Identifying Potential Problems and Risks in GQM+Strategies Models Using Metamodel and Design Principles

Although GQM+Strategies®1 assures that business goals and strategies are aligned throughout an organization and at each organizational unit based on the rationales to achieve the overall business goals, whether the GQM+Strategies grid is created correctly cannot be determined because the current definition of GQM+Strategies allows multiple perspectives when aligning goals with strategies. Here we define modeling rules for GQM+Strategies with a metamodel specified with a UML class diagram. Additionally, we create design principles that consist of relationship constraints between GQM+Strategies elements, which configure GQM+Strategies grids. We demonstrate that the GQM+Strategies grids can be automatically determined with the help of design principles described in OCL. In fact, an experiment is implemented using these approaches in order to show that this method helps identify and improve potential problems and risks. The results confirm that our approaches help create a consistent GQM+Strategies grid

A framework to improve the architecture quality of software intensive systems

Over the past decade, the amount and complexity of software for almost any business sector has increased substantially. Unfortunately, the increased complexity of software in the systems to be built has often lead to a significant mismatch between the planned and the implemented products. One common problem is that system-wide quality attributes such as safety, reliability, performance, and modifiability are not sufficiently considered in software architecture design. Typically, they are addressed in an ad-hoc and unstructured fashion. Since rationales for architectural decisions are frequently missing, risks associated with those decisions can be neither identified, nor mitigated in a systematic way. Consequently, there is a high probability that the resulting software architecture fails to meet business goals and does not allow the building of an adequate system. This work presents QUADRAD, a framework for Quality-Driven Architecture Development. QUADRAD is capable of improving architecture quality for software-intensive systems in a systematic way. It supports the development of architectures that are optimized according to their essential quality requirements. Such architectures permit the building of systems that are better aligned to the principal market needs and business goals. QUADRAD is complemented by the Architecture Exploration Tool (AET), which supports architecture evaluations and helps in documenting the fundamental design decisions of an architecture. QUADRAD has been validated in three industrial projects. For each of these projects the architecture quality could be significantly increased. The results confirm the hypothesis of this work and demonstrate how critical problems in the transition from requirements to architecture design can be mitigated

A Modelling Approach to Multi-Domain Traceability

Traceability is an important concern in projects that span different engineering domains. Traceability can also be mandated, exploited and man- aged across the engineering lifecycle, and may involve defining connections between heterogeneous models. As a result, traceability can be considered to be multi-domain. This thesis introduces the concept and challenges of multi-domain trace- ability and explains how it can be used to support typical traceability scenarios. It proposes a model-based approach to develop a traceability solution which effectively operates across multiple engineering domains. The approach introduced a collection of tasks and structures which address the identified challenges for a traceability solution in multi-domain projects. The proposed approach demonstrates that modelling principles and MDE techniques can help to address current challenges and consequently improve the effectiveness of a multi-domain traceability solution. A prototype of the required tooling to support the approach is implemented with EMF and atop Epsilon; it consists of an implementation of the proposed structures (models) and model management operations to sup- port traceability. Moreover, the approach is illustrated in the context of two safety-critical projects where multi-domain traceability is required to underpin certification arguments

Foundations of Empirical Software Engineering: The Legacy of Victor R. Basili

This book captures the main scientific contributions of Victor R. Basili, who has significantly shaped the field of empirical software engineering from its very start. He was the first to claim that software engineering needed to follow the model of other physical sciences and develop an experimental paradigm. By working on this postulate, he developed concepts that today are well known and widely used, including the Goal-Question-Metric method, the Quality-Improvement paradigm, and the Experience Factory. He is one of the few software pioneers who can aver that their research results are not just scientifically acclaimed but are also used as industry standards. On the occasion of his 65th birthday, celebrated with a symposium in his honor at the International Conference on Software Engineering in St. Louis, MO, USA in May 2005, Barry Boehm, Hans Dieter Rombach, and Marvin V. Zelkowitz, each a long-time collaborator of Victor R. Basili, selected the 20 most important research papers of their friend, and arranged these according to subject field. They then invited renowned researchers to write topical introductions. The result is this commented collection of timeless cornerstones of software engineering, hitherto available only in scattered publications

A Requirements Measurement Program for Systems Engineering Projects: Metrics, Indicators, Models, and Tools for Internal Stakeholders

Software engineering (SE) measurement has shown to lead to improved quality and productivity in software and systems projects and, thus, has received significant attention in the literature, particularly for the design and development stages. In requirements engineering (RE), research and practice has recognized the importance of requirements measurement (RM) for tracking progress, identifying gaps in downstream deliverables related to requirements, managing requirements-related risks, reducing requirements errors and defects, and project management and decision making. However, despite the recognized benefits of RM, research indicates that only 5\% of the literature on SE measurement addresses requirements. This small percentage is reflected in the lack of well-defined and ready to use requirements metrics, approaches, tools, and frameworks that would enable the effective implementation and management of a RM program. Such a program would, in turn, provide the various internal stakeholders with various quantitative requirements-driven information (e.g., measures, indicators, and analytics, etc.) in order for them to better manage, control, and track their respective process activities. This shortage makes the process of RM, at best, complicated and, at worst, non-existent in most projects. The RM process is further complicated in large systems engineering projects due to large project sizes, numerous internal stakeholders, time pressure, large numbers of requirements, other software artifacts, to name a few. This integrated-article thesis aims to address the aforementioned problem through the following main contributions that have been researched and validated within the context of a large systems engineering project in the rail-automation domain: (i) an empirically derived and validated structured requirements metric suite; (ii) an approach for deriving and organizing requirements metrics and related information; (iii) a requirements-centric, measurement-based health assessment framework; (iv) a meta-model for managing requirements -driven information for internal stakeholders; (v) a prototype requirements dashboard that builds upon and automates the concepts in i, ii, iii, and iv. These contributions have implications for research on RM through extending the body of work on RM and promulgating further research. For practice, the results of this thesis are anticipated to facilitate the implementation and management of RM programs in real-world projects

An i*-based Reengineering Framework for Requirements Engineering

Avui en dia, els sistemes d'informació són un actiu clau en les organitzacions i sovint els proporcionen un avantatges competitiu. Per a que això segueixi així, han de ser mantinguts i evolucionats d'acord amb els objectius estratègics de la organització. Aquesta evolució inclou els requeriments del sistema d'informació, la tecnologia emprada i els processos suportats. L'impacte dels canvis pot anar des de petites modificacions al desenvolupament d'un nou sistema d'informació i, per aquest motiu, l'evolució dels sistemes d'informació s'analitza durant la fase de requeriments, on es possible avaluar-ne la magnitud utilitzant menys recursos. Des d'aquest punt de vista, els mètodes de l'enginyeria de requeriments i els de la reenginyeria de processos sovint comparteixen els mateixos objectius i es pot considerar que la reenginyeria de processos es adequada tant per al desenvolupament com per al manteniment dels sistemes d'informació. El llenguatge i* està orientat a objectius i permet modelar els sistemes d'informació en termes d'actors i dependencies entre ells. El llenguatge i* s'utilitza en l'enginyeria de requeriments i en la reenginyeria de processos de negoci, però no existeixen gaires propostes comunes a ambdues disciplines. Amb l'objectiu d'utilitzar el llenguatge i* en la reenginyeria de processos, s'ha definit PRiM, un mètode basat en i* per a la reenginyeria de processos (Proces Reenginieering i*-based Method). PRiM assumeix que ja existeix un procés que s'utilitzarà com a punt de partida per l'especificació o l'evolució del nou sistema d'informació. El mètode PRiM consta de sis fases: 1) l'anàlisi dels processos i dels sistemes d'informació actuals, 2) la construcció del model i*, 3) la reenginyeria dels processos actuals, 4) la generació de models i* representant les diferents alternatives, 5) l'avaluació de les alternatives utilitzant mètriques estructurals i 6) l'especificació del nou sistema d'informació a partir del model i* escollit. En les sis fases de PRiM, s'utilitzen diferents mètodes i tècniques algunes creades expressament pel mètode i d'altres provinents de l'enginyeria de requeriments i la reenginyeria de processos. Tot i això, hi ha altres mètodes i tècniques que poden ser utilitzades enlloc d'aquestes i que poden ser mes convenients quan les condicions d'aplicació del mètode canvien. Per tal de permetre la selecció i inclusió d'altres tècniques, es proposa l'aplicació de l'enginyeria de mètodes (Method Engineering). Aquesta disciplina permet construir nous mètodes a partir de parts de mètodes ja existents, i s'ha utilitzat per definir un mètode marc per a la reenginyeria anomenat ReeF (Reengineering Framework). A ReeF, les sis fases de PRiM es presenten de forma genèrica per tal de permetre la selecció de la tècnica més apropiada per cada una de les fases, a partir de l'experiència de l'usuari com dels seus coneixements de l'aplicació. Com a exemple d'aplicació de ReeF, s'ha definit el mètode SARiM.Les contribucions principals de la tesis son dues. En primer lloc, els dos mètodes basats en i* definits (PRiM per a la reenginyeria de processos, i SARiM, per a la reenginyeria d'arquitectures software). En segon lloc, les diferents tècniques i* definides en PRiM i que poden ser utilitzades per construir models i*, generar alternatives i avaluar-les amb mètriques estructurals. Aquestes tècniques i mètodes s'han obtingut a partir de l'estudi de l'estat de l'art i s'han validat en diferents casos d'estudi formatius i en un cas d'estudi industrial. Com a suport, s'han desenvolupat dues eines: 1) REDEPEND-REACT, que permet la modelització gràfica de models i*, la generació d'alternatives i la definició de mètriques estructurals, i 2) J-PRiM, que dóna suport a les fases de PRiM mitjançant el tractament textual dels models i*.Information Systems are a crucial asset of the organizations and can provide competitive advantages to them. However, once the Information System is built, it has to be maintained and evolved, which includes changes on the requirements, the technology used, or the business processes supported. All these changes are diverse in nature and may require different treatments according to their impact, ranging from small improvements to the deployment of a new Information System. In both situations, changes are addressed at the requirements level, where decisions are analysed involving less resources. Because Requirements Engineering and Business Process Reengineering methods share common activities, and the design of the Information System with the business strategy has to be maintained during its evolution, a Business Process Reengineering approach is adequate for addressing Information Systems Development when there is an existing Information System to be used as starting point. The i* framework is a well-consolidated goal-oriented approach that allows to model Information Systems in a graphical way, in terms of actors and dependencies among them. The i* framework addresses Requirements Engineering and Business Process Reengineering but none of the i*-based existing approaches provides a complete framework for reengineering. In order to explore the applicability of i* for a reengineering framework, we have defined PRiM: a Process Reengineering i* Method, which assumes that there is an existing process that is the basis for the specification of the new Information System. PRiM is a six-phase method that combines techniques from the fields of Business Process Reengineering and Requirements Engineering and defines new techniques when needed. As a result PRiM addresses: 1) the analysis of the current process using socio-technical analysis techniques; 2) the construction of the i* model by differentiating the operationalization of the process form the strategic intentionality behind it; 3) the reengineering of the current process based on its analysis for improvements using goal acquisition techniques; 4) the generation of alternatives based on heuristics and patterns; 5) the evaluation of alternatives by defining structural metrics; and, 6) the specification of the new Information System from the selected i* model.There are several techniques from the Requirements Engineering and Business Process Reengineering fields, that can be used instead the ones selected in PRiM. Therefore, in order to not enforce the application of a certain technique we propose a more generic framework where to use and combine them. Method Engineering is the discipline that constructs new methods from parts of existing ones and, so, it is the approach adopted to define ReeF: a Reengineering Framework. In ReeF the six phases of PRiM are abstracted and generalized in order to allow selecting the most appropriate techniques for each of the phases, depending on the user expertise and the domain of application. As an example of the applicability of ReeF, the new method SARiM is defined. The main contributions of this work are twofold. On the one hand, two i*-based methods are defined: the PRiM method, which addresses process reengineering, and SARiM, which addresses software architecture reengineering. On the other hand, we provide several i*-based techniques to be used for constructing i* models, generating alternatives, and evaluating them using Structural Metrics. These methods and techniques are based on exhaustive review of existing work and their validation is done by means of several formative case studies and an industrial case study. Tool support has been developed for the approach: REDEPEND-REACT supporting the graphical modelling of i*, the generation of alternatives and the definition of Structural Metrics; and J-PRiM supporting all the phases of the PRiM method using a textual visualization of the i* models

A mapping study on documentation in Continuous Software Development

Context: With an increase in Agile, Lean, and DevOps software methodologies over the last years (collectively referred to as Continuous Software Development (CSD)), we have observed that documentation is often poor. Objective: This work aims at collecting studies on documentation challenges, documentation practices, and tools that can support documentation in CSD. Method: A systematic mapping study was conducted to identify and analyze research on documentation in CSD, covering publications between 2001 and 2019. Results: A total of 63 studies were selected. We found 40 studies related to documentation practices and challenges, and 23 studies related to tools used in CSD. The challenges include: informal documentation is hard to understand, documentation is considered as waste, productivity is measured by working software only, documentation is out-of-sync with the software and there is a short-term focus. The practices include: non-written and informal communication, the usage of development artifacts for documentation, and the use of architecture frameworks. We also made an inventory of numerous tools that can be used for documentation purposes in CSD. Overall, we recommend the usage of executable documentation, modern tools and technologies to retrieve information and transform it into documentation, and the practice of minimal documentation upfront combined with detailed design for knowledge transfer afterwards. Conclusion: It is of paramount importance to increase the quantity and quality of documentation in CSD. While this remains challenging, practitioners will benefit from applying the identified practices and tools in order to mitigate the stated challenges

Managing Epistemic Uncertainties in the Underlying Models of Safety Assessment for Safety-Critical Systems

When conducting safety assessment for safety-critical systems, epistemic uncertainty is an ever-present challenge when reasoning about the safety concerns and causal relationships related to hazards. Uncertainty around this causation thus needs to be managed well. Unfortunately, existing safety assessment tends to ignore unknown uncertainties, and stakeholders rarely track known uncertainties well through the system lifecycle. In this thesis, an approach is described for managing epistemic uncertainties about the system and safety causal models that are applied in a safety assessment. First, the principles that define the requirements for the approach are introduced. Next, these principles are used to construct three distinct steps that constitute an approach to manage such uncertainties. These three steps involve identifying, documenting and tracking the uncertainties throughout the system lifecycle so as to enable intervention to address the uncertainties. The approach is evaluated by integrating it with two existing safety assessment techniques, one using models from a system viewpoint and the other with models from a component viewpoint. This approach is also evaluated through peer reviews, semi-structured interviews with practitioners, and by review against requirements derived from the principles. Based on the evaluation results, it is plausible that our approach can provide a feasible and systematic way to manage epistemic uncertainties in safety assessment for safety-critical systems