing software and systems engineering standards

    Get PDF
    There are a great many Software and Systems Engineering standards such as those supported by organizations like the ISO (International Organization for Standardization). It is often said that many of these have a poor reputation with many sections of academia and industry. Whilst there may be many publicized business advantages of using standards, standardization is an often-neglected route for exploiting academic and commercial research. Often researchers have little experience of standardization to plan, implement and exploit their research utilizing standards. Involvement with standards development organizations in your research can positively increase international recognition and highlight in a world stage your research and enhance your international reputation. This keynote address examined the benefits of being directly involved in the standards community for both industry and academia and specifically how standards can inform your research. Based upon personal experience as Ireland Head of Delegation to ISO's Software and Systems Engineering group and that of being an ISO standards editor, this keynote will examine the issues and benefits of becoming actively involved inside the standardization community and how this can be translated into your personal research agenda

    Systems Engineering Leading Indicators Guide, Version 2.0

    Get PDF
    The Systems Engineering Leading Indicators Guide editorial team is pleased to announce the release of Version 2.0. Version 2.0 supersedes Version 1.0, which was released in July 2007 and was the result of a project initiated by the Lean Advancement Initiative (LAI) at MIT in cooperation with: the International Council on Systems Engineering (INCOSE), Practical Software and Systems Measurement (PSM), and the Systems Engineering Advancement Research Initiative (SEAri) at MIT. A leading indicator is a measure for evaluating the effectiveness of how a specific project activity is likely to affect system performance objectives. A leading indicator may be an individual measure or a collection of measures and associated analysis that is predictive of future systems engineering performance. Systems engineering performance itself could be an indicator of future project execution and system performance. Leading indicators aid leadership in delivering value to customers and end users and help identify interventions and actions to avoid rework and wasted effort. Conventional measures provide status and historical information. Leading indicators use an approach that draws on trend information to allow for predictive analysis. By analyzing trends, predictions can be forecast on the outcomes of certain activities. Trends are analyzed for insight into both the entity being measured and potential impacts to other entities. This provides leaders with the data they need to make informed decisions and where necessary, take preventative or corrective action during the program in a proactive manner. Version 2.0 guide adds five new leading indicators to the previous 13 for a new total of 18 indicators. The guide addresses feedback from users of the previous version of the guide, as well as lessons learned from implementation and industry workshops. The document format has been improved for usability, and several new appendices provide application information and techniques for determining correlations of indicators. Tailoring of the guide for effective use is encouraged. Additional collaborating organizations involved in Version 2.0 include the Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR), US Department of Defense Systems Engineering Research Center (SERC), and National Defense Industrial Association (NDIA) Systems Engineering Division (SED). Many leading measurement and systems engineering experts from government, industry, and academia volunteered their time to work on this initiative

    EsaCake: a semantic software enviroment for sharing software proyects knowledge based on the ESA software methodology

    Get PDF
    Proceedings of: The Third International Conference on Internet and Web Applications and Services (ICIW 2008), 8-13 June 2008, Athens, GreeceThere is an increasing need of defining standards at the beginning of any engineering project. The correct specification of standards has become essential in software development in order to handle correctly the development of projects. Nowadays the need to define standards at the outset of any engineering project is more evident than ever. The specification of standards has become an essential topic which universities try to teach to software engineering students. In fact, software creation processes are required intrinsically to be produced according to a systematic methodology to enable constant control during the project life cycle. This paper presents a new environment that enables semantic and social interaction of documentation produced during software development processes.This work is supported by the Spanish Ministry of Industry, Tourism, and Commerce under the project GODO (FIT-340000-2007-134), under the PIBES project of the Spanish Committee of Education & Science (TEC2006-12365-C02-01) and the MID-CBR project of the Spanish Committee of Education & Science (TIN2006-15140-C03-02).Publicad

    A DISCUSSION ON ASSURING SOFTWARE QUALITY IN SMALL AND MEDIUM SOFTWARE ENTERPRISES: AN EMPIRICAL INVESTIGATION

    Get PDF
    Under the studies of general core activities including software inspection, review and testing to achieve quality objectives in small-medium size enterprises (SMEs), the paper presents a contemporary view of such companies against quality measures. The results from a local empirical investigation of quality standards in the Turkish software industry are reported.Around 150 software companies have been approached from which 17 detailed feedback inform that in order to ensure software quality, standards including internationally recognized International Standards Organization (ISO) and Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) are given credit. However the substantial workload and resources required to obtain them are also reported as serious; downscaled frameworks of such large models proposed in the literature are not well known by the SMEs either. The paper also discusses "work around" that bypasses such standards to ease delivery of products while keeping certificates as labels just to acquire new jobs for the business

    Set-Based Concurrent Engineering Model for Automotive Electronic/Software Systems Development

    Get PDF
    Organised by: Cranfield UniversityThis paper is presenting a proposal of a novel approach to automotive electronic/software systems development. It is based on the combination of Set-Based Concurrent Engineering, a Toyota approach to product development, with the standard V-Model of software development. Automotive industry currently faces the problem of growing complexity of electronic/software systems. This issue is especially visible at the level of integration of these systems which is difficult and error-prone. The presented conceptual proposal is to establish better processes that could handle the electronic/software systems design and development in a more integrated and consistent manner.Mori Seiki – The Machine Tool Compan

    International conference on software engineering and knowledge engineering: Session chair

    Get PDF
    The Thirtieth International Conference on Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering (SEKE 2018) will be held at the Hotel Pullman, San Francisco Bay, USA, from July 1 to July 3, 2018. SEKE2018 will also be dedicated in memory of Professor Lofti Zadeh, a great scholar, pioneer and leader in fuzzy sets theory and soft computing. The conference aims at bringing together experts in software engineering and knowledge engineering to discuss on relevant results in either software engineering or knowledge engineering or both. Special emphasis will be put on the transference of methods between both domains. The theme this year is soft computing in software engineering & knowledge engineering. Submission of papers and demos are both welcome

    Teaching Software Development to Non-Software Engineering Students

    Get PDF
    This paper argues that although the object-oriented programming (OOP) paradigm is appropriate for students taking programming modules on Higher Education (HE) software engineering course, this paradigm is not as relevant for students from other courses who study programming modules. It is also asserts that adopting another paradigm when teaching programming to non-software engineering students need not prevent the encouragement of good software engineering practices The paper discusses the software development model, procedures, techniques and programming language that the author requires non-software engineering students to employ when developing their software. This discussion also includes consideration of implementation issues in an educational context. The paper concludes that his alternative approach has been successfully implemented, that it requires the student to adopt a rigorous approach to development and that it encourages best software engineering practices. The conclusions also note that delivering this alternative offers the opportunity to include good educational practice, such as role-play

    Systems Engineering Leading Indicators Guide, Version 1.0

    Get PDF
    The Systems Engineering Leading Indicators guide set reflects the initial subset of possible indicators that were considered to be the highest priority for evaluating effectiveness before the fact. A leading indicator is a measure for evaluating the effectiveness of a how a specific activity is applied on a program in a manner that provides information about impacts that are likely to affect the system performance objectives. A leading indicator may be an individual measure, or collection of measures, that are predictive of future system performance before the performance is realized. Leading indicators aid leadership in delivering value to customers and end users, while assisting in taking interventions and actions to avoid rework and wasted effort. The Systems Engineering Leading Indicators Guide was initiated as a result of the June 2004 Air Force/LAI Workshop on Systems Engineering for Robustness, this guide supports systems engineering revitalization. Over several years, a group of industry, government, and academic stakeholders worked to define and validate a set of thirteen indicators for evaluating the effectiveness of systems engineering on a program. Released as version 1.0 in June 2007 the leading indicators provide predictive information to make informed decisions and where necessary, take preventative or corrective action during the program in a proactive manner. While the leading indicators appear similar to existing measures and often use the same base information, the difference lies in how the information is gathered, evaluated, interpreted and used to provide a forward looking perspective
    corecore