Quantifiable architecting of dependable systems of embedded systems

Abstract

Architecture is a critical aspect in the successful development and evolution of dependable systems of embedded systems (SoES). Quantifiably architecting such systems involves establishing consensus from the particular perspectives of quality attributes. Unfortunately, there are few established approaches for rapidly prototyping architecture to identify key architectural artifacts that carry quantifiable constraints throughout the software development processes. This paper presents a quantifiable architectural approach for dependable SoES using rapid prototyping. The approach provides a set of rules (patterns) governing system composition. With quantifiable constraints attached to compositional patterns, the approach also establishes mappings between perspective modeling of dependability acquisition, constraint attachment, and property monitoring. Finally, it provides a rationale for translating timing and synchronous constraints into monitored properties attached to the auto-generated quantifiable architectural framework as an architectural context for quantifiable assessment and architectural evolution. Thus these properties are effectively and practically computable for dynamic monitoring at runtime.

Re-ADA

“…Software architecture is the common vehicle for communication among component systems, the suitable arena that non-functional properties (namely, dependability) can be focused. Allowing architectural artifacts to be associated with dependability attributes [12] as quantitative constraints makes it possible to verify statically and monitor dynamically the constraints during architectural design [8,13,14,15]. Nonetheless, creative ideas are needed to incorporate innovative methods into practical approach to dependable interoperability-enabled architecture.…”

“…The quantitative view refers to translating conceptual dependability into quantitative constraints [14]. The semantic view concerns how to implement quantitative constraints as semantic properties on architectural artifacts [8,15].…”

“…Further research will also be required to associate more quantitative constraints with interoperable roles, architectural styles, and communication protocols [13,14,15].…”

Supporting architectural design of acknowledged SoS

“…Regarding processes for the architectural design of SoS, two studies ( (Chigani and Balci, 2012;Liang and Luqi, 2003)) were proposed to organize the steps of the complexity associated with the design of SoS software architectures. The more complete study is Chigani's work (Chigani and Balci, 2012), which provides these main steps for the SoS architecture construction, organized in five specific goals: Identify System Components; Establish Relationships among the Identified Components; Create the Architecture; and Describe the Architecture.…”

“…Architectural evaluation on SoS software architectures: architectural evaluation must consider the operational dynamism of SoS and its constituents. Liang and Luqi (2003) propose a static design inspection that provides a means of assessing the 43 2.2. Architecting SoS quality impact of design decisions before coding.…”