Developing a traceable domain reference architecture to support clinical trials at the National Cancer Institute. An experience report

Barber, K. Suzanne; Graser, Thomas J.; Silva, J.

doi:10.1109/ecbs.2001.922416

Cited by 5 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…With regard to RQ1, Figure 2 summarizes the 162 reference architectures found by year 11 , highlighting the amount of them that were designed in the academic context (in gray color), industry context (in dark-blue color), and collaboration between industry-academy context (in light-blue color). Table 5 in Appendix A, lists the final set of studies reporting reference architectures and that were analyzed in this SMS.…”

Section: Existing Reference Architecturesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Three decades of software reference architectures: A systematic mapping study

Garcés

Martínez‐Fernández

Oliveira

et al. 2021

Journal of Systems and Software

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Existing Reference Architecturesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Three decades of software reference architectures: A systematic mapping study

Garcés

Martínez‐Fernández

Oliveira

et al. 2021

Journal of Systems and Software

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Simulation is a powerful technique for evaluating performance properties of software architectures [10][11][12], however application of simulation techniques requires specialized knowledge to (1) translate an architecture specification into suitable input to a simulation tool, and (2) interpret the results of simulation and relate those results back to the architecture specification in a meaningful way. This process is iterative: as performance issues are detected, the architecture specification must be corrected, and simulation must be re-applied to verify the corrections (Figure 1).…”

Section: Arcade Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Arcade can be used for performance evaluations of the implementation-specific SEPA architecture levels as well, but such analyses are not the focus of this paper. The SEPA methodology, tools, and associated artifacts have been employed in association with several large multi-year projects, including development of DRAs for clinical trial management for the National Cancer Institute [1], and for the Enhanced Consequence Management, Planning and Support System (ENCOMPASS), a DARPA system designed to support information dissemination and coordination among first responders (e.g., fire, police, EMS) during incident response [4].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Performance evaluation of domain reference architectures

Barber

Holt

Baker

2002

Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Architectures embody the requirements expressed by system stakeholders, and the type of architecture used to capture a given set of requirements dictates when evaluation can occur and what will be evaluated. This research aims to leverage requirements and a resulting architecture dictated by the problem domain and captured early in the lifecycle. Thus, the research goal is to provide early performance evaluation in an effort to convey the most accurate blueprint to system implementers specifically and system stakeholders in general. A new software architecture evaluation tool called Arcade, developed to support the Systems Engineering Process Activities (SEPA), automates early performance evaluation of software architectures using simulation. SEPA suggests a comprehensive approach to capture and represent different types of requirements as a multi-level software architecture. One SEPA architecture level, the Domain Reference Architecture (DRA) encompasses performance characteristics inherent to the domain in terms of what processes, data, and timing are required, rather than how a system should be implemented. Performance evaluation of a DRA can provide qualitative data to (1) aid in identification and validation of domain related performance concerns, and (2) provide system implementers with performance guidelines towards satisfying the performance constraints inherent to the domain. The range of performance statistics Arcade is capable of analyzing is demonstrated through a case study of a Motorola ebusiness project.

show abstract

“…Barber et al [6] would seem to have the strongest claim in this regard. However, there does not appear to be many field trials, if any, beyond [6].…”

Section: Accessibility To the Professional And Expressive Powermentioning

confidence: 95%

“…Barber [5,6] both support domain restriction, and their refinement method is strongly based on the domain architecture.…”

Section: Domain and Technology Restrictionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Non-functional refinement of computer based systems architecture

Denford

Leaney

O'Neill

Proceedings. 11th IEEE International Conference and Workshop on the Engineering of Computer-Based Systems, 2004.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Architecture based refinement is an important technique for ensuring efficiency, effectiveness and correctness in the practical design of complex computer based systems. With a few exceptions, current methods of architectural refinement focus on functional behaviour and fail to address non-functional requirements throughout the refinement process. A best practices approach to refinement would address both functional and non-functional requirements such that the refinement of an abstract into a concrete (implementation) architecture ensures that both sets of requirements are met.We propose a method that focuses on the nonfunctional requirements while still addressing the functional requirements throughout refinement. The method has a formal underpinning in abstract data types (based on term rewriting) which are used to represent the architectures throughout the refinement process and to place pre and post conditions on the refinements. In addition to this, the method uses non-functional requirement calculators to check the non-functional qualities of the architecture as refinement proceeds.Reflection on the practice of the method suggests that it may be possible to extend the architectural style idea to provide reusable refinement schema for the design of certain non-functional qualities into architectural patterns.The example considers reliability and performance in the refinement of a client server architectural pattern.The method does not aim to replace or fully automate the work of the designer. It aims to augment the design process and aid the designer in performing their tasks. It seeks to provide certain guidance for the designer that will help them make the right design decisions, and correct certain classes of errors.

show abstract

Developing a traceable domain reference architecture to support clinical trials at the National Cancer Institute. An experience report

Cited by 5 publications

References 2 publications

Three decades of software reference architectures: A systematic mapping study

Three decades of software reference architectures: A systematic mapping study

Performance evaluation of domain reference architectures

Non-functional refinement of computer based systems architecture

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About