4,240 research outputs found
Boundary Objects and their Use in Agile Systems Engineering
Agile methods are increasingly introduced in automotive companies in the
attempt to become more efficient and flexible in the system development. The
adoption of agile practices influences communication between stakeholders, but
also makes companies rethink the management of artifacts and documentation like
requirements, safety compliance documents, and architecture models.
Practitioners aim to reduce irrelevant documentation, but face a lack of
guidance to determine what artifacts are needed and how they should be managed.
This paper presents artifacts, challenges, guidelines, and practices for the
continuous management of systems engineering artifacts in automotive based on a
theoretical and empirical understanding of the topic. In collaboration with 53
practitioners from six automotive companies, we conducted a design-science
study involving interviews, a questionnaire, focus groups, and practical data
analysis of a systems engineering tool. The guidelines suggest the distinction
between artifacts that are shared among different actors in a company (boundary
objects) and those that are used within a team (locally relevant artifacts). We
propose an analysis approach to identify boundary objects and three practices
to manage systems engineering artifacts in industry
Towards the Model-Driven Engineering of Secure yet Safe Embedded Systems
We introduce SysML-Sec, a SysML-based Model-Driven Engineering environment
aimed at fostering the collaboration between system designers and security
experts at all methodological stages of the development of an embedded system.
A central issue in the design of an embedded system is the definition of the
hardware/software partitioning of the architecture of the system, which should
take place as early as possible. SysML-Sec aims to extend the relevance of this
analysis through the integration of security requirements and threats. In
particular, we propose an agile methodology whose aim is to assess early on the
impact of the security requirements and of the security mechanisms designed to
satisfy them over the safety of the system. Security concerns are captured in a
component-centric manner through existing SysML diagrams with only minimal
extensions. After the requirements captured are derived into security and
cryptographic mechanisms, security properties can be formally verified over
this design. To perform the latter, model transformation techniques are
implemented in the SysML-Sec toolchain in order to derive a ProVerif
specification from the SysML models. An automotive firmware flashing procedure
serves as a guiding example throughout our presentation.Comment: In Proceedings GraMSec 2014, arXiv:1404.163
Requirements engineering and continuous deployment
This article summarizes the RE in the Age of Continuous Deployment panel at the 25th IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference. It highlights two synergistic points (user stories and linguistic tooling) and one challenge (nonfunctional requirements) in fast-paced, agile-like projects, and recommends how to carry on the dialogue.Peer ReviewedPostprint (author's final draft
Software Engineers' Information Seeking Behavior in Change Impact Analysis - An Interview Study
Software engineers working in large projects must navigate complex
information landscapes. Change Impact Analysis (CIA) is a task that relies on
engineers' successful information seeking in databases storing, e.g., source
code, requirements, design descriptions, and test case specifications. Several
previous approaches to support information seeking are task-specific, thus
understanding engineers' seeking behavior in specific tasks is fundamental. We
present an industrial case study on how engineers seek information in CIA, with
a particular focus on traceability and development artifacts that are not
source code. We show that engineers have different information seeking
behavior, and that some do not consider traceability particularly useful when
conducting CIA. Furthermore, we observe a tendency for engineers to prefer less
rigid types of support rather than formal approaches, i.e., engineers value
support that allows flexibility in how to practically conduct CIA. Finally, due
to diverse information seeking behavior, we argue that future CIA support
should embrace individual preferences to identify change impact by empowering
several seeking alternatives, including searching, browsing, and tracing.Comment: Accepted for publication in the proceedings of the 25th International
Conference on Program Comprehensio
Proceedings of the 9th Overture Workshop
This report contains the proceedings of The 9th Overture Workshop, held in Limerick on 20th June 2011
The Impact of Requirements on Systems Development Speed: A Multiple-Case Study in Automotive
Automotive\ua0manufacturers have historically adopted rigid\ua0requirements\ua0engineering processes. This allowed them to meet safety-critical\ua0requirements\ua0when producing\ua0a\ua0highly complex and differentiated product out of the integration of thousands of physical and software components. Nowadays, few software-related domains are as rapidly changing as the\ua0automotive\ua0industry.\ua0In\ua0particular, the needs of improving\ua0development\ua0speed\ua0are increasingly pushing companies\ua0in\ua0this domain toward new ways of developing software.\ua0In\ua0this paper, we investigate how the goal to increase\ua0development\ua0speed\ua0impacts how\ua0requirements\ua0are managed\ua0in\ua0the\ua0automotive\ua0domain. We start from\ua0a\ua0manager perspective, which we then complement with\ua0a\ua0more general perspective. We used\ua0a\ua0qualitative\ua0multiple-case\ua0study, organized\ua0in\ua0two steps.\ua0In\ua0the first step, we had 20 semi-structured interviews, at two\ua0automotive\ua0manufacturers. Our sampling strategy focuses on manager roles, complemented with technical specialists.\ua0In\ua0the second step, we validated our results with 12 more interviews, covering nine additional respondents and three recurring from the first step.\ua0In\ua0addition to validating our qualitative model, the second step of interviews broadens our perspective with technical experts and change managers. Our respondents indicate and rank six aspects of the current\ua0requirements\ua0engineering approach that\ua0impact\ua0development\ua0speed. These aspects include the negative\ua0impact\ua0of\ua0a\ua0requirements\ua0style dominated by safety concerns as well as decomposition of\ua0requirements\ua0over many levels of abstraction. Furthermore, the use of\ua0requirements\ua0as part of legal contracts with suppliers is seen as hindering fast collaboration. Six additional suggestions for potential improvements include domain-specific tooling, model-based\ua0requirements, test automation, and\ua0a\ua0combination of lightweight upfront\ua0requirements\ua0engineering preceding\ua0development\ua0with precise specifications post-development. Out of these 12 aspects, seven can likely be addressed as part of an ongoing agile transformation. We offer an empirical account of expectations and needs for new\ua0requirements\ua0engineering approaches\ua0in\ua0the\ua0automotive\ua0domain, necessary to coordinate hundreds of collaborating organizations developing software-intensive and potentially safety-critical\ua0systems
- …