Characterizing real-time reflexion-based architecture recovery

Alí, Nour; Rosik, Jacek; Buckley, Jim

doi:10.1145/2304696.2304702

Cited by 19 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This paper is a substantial extension of the work presented by several of the authors in [18]. That paper reported on the first three case studies, providing a characterization of the modelling practices of the participants involved, their mapping (source code to RM vertices) preferences, and a characterization of the violations identified.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…Hence, there is limited guidance as to how the modelling and mapping facilities available to participants are used during RM (an exception being [18]). This is surprising given the popularity of such tools in practice, and the lack of reported results of this kind leaves open the possibility that current approaches to architectural reconciliation may be sub-optimal for their users.…”

Section: Motivation and Research Questionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Several implementations of RM variants have been empirically evaluated through case studies [15][16][17][18], largely achieving positive feedback from industrial practitioners. Specifically, software architects have shown great enthusiasm for the information which it provides [13,19] and have even proactively sought such analysis again [20].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Here RT-RM [18] refers to a variant of RM where new architectural violations are presented to the architect, as new mappings are made between architectural modules and source code elements.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Specifically, while it does re-assess the modelling, mapping and architectural violations issues expounded upon in [18], with respect to the enlarged data set, it also includes findings on iterative analysis of systems through Reflexion models, findings on the outcome of RM in terms of the systems' architectural violations and an extended set of requirements for RM going forward.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Real-Time Reflexion Modelling in architecture reconciliation: A multi case study

Buckley

Alí

English

et al. 2015

Information and Software Technology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ContextReflexion Modelling is considered one of the more successful approaches to architecture reconciliation. Empirical studies strongly suggest that professional developers involved in real-life industrial projects find the information provided by variants of this approach useful and insightful, but the degree to which it resolves architecture conformance issues is still unclear. ObjectiveThis paper aims to assess the level of architecture conformance achieved by professional architects using Reflexion Modelling, and to determine how the approach could be extended to improve its suitability for this task. MethodAn in-vivo, multi-case-study protocol was adopted across five software systems, from four different financial services organizations. Think-aloud, video-tape and interview data from professional architects involved in Reflexion Modelling sessions were analysed qualitatively. ResultsThis study showed that (at least) four months after the Reflexion Modelling sessions less than 50% of the architectural violations identified were removed. The majority of participants who did remove violations favoured changes to the architectural model rather than to the code. Participants seemed to work off two specific architectural templates, and interactively explored their architectural model to focus in on the causes of violations, and to assess the ramifications of potential code changes. They expressed a desire for dependency analysis beyond static-source-code analysis and scalable visualizations. ConclusionThe findings support several interesting usage-in-practice traits, previously hinted at in the literature. These include 1) the iterative analysis of systems through Reflexion models, as a precursor to possible code change or as a focusing mechanism to identify the location of architecture conformance issues, 2) the extension of the approach with respect to dependency analysis of software systems and architectural modelling templates, 3) improved visualization support and 4) the insight that identification of architectural violations in itself does not lead to their removal in the majority of instances.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Section: Motivation and Research Questionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Real-Time Reflexion Modelling in architecture reconciliation: A multi case study

Buckley

Alí

English

et al. 2015

Information and Software Technology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

An Approach and Toolset to Semi-automatically Recover and Visualise Micro-Service Architecture

Ali,

Alshuqayran,

Fakeeh

et al. 2024

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Architecture consistency: State of the practice, challenges and requirements

Alí

Baker

O’Crowley³

et al. 2017

Empir Software Eng

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Architecture Consistency (AC) aims to align implemented systems with their intended architectures. Several AC approaches and tools have been proposed and empirically evaluated, suggesting favourable results. In this paper, we empirically examine the state of practice with respect to Architecture Consistency, through interviews with nineteen experienced software engineers. Our goal is to identify 1) any practises that the companies these architects work for, currently undertake to achieve AC; 2) any barriers to undertaking explicit AC approaches in these companies; 3) software development situations where practitioners perceive AC approaches would be useful, and 4) AC tool needs, as perceived by practitioners. We also assess current commercial AC tool offerings in terms of these perceived needs. The study reveals that many practitioners apply informal AC approaches as there are barriers for adopting more formal and Empir Software Eng (2018) 23:224-258 DOI 10.1007 The original version of this article was revised due to a retrospective Open Access order. Karlstad University, Karlstad, Sweden explicit approaches. These barriers are: 1) Difficulty in quantifying architectural inconsistency effects, and thus justifying the allocation of resources to fix them to senior management, 2) The near invisibility of architectural inconsistency to customers, 3) Practitioners' reluctance towards fixing architectural inconsistencies, and 4) Practitioners perception that huge effort is required to map the system to the architecture when using more formal AC approaches and tools. Practitioners still believe that AC would be useful in supporting several of the software development activities such as auditing, evolution and ensuring quality attributes. After reviewing several commercial tools, we posit that AC tool vendors need to work on their ability to support analysis of systems made up of different technologies, that AC tools need to enhance their capabilities with respect to artefacts such as services and meta-data, and to focus more on non-maintainability architectural concerns.

show abstract

Characterizing real-time reflexion-based architecture recovery

Cited by 19 publications

References 23 publications

Real-Time Reflexion Modelling in architecture reconciliation: A multi case study

Real-Time Reflexion Modelling in architecture reconciliation: A multi case study

An Approach and Toolset to Semi-automatically Recover and Visualise Micro-Service Architecture

Architecture consistency: State of the practice, challenges and requirements

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About