Systematic evaluation of software product line architectures

The architecture of a software product line is one of its most important artifacts as it represents an abstraction of the products that can be generated. It is crucial to evaluate the quality attributes of a product line architecture in order to: increase the productivity of the product line process and the quality of the products; provide a means to understand the potential behavior of the products and, consequently, decrease their time to market; and, improve the handling of the product line variability. The evaluation of product line architecture can serve as a basis to analyze the managerial and economical values of a product line for software managers and architects. Most of the current research on the evaluation of product line architecture does not take into account metrics directly obtained from UML models and their variabilities; the metrics used instead are difficult to be applied in general and to be used for quantitative analysis. This paper presents a Systematic Evaluation Method for UML-based Software Product Line Architecture, the SystEM-PLA. SystEM-PLA differs from current research as it provides stakeholders with a means to: (i) estimate and analyze potential products; (ii) use predefined basic UML-based metrics to compose quality attribute metrics; (iii) perform feasibility and trade-off analysis of a product line architecture with respect to its quality attributes; and, (iv) make the evaluation of product line architecture more flexible. An example using the SEI’s Arcade Game Maker (AGM) product line is presented as a proof of concept, illustrating SystEM-PLA activities. Metrics for complexity and extensibility quality attributes are defined and used to perform a trade-off analysis

Defining and validating a multimodel approach for product architecture derivation and improvement

The final publication is available at Springer via http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-41533-3_24Software architectures are the key to achieving the non-functional requirements (NFRs) in any software project. In software product line (SPL) development, it is crucial to identify whether the NFRs for a specific product can be attained with the built-in architectural variation mechanisms of the product line architecture, or whether additional architectural transformations are required. This paper presents a multimodel approach for quality-driven product architecture derivation and improvement (QuaDAI). A controlled experiment is also presented with the objective of comparing the effectiveness, efficiency, perceived ease of use, intention to use and perceived usefulness with regard to participants using QuaDAI as opposed to the Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method (ATAM). The results show that QuaDAI is more efficient and perceived as easier to use than ATAM, from the perspective of novice software architecture evaluators. However, the other variables were not found to be statistically significant. Further replications are needed to obtain more conclusive results.This research is supported by the MULTIPLE project (MICINN TIN2009-13838) and the Vali+D fellowship program (ACIF/2011/235).González Huerta, J.; Insfrán Pelozo, CE.; Abrahao Gonzales, SM. (2013). Defining and validating a multimodel approach for product architecture derivation and improvement. En Model-Driven Engineering Languages and Systems. Springer. 388-404. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-41533-3_24S388404Ali-Babar, M., Lago, P., Van Deursen, A.: Empirical research in software architecture: opportunities, challenges, and approaches. Empirical Software Engineering 16(5), 539–543 (2011)Ali-Babar, M., Zhu, L., Jeffery, R.: A Framework for Classifying and Comparing Software Architecture Evaluation Methods. In: 15th Australian Software Engineering Conference, Melbourne, Australia, pp. 309–318 (2004)Basili, V.R., Rombach, H.D.: The TAME project: towards improvement-oriented software environments. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 14(6), 758–773 (1988)Barkmeyer, E.J., Feeney, A.B., Denno, P., Flater, D.W., Libes, D.E., Steves, M.P., Wallace, E.K.: Concepts for Automating Systems Integration NISTIR 6928. National Institute of Standards and Technology, U.S. Dept. of Commerce (2003)Bosch, J.: Design and Use of Software Architectures. Adopting and Evolving Product-Line Approach. Addison-Wesley, Harlow (2000)Botterweck, G., O’Brien, L., Thiel, S.: Model-driven derivation of product architectures. In: 22th Int. Conf. on Automated Software Engineering, New York, USA, pp. 469–472 (2007)Buschmann, F., Meunier, R., Rohnert, H., Sommerlad, P., Stal, M.: Pattern-Oriented software architecture, vol. 1: A System of Patterns. Wiley (1996)Cabello, M.E., Ramos, I., Gómez, A., Limón, R.: Baseline-Oriented Modeling: An MDA Approach Based on Software Product Lines for the Expert Systems Development. In: 1st Asia Conference on Intelligent Information and Database Systems, Vietnam (2009)Carifio, J., Perla, R.J.: Ten Common Misunderstandings, Misconceptions, Persistent Myths and Urban Legends about Likert Scales and Likert Response Formats and their Antidotes. Journal of Social Sciences 3(3), 106–116 (2007)Clements, P., Northrop, L.: Software Product Lines: Practices and Patterns. Addison-Wesley, Boston (2007)Czarnecki, K., Kim, C.H.: Cardinality-based feature modeling and constraints: A progress report. In: Int. Workshop on Software Factories, San Diego-CA (2005)Datorro, J.: Convex Optimization & Euclidean Distance Geometry. Meboo Publishing (2005)Davis, F.D.: Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly 13(3), 319–340 (1989)Douglass, B.P.: Real-Time Design Patterns: Robust Scalable Architecture for Real-Time Systems. Addison-Wesley, Boston (2002)Feiler, P.H., Gluch, D.P., Hudak, J.: The Architecture Analysis & Design Language (AADL): An Introduction. Tech. Report CMU/SEI-2006-TN-011. SEI, Carnegie Mellon University (2006)Gómez, A., Ramos, I.: Cardinality-based feature modeling and model-driven engineering: Fitting them together. In: 4th Int. Workshop on Variability Modeling of Software Intensive Systems, Linz, Austria (2010)Gonzalez-Huerta, J., Insfran, E., Abrahao, S.: A Multimodel for Integrating Quality Assessment in Model-Driven Engineering. In: 8th International Conference on the Quality of Information and Communications Technology (QUATIC 2012), Lisbon, Portugal, September 3-6 (2012)Gonzalez-Huerta, J., Insfran, E., Abrahao, S., McGregor, J.D.: Non-functional Requirements in Model-Driven Software Product Line Engineering. In: 4th Int. Workshop on Non-functional System Properties in Domain Specific Modeling Languages, Insbruck, Austria (2012)Guana, V., Correal, V.: Variability quality evaluation on component-based software product lines. In: 15th Int. Software Product Line Conference, Munich, Germany, vol. 2, pp. 19.1–19.8 (2011)Insfrán, E., Abrahão, S., González-Huerta, J., McGregor, J.D., Ramos, I.: A Multimodeling Approach for Quality-Driven Architecture Derivation. In: 21st Int. Conf. on Information Systems Development (ISD 2012), Prato, Italy (2012)ISO/IEC 25000:2005, Software Engineering. Software product Quality Requirements and Evaluation SQuaRE (2005)Kazman, R., Klein, M., Clements, P.: ATAM: Method for Architecture Evaluation (CMU/SEI-2000-TR-004, ADA382629). Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh (2000), http://www.sei.cmu.edu/publications/documents/00.reports/00tr004.htmlKim, T., Ko, I., Kang, S., Lee, D.: Extending ATAM to assess product line architecture. In: 8th IEEE Int. Conference on Computer and Information Technology, Sydney, Australia, pp. 790–797 (2008)Kitchenham, B.A., Pfleeger, S.L., Hoaglin, D.C., Rosenber, J.: Preliminary Guidelines for Empirical Research in Software Engineering. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 28(8) (2002)Kruchten, P.B.: The Rational Unified Process: An Introduction. Addison-Wesley (1999)Martensson, F.: Software Architecture Quality Evaluation. Approaches in an Industrial Context. Ph. D. thesis, Blekinge Institute of Technology, Karlskrona, Sweden (2006)Maxwell, K.: Applied Statistics for Software Managers. Software Quality Institute Series. Prentice-Hall (2002)Olumofin, F.G., Mišic, V.B.: A holistic architecture assessment method for software product lines. Information and Software Technology 49, 309–323 (2007)Perovich, D., Rossel, P.O., Bastarrica, M.C.: Feature model to product architectures: Applying MDE to Software Product Lines. In: IEEE/IFIP & European Conference on Software Architecture, Helsinki, Findland, pp. 201–210 (2009)Robertson, S., Robertson, J.: Mastering the requirements process. ACM Press, New York (1999)Roos-Frantz, F., Benavides, D., Ruiz-Cortés, A., Heuer, A., Lauenroth, K.: Quality-aware analysis in product line engineering with the orthogonal variability model. Software Quality Journal (2011), doi:10.1007/s11219-011-9156-5Saaty, T.L.: The Analytical Hierarchical Process. McGraw- Hill, New York (1990)Taher, L., Khatib, H.E., Basha, R.: A framework and QoS matchmaking algorithm for dynamic web services selection. In: 2nd Int. Conference on Innovations in Information Technology, Dubai, UAE (2005)Wohlin, C., Runeson, P., Host, M., Ohlsson, M.C., Regnell, B., Weslen, A.: Experimentation in Software Engineering - An Introduction. Kluwer (2000

Cloud Architecture Evaluation

Cloud computing has introduced numerous ways to build software systems in the cloud environment. The complexity of today’s system architectures require architecture evaluation in the designing phase of the system, in the implementation phase, and in the maintenance phase. There are many different architecture evaluation models. This thesis discusses three different evaluation models: architecture tradeoff analysis method, cost-benefit analysis method, and AWS Well-Architected framework. The AWS Well-Architected framework is deeply evaluated by performing an architectural evaluation for the case study software: Lixani 5. This thesis introduces and compares the opportunities for cloud architecture evaluation by literature review, case study, and interviews with experts. The thesis begins with introduction to cloud computing, cloud architecture models and architecture evaluation methods. An architecture evaluation for a case study software is then carried out. This thesis also contains interviews with experts, producing knowledge on how the system architecture is being evaluated in the field. The research methods used in the thesis are literature review, case study, and expert interviews. This thesis attempts to describe and assess the architecture evaluation models by using the research methods. In addition, this thesis introduces and discusses the case study software – Lixani 5 – and its architectural decisions. Based on research in the thesis it was noted that all three studied software architecture evaluation models are suitable options for reviewing software architecture. All models included positive and negative aspects and none of them was seen as superior compared to the others. Based on the interviews with experts it was noted that there are also multiple other efficient ways to evaluate the system architecture than the models discussed in the thesis. These ways included a technology audit template and a proof-of-concept culture

Debugging Techniques for Locating Defects in Software Architectures

The explicit design of the architecture for a software product is a well established part of development projects. As the software architecture descriptions are becoming larger and more complex, there is more likelihood of defects being present in the software architecture. Studies have shown that a defect in the software architecture that has propagated to the development phase is very expensive to fix. To prevent such propagation of defects, this research proposes to provide debugging support for software architecture design. Debugging is commonly used in programming languages to effectively find the cause of a failure and locate the error to provide a fix. The same should be accomplished in software architectures to debug architecture failures. Without debugging support, the software architect is unable to quickly locate and determine the source of an error. In our work, we define a process for debugging software architecture and provide analysis techniques to locate defects in a software architecture that fails to meet functional and non-functional requirements. We have implemented the techniques and provide an evaluation of the techniques based on examples using an industry standard architecture definition language, Architecture Analysis and Design Language (AADL)

Análisis de metodologías de validación de una línea de producto de software : caso aplicable a un cajero automático.

El concepto de líneas de producto de software se asocia con el conjunto de sistemas de software que comparte entre sí una serie de características en común. En este orden, en la presente investigación se evalúan diferentes metodologías enfocadas en los procesos de validación de software, siendo estas centralizadas en las líneas de producto de software, para lo cual se analizan algunas de las principales metodologías principales, determinándose aspectos como el campo de aplicación, los atributos de calidad abordados y los criterios de validación, las fases del proyecto, los modelos y artefactos sobre el que se valida, las entradas y salidas consideradas, entre otros elementos. De acuerdo con los resultados del proceso investigativo, se selecciona la metodología ATAM (Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method), considerando el hecho de que es en esencia una herramienta que posibilita el reuso de información, considera la evaluación de varios atributos y se centraliza en el modelado de objetivos. Esta herramienta fue aplicada al diseño de un software de cajero automático, en la que se analizó la priorización de los escenarios, encontrándose que se requiere de una prioridad alta en los módulos de validación de tarjeta y retiro de dinero.The concept of software product lines is associated with the set of software systems that share a series of characteristics in common. In this order, in this research different methodologies focused on software validation processes are evaluated, being centralized in the software product lines, for which some of the main methodologies are analyzed, determining aspects such as the field of application, the attributes of quality addressed and the validation criteria, the phases of the project, the models and artifacts on which it is validated, the inputs and outputs considered, among other elements. According to the results of the research process, the ATAM methodology is selected, considering the fact that it is in essence a tool that enables the reuse of information, considers the evaluation of several attributes and is centralized in the modeling of objectives. This tool was applied to the design of an ATM software, in which the prioritization of the scenarios was analyzed, finding that a high priority is required in the modules of card validation and withdrawal of money