Exploring Knowledge Engineering Strategies in Designing and Modelling a Road Traffic Accident Management Domain

Formulating knowledge for use in AI Planning engines is currently something of an ad-hoc process, where the skills of knowledge engineers and the tools they use may significantly influence the quality of the resulting planning application. There is little in the way of guidelines or standard procedures, however, for knowledge engineers to use when formulating knowledge into planning domain languages such as PDDL. This paper seeks to investigate this process using as a case study a road traffic accident management domain. Managing road accidents requires systematic, sound planning and coordination of resources to improve outcomes for accident victims. We have derived a set of requirements in consultation with stakeholders for the resource coordination part of managing accidents. We evaluate two separate knowledge engineering strategies for encoding the resulting planning domain from the set of requirements: (a) the traditional method of PDDL experts and text editor, and (b) a leading planning GUI with built in UML modelling tools. These strategies are evaluated using process and product metrics, where the domain model (the product) was tested extensively with a range of planning engines. The results give insights into the strengths and weaknesses of the approaches, highlight lessons learned regarding knowledge encoding, and point to important lines of research for knowledge engineering for planning

The Key Functions and Best Practices of Software Product Management

This paper is basically an overview, practitioners approach and best practices of software product management. The basic functions of software product management, right from product concept, prototype development, requirements management, product planning, planning product lines, product development, product testing, product launch and deployment, product marketing, aligning product management with program management, the relationship of product management with individual project management and product withdrawal are discussed in this paper. This paper high lights some of the best practices of software product management and managing individual software projects. This paper gives a bird eye view of software product management with a block diagram, shows the relationship between product management and individual project management, product roadmap, different releases of software product and their relationships and flow of software product from one version to another version

Software Product Line Engineering: Future Research Directions

The recent trend of switching from single software product development tolines of software products in the software industry has made the software product line concept viable and widely accepted methodology in the future. Some of the potential benefits of this approach include cost reduction, improvement in quality and a decrease in product development time. Many organizations that deal in wide areas of operation, from consumer electronics, telecommunications, and avionics to information technology, are using software product lines practice because it deals with effective utilization ofsoftware assets and provides numerous benefits. Software product line engineering is an inter-disciplinary concept. It spans over the dimensions of business, architecture, process and organization. The business dimension of software product lines deals with managing a strong coordination between product line engineering and the business aspects of product line. Software product line architecture is regarded as one of the crucial piece of entity in software product lines. All the resulting products share thiscommon architecture. The organizational theories, behavior and management play critical role in the process of institutionalization of software product line engineering in an organization. The objective of this chapter is to discuss the state of the art of software product line engineering from the perspectives of business, architecture, organizational management and software engineering process. This work also highlights and discusses the future research directions in this area thus providing an opportunity to researchers and practitioners to better understand the future trends and requirements

A comparison of two SPLE tools : Pure::Variants and Clafer tools

In software product line engineering (SPLE), parts of developed software is made variable in order to be able to build a whole range of software products at the same time. This is widely known to have a number of potential benefits such as saving costs when the product line is large enough. However, managing variability in software introduces challenges that are not well addressed by tools used in conventional software engineering, and specialized tools are needed. Research questions: 1) What are the most important requirements for SPLE tools for a small-to-medium sized organisation aiming to experiment with SPLE? 2) How well those requirements are met in two specific SPLE tools, Pure::Variants and Clafer tools? 3) How do the studied tools compare against each other when it comes to their suitability for the chosen context (a digital board game platform)? 4) How common requirements for SPL tools can be generalized to be applicable for both graphical and text-based tools? A list of requirements is first obtained from literature and then used as a basis for an experiment where support for each requirement is tried out with both tools. Then a part of an example product line is developed with both tools and the experiences reported on. Both tools were found to support the list of requirements quite well, although there were some usability problems and not everything could be tested due to technical issues. Based on developing the example, both tools were found to have their own strengths and weaknesses probably partly resulting from one being GUI-based and one textual. ACM Computing Classification System (CCS): (1) CCS → Software and its engineering → Software creation and management → Software development techniques → Reusability → Software product lines (2) CCS → Software and its engineering → Software notations and tools → Software configuration management and version control system

Software evolution in model-driven product line engineering

New requirements and technology changes lead to continuous changes of the assets comprising a software product line. Since the product line represents a large number of potential products (or already deployed products) in a given domain, managing these changes becomes a key issue when dealing with evolution. We present a framework to support the development and evolution of highquality software product lines. The framework is based on several interrelated models or system views (eg, functionality, variability, quality) and a production plan defined by model transformations that generate a software system that meets both functional and quality requirements. We used our framework to develop a software system for the automotive domain.Abrahao Gonzales, SM.; González Huerta, J.; Insfrán Pelozo, CE.; Ramos Salavert, I. (2012). Software evolution in model-driven product line engineering. Ercim News. 88:41-43. http://hdl.handle.net/10251/46692S41438

Managing Product Line Asset Bases

Product lines are predicated on collecting assets common to the desired product portfolio, commonly known as the asset base. For many product lines, the size of asset base has become large enough to create a variety of difficulties. The techniques for managing large product line asset bases are unaddressed in the literature. This research presents new techniques that take advantage of asset base characteristics, unavailable in more general collections, to both reduce the number of assets and to organize the asset base that go beyond what is possible with other software collections. The result is an asset base that is more efficient to use. Research related to improving the organization of the asset base was performed by taking the component assets of a research SPL and arranging them based on three different organizational criteria - according to the structure of the architecture, important abstractions (Key Domain Abstractions), and product features. The three resulting organizations were then studied using four evaluation criteria - natural division of assets into groups (assets fit into the groups provided by the organization), easy to map assets to organization criteria (mapping between the selection of a particular product variant and the assets needed to produce it), reasonably sized groups, and similarly sized groups. The effectiveness of the different organizations was then compared and recommendations concerning asset base organization provided. The literature indicates that large product lines are likely to contain multiple assets that provide the same functionality, but that differ in the program context that they support. The presence of the duplicative assets creates a number of problems including organization difficulties. In a SPL these differences in program context are the result of requirements expressed at the product`s variation points. The limited differences in program context make it practical to attempt to provide a modular solution which permits the desired variation to be assembled as needed. The research explored a number of different implementation mechanisms to provide these modular variation points. The result is a recommendation on how to implement SPL variation points provided in the form of a pattern language

A Data Mining Technique to Improve Configuration Prioritization Framework for Component-based Systems: An Empirical Study

In the current application development strategies, families of products are developed with personalized configurations to increase stakeholders’ satisfaction. Product lines have the ability to address several requirements due to their reusability and configuration properties. The structuring and prioritizing of configuration requirements facilitate the development processes, whereas it increases the conflicts and inadequacies. This results in increasing human effort, reducing user satisfaction, and failing to accommodate a continuous evolution in configuration requirements. To address these challenges, we propose a framework for managing the prioritization process considering heterogeneous stakeholders priority semantically. Features are analyzed, and mined configuration priority using the data mining method based on frequently accessed and changed configurations. Firstly, priority is identified based on heterogeneous stakeholder’s perspectives using three factors functional, experiential, and expressive values. Secondly, the mined configuration is based on frequently accessed or changed configuration frequency to identify the new priority for reducing failures or errors among configuration interaction. We evaluated the performance of the proposed framework with the help of an experimental study and by comparing it with analytical hierarchical prioritization (AHP) and Clustering. The results indicate a significant increase (more than 90 percent) in the precision and the recall value of the proposed framework, for all selected cases

Integration of Quality Attributes in Software Product Line Development

Different approaches for building modern software systems in complex and open environments have been proposed in the last few years. Some efforts try to apply Software Product Line (SPL) approach to take advantage of the massive reuse for producing software systems that share a common set of features. In general quality assurance is a crucial activity for success in software industry, but it is even more important when talking about Software Product Lines since the intensive reuse of assets makes the quality attributes (a measurable physical or abstract property of an entity) of the assets to be transmitted to the whole SPL scope. However, despite the importance that quality has in software product line development, most of the methodologies being applied in Software Product Line Development focus only on managing the commonalities and variability within the product line and not giving support to the non--¿ functional requirements that the products must fit. The main goal of this master final work is to introduce quality attributes in early stages of software product line development processes by means of the definition of a production plan that, on one hand, integrates quality as an additional view for describing the extension of the software product line and, on the other hand introduces the quality attributes as a decision factor during product configuration and when selecting among design alternatives. Our approach has been defined following the Model--¿ Driven Software Development paradigm. Therefore all the software artifacts defined had its correspondent metamodels and the processes defined rely on automated model transformations. Finally in order to illustrate the feasibility of the approach we have integrated the quality view in an SPL example in the context of safety critical embedded systems on the automotive domain.González Huerta, J. (2011). Integration of Quality Attributes in Software Product Line Development. http://hdl.handle.net/10251/15835Archivo delegad

A systematic review of quality attributes and measures for software product lines

[EN] It is widely accepted that software measures provide an appropriate mechanism for understanding, monitoring, controlling, and predicting the quality of software development projects. In software product lines (SPL), quality is even more important than in a single software product since, owing to systematic reuse, a fault or an inadequate design decision could be propagated to several products in the family. Over the last few years, a great number of quality attributes and measures for assessing the quality of SPL have been reported in literature. However, no studies summarizing the current knowledge about them exist. This paper presents a systematic literature review with the objective of identifying and interpreting all the available studies from 1996 to 2010 that present quality attributes and/or measures for SPL. These attributes and measures have been classified using a set of criteria that includes the life cycle phase in which the measures are applied; the corresponding quality characteristics; their support for specific SPL characteristics (e. g., variability, compositionality); the procedure used to validate the measures, etc. We found 165 measures related to 97 different quality attributes. The results of the review indicated that 92% of the measures evaluate attributes that are related to maintainability. In addition, 67% of the measures are used during the design phase of Domain Engineering, and 56% are applied to evaluate the product line architecture. However, only 25% of them have been empirically validated. In conclusion, the results provide a global vision of the state of the research within this area in order to help researchers in detecting weaknesses, directing research efforts, and identifying new research lines. In particular, there is a need for new measures with which to evaluate both the quality of the artifacts produced during the entire SPL life cycle and other quality characteristics. There is also a need for more validation (both theoretical and empirical) of existing measures. In addition, our results may be useful as a reference guide for practitioners to assist them in the selection or the adaptation of existing measures for evaluating their software product lines. © 2011 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC.This research has been funded by the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation under the MULTIPLE (Multimodeling Approach For Quality-Aware Software Product Lines) project with ref. TIN2009-13838.Montagud Gregori, S.; Abrahao Gonzales, SM.; Insfrán Pelozo, CE. (2012). A systematic review of quality attributes and measures for software product lines. Software Quality Journal. 20(3-4):425-486. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11219-011-9146-7S425486203-4Abdelmoez, W., Nassar, D. M., Shereschevsky, M., Gradetsky, N., Gunnalan, R., Ammar, H. H., et al. (2004). Error propagation in software architectures. In 10th international symposium on software metrics (METRICS), Chicago, Illinois, USA.Ajila, S. A., & Dumitrescu, R. T. (2007). Experimental use of code delta, code churn, and rate of change to understand software product line evolution. Journal of Systems and Software, 80, 74–91.Aldekoa, G., Trujillo, S., Sagardui, G., & Díaz, O. (2006). Experience measuring maintainability in software product lines. In XV Jornadas de Ingeniería del Software y Bases de Datos (JISBD). Barcelona.Aldekoa, G., Trujillo, S., Sagardui, G., & Díaz, O. (2008). Quantifying maintanibility in feature oriented product lines, Athens, Greece, pp. 243–247.Alves de Oliveira Junior, E., Gimenes, I. M. S., & Maldonado, J. C. (2008). A metric suite to support software product line architecture evaluation. In XXXIV Conferencia Latinamericana de Informática (CLEI), Santa Fé, Argentina, pp. 489–498.Alves, V., Niu, N., Alves, C., & Valença, G. (2010). Requirements engineering for software product lines: A systematic literature review. Information & Software Technology, 52(8), 806–820.Bosch, J. (2000). Design and use of software architectures: Adopting and evolving a product line approach. USA: ACM Press/Addison-Wesley Publishing Co.Briand, L. C., Differing, C. M., & Rombach, D. (1996a). Practical guidelines for measurement-based process improvement. Software Process-Improvement and Practice, 2, 253–280.Briand, L. C., Morasca, S., & Basili, V. R. (1996b). Property based software engineering measurement. IEEE Transactions on Software Eng., 22(1), 68–86.Calero, C., Ruiz, J., & Piattini, M. (2005). Classifying web metrics using the web quality model. Online Information Review, 29(3): 227–248.Chen, L., Ali Babar, M., & Ali, N. (2009). Variability management in software product lines: A systematic review. In 13th international software product lines conferences (SPLC), San Francisco, USA.Clements, P., & Northrop, L. (2002). Software product lines. 2003. Software product lines practices and patterns. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley.Crnkovic, I., & Larsson, M. (2004). Classification of quality attributes for predictability in component-based systems. Journal of Econometrics, pp. 231–250.Conference Rankings of Computing Research and Education Association of Australasia (CORE). (2010). Available in http://core.edu.au/index.php/categories/conference%20rankings/1 .Davis, A., Dieste, Ó., Hickey, A., Juristo, N., & Moreno, A. M. (2006). Effectiveness of requirements elicitation techniques: Empirical results derived from a systematic review. In 14th IEEE international conference requirements engineering, pp. 179–188.de Souza Filho, E. D., de Oliveira Cavalcanti, R., Neiva, D. F. S., Oliveira, T. H. B., Barachisio Lisboa, L., de Almeida E. S., & de Lemos Meira, S. R. (2008). Evaluating domain design approaches using systematic review. In 2nd European conference on software architecture, Cyprus, pp. 50–65.Ejiogu, L. (1991). Software engineering with formal metrics. QED Publishing.Engström, E., & Runeson, P. (2011). Software product line testing—A systematic mapping study. Information & Software Technology, 53(1), 2–13.Etxeberria, L., Sagarui, G., & Belategi, L. (2008). Quality aware software product line engineering. Journal of the Brazilian Computer Society, 14(1), Campinas Mar.Ganesan, D., Knodel, J., Kolb, R., Haury, U., & Meier, G. (2007). Comparing costs and benefits of different test strategies for a software product line: A study from Testo AG. In 11th international software product line conference, Kyoto, Japan, pp. 74–83, September 2007.Gómez, O., Oktaba, H., Piattini, M., & García, F. (2006). A systematic review measurement in software engineering: State-of-the-art in measures. In First international conference on software and data technologies (ICSOFT), Setúbal, Portugal, pp. 11–14.IEEE standard for a software quality metrics methodology, IEEE Std 1061-1998, 1998.Inoki, M., & Fukazawa, Y. (2007). Software product line evolution method based on Kaizen approach. In 22nd annual ACM symposium on applied computing, Korea.Insfran, E., & Fernandez, A. (2008). A systematic review of usability evaluation in Web development. 2nd international workshop on web usability and accessibility (IWWUA’08), New Zealand, LNCS 5176, Springer, pp. 81–91.ISO/IEC 25010. (2008). Systems and software engineering. Systems and software Quality Requirements and Evaluation (SQuaRE). System and software quality models.ISO/IEC 9126. (2000). Software engineering. Product Quality.Johansson, E., & Höst, R. (2002). Tracking degradation in software product lines through measurement of design rule violations. In 14th International conference on software engineering and knowledge engineering, Ischia, Italy, pp. 249–254.Journal Citation Reports of Thomson Reuters. (2010). Available in http://thomsonreuters.com/products_services/science/science_products/a-z/journal_citation_reports/ .Khurum, M., & Gorschek, T. (2009). A systematic review of domain analysis solutions for product lines. The Journal of Systems and Software.Kim, T., Ko, I. Y., Kang, S. W., & Lee, D. H. (2008). Extending ATAM to assess product line architecture. In 8th IEEE international conference on computer and information technology, pp. 790–797.Kitchenham, B. (2007). Guidelines for performing systematic literature reviews in software engineering. Version 2.3, EBSE Technical Report, Keele University, UK.Kitchenham, B., Pfleeger, S., & Fenton, N. (1995). Towards a framework for software measurement validation. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 21(12).Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33, 159–174.Mendes, E. (2005). A systematic review of Web engineering research. International symposium on empirical software engineering. Noosa Heads, Australia.Meyer, M. H., & Dalal, D. (2002). Managing platform architectures and manufacturing processes for non assembled products. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 19(4), 277–293.Montagud, S., & Abrahão, S. (2009). Gathering Current knowledge about quality evaluation in software product lines. In 13th international software product lines conferences (SPLC), San Francisco, USA.Montagud, S., & Abrahão, S. (2009). A SQuaRE-bassed quality evaluation method for software product lines. Master’s thesis, December 2009 (in Spanish).Needham, D., & Jones, S. (2006). A software fault tree metric. In 22nd international conference on software maintenance (ICSM), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.Niemelä, E., & Immonen, A. (2007). Capturing quality requirements of product family architecture. Information and Software Technology, 49(11–12), 1107–1120.Odia, O. E. (2007). Testing in software product lines. Master Thesis Software Engineering of School of Engineering, Bleking Institute of Technology. Thesis no. MSE-2007:16, Sweden.Olumofin, F. G., & Mišić, V. B. (2007). A holistic architecture assessment method for software product lines. Information and Software Technology, 49, 309–323.Pérez Lamancha, B., Polo Usaola, M., & Piattini Velthius, M. (2009). Software product line testing—a systematic review. ICSOFT, (1), 23–30.Poels, G., & Dedene, G. (2000). Distance-based software measurement: necessary and sufficient properties for software measures. Information and Software Technology, 42(I), 35–46.Prehofer, C., van Gurp, J., & Bosch, J. (2008). Compositionality in software platforms. In Emerging methods, technologies and process management in software engineering. Wiley.Rahman, A. (2004). Metrics for the structural assessment of product line architecture. Master Thesis on Software Engineering, Thesis no. MSE-2004:24. School of Engineering, Blekinge Institute of Technology, Sweden.Sethi, K., Cai, Y., Wong, S., Garcia, A., & Sant’Anna, C. (2009). From retrospect to prospect: Assessing modularity and stability from software architecture. Joint working IEEE/IFIP conference on software architecture, 2009 & European conference on software architecture. WICSA/ECSA.Shaik, I., Abdelmoez, W,. Gunnalan, R., Shereshevsky, M., Zeid, A., Ammar, H. H., et al. (2005). Change propagation for assessing design quality of software architectures. 5th working IEEE/IFIP conference on software architecture (WICSA’05).Siegmund, N., Rosenmüller, M., Kuhlemann, M., Kästner, C., & Saake, G. (2008). Measuring non-functional properties in software product lines for product derivation. In 15th Asia-Pacific software engineering conference, Beijing, China.Sun Her, J., Hyeok Kim, J., Hun Oh, S., Yul Rhew, S., & Dong Kim, S. (2007). A framework for evaluating reusability of core asset in product line engineering. Information and Software Technology, 49, 740–760.Svahnberg, M., & Bosch, J. (2000). Evolution in software product lines. In 3rd international workshop on software architectures for products families (IWSAPF-3). Las Palmas de Gran Canaria.Van der Hoek, A., Dincel, E., & Medidović, N. (2003). Using services utilization metrics to assess the structure of product line architectures. In 9th international software metrics symposium (METRICS), Sydney, Australia.Van der Linden, F., Schmid, K., & Rommes, E. (2007). Software product lines in action. Springer.Whitmire, S. (1997). Object oriented design measurement. John Wiley & Sons.Wnuk, K., Regnell, B., & Karlsson, L. (2009). What happened to our features? Visualization and understanding of scope change dynamics in a large-scale industrial setting. In 17th IEEE international requirements engineering conference.Yoshimura, K., Ganesan, D., & Muthig, D. (2006). Assessing merge potential of existing engine control systems into a product line. In International workshop on software engineering for automative systems, Shangai, China, pp. 61–67.Zhang, T., Deng, L., Wu, J., Zhou, Q., & Ma, C. (2008). Some metrics for accessing quality of product line architecture. In International conference on computer science and software engineering (CSSE), Wuhan, China, pp. 500–503

Evolving multi-tenant SaaS cloud applications using model-driven engineering

Cloud computing promotes multi-tenancy for efficient resource utilization by sharing hardware and software infrastructure among multiple clients. Multi-tenant applications running on a cloud infrastructure are provided to clients as Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) over the network. Despite its benefits, multi-tenancy introduces additional challenges, such as p artitioning, extensibility, and customizability during the application development. Over time, after the application deployment, new requirements of clients and changes in business environment result application evolution. As the application evolves, its complexity also increases. In multi-tenancy, evolution demanded by individual clients should not affect availability , security , and performance of the application for other clients. Thus, the multi- tenancy concerns add more complexity by causing variability in design decisions. Managing this complexity requires adequate approaches and tools. In this paper, we propose modeling techniques from software product lines (SPL) and model-driven engineering (MDE) to manage variability and support evolution of multi-tenant applications and their requirements. Specifically, SPL was ap p lied to define technological and concep tual variabilities during the application design, where MDE was suggested to manage these variabilities. We also present a process of how MDE can address evolution of multi-tenant applications using variability models