Systematic selection of software architecture styles

Galster, Matthias; Eberlein, Armin; Moussavi, Mahmood

doi:10.1049/iet-sen.2009.0004

Cited by 28 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The main drivers of the approach are quality goals that serve as weights when proposing a solution. These arguments are also valid for the [10,9,12,8] and [15], the latter evaluates multiple available design decisions basing on selected quality attributes.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 94%

An architecture-centric approach for goal-driven requirements elicitation

Durdik

2011

Proceedings of the 19th ACM SIGSOFT Symposium and the 13th European Conference on Foundations of Software Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Software system development typically starts from a requirement specification followed by stepwise refinement of available requirements while transferring them into the system architecture. However, the granularity and the amount of requirements to be elicited for a successful architectural design are not well understood. This paper proposes a process concept to support system development with the help of an architecture-centric approach for goal-driven requirements elicitation. The process focuses on multiple quality dimensions, such as performance, reliability and scalability, and at the same time shall reduce costs and risks through early decision evaluation. The main contribution of this paper is a novel process where not only requirements can drive architectural design, but also architectural design can selectively drive requirement elicitation with the help of hypotheses connected to the selected architectural solutions. The paper concludes with a discussion on its possible empirical validation.

show abstract

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 94%

An architecture-centric approach for goal-driven requirements elicitation

Durdik

2011

Proceedings of the 19th ACM SIGSOFT Symposium and the 13th European Conference on Foundations of Software Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Imp.) (9,9,9) One variable is absolutely more important than the other 2 Immediate values between scales (1,2,3) 4 (3,4,5) 6 (5,6,7) 8 (7,8,9) If Criteria 1 (C1) is Weakly Important than Criteria 2 (C2) then it takes the fuzzy triangular scale as (2,3,4) and pairwise comparison C2 to C1 will take the reciprocal value as (1/2, 1/3, 1/4).…”

Section: Fuzzy Ahp (Fahp) Equationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…According to Table V, global parameter, C3 (Maintainability) is strongly important than global parameter C1(Efficiency). Therefore pairwise comparison of C3 to C1 will take the TFN value (6,7,8) and pairwise comparison C1 to C3 will take the reciprocal value as (1/6, 1/7, 1/8) as shown in Table VI (3) and (4). For determination of scorevalues we opted from [7] where a discrete ordinal integer values are given to the symbols used inthe mapping table of quality attributes in relation to architectural patternas in Table IV.…”

Section: Analysis Of Collected Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Fuzzy AHP based design decision for Product Line architecture

Halim

Deris

Zaki

2014

2014 8th. Malaysian Software Engineering Conference (MySEC)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Product line architecture (PLA)is one of the important assets in Software Product Line (SPL). In PLA there are numerous variation points and variants in which software engineers can decide and select as the best or suitable enough design decision for the PLA. Therefore it's crucial for SPL to have an explicit architecture design decision representation to enable the important knowledge to be reused in several similar applications in the product line.Though there are many proposals towards incorporating design decision in SPL, however it is still lacking in dealing with multiple criteria and fuzziness of the PLA design decision. In this paper, we propose to overcome this problem by incorporating Fuzzy Analytical Hierarchical Process (FAHP) in the design decision. Our approach considers the use of architecturally significant requirements, which is the quality attributes in the design decision. We demonstrate our approach using the case study of Autonomous Mobile Robot Product Line (AMRPL). The findingstend to show a potential use of FAHP in the design decision.

show abstract

“…This five point scale has been used by different researchers for the purpose evaluating architectural styles. For example, in [17] a five point scale is used to calculate the total score for architectural style in achieving specific quality attributes. …”

Section: Interaction Between Uims Architectures and Unit Operationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating User Interface Management Systems based on Quality Attributes and Unit Operations

Alashqar¹,

Elfetouh²,

El-Bakry³

2015

IJCA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Software architecture is an essential early stage in the software design process. In this stage, the architect should give the quality attributes a special consideration because a good level of meeting these attributes can be performed by well-designed architecture. This means that there is a close relationship between quality attributes and software architecture. However, quality attributes can be achieved through the appropriate application of a set of unit operations. A unit operation is a systematic designing operation that can be applied directly to system architecture. Architectural styles (patterns) include high level design decisions that address quality attributes. Many general architectural styles are defined in the literature. For the domain of user interactive systems there are many architectural styles that address some important quality attributes. In many cases, it is essential to evaluate software styles in terms of their achievement of the required quality attributes by analyzing the relationships between these attributes, unit operations, and styles. This evaluation can help and facilitate the process of selecting a specified style. In this paper the authors propose a structured quantitative evaluation method to show a rank of four wellknown user interface management systems (UIMSs) in terms of their supporting a set of six important selected quality attributes.

show abstract

Systematic selection of software architecture styles

Cited by 28 publications

References 15 publications

An architecture-centric approach for goal-driven requirements elicitation

An architecture-centric approach for goal-driven requirements elicitation

Fuzzy AHP based design decision for Product Line architecture

Evaluating User Interface Management Systems based on Quality Attributes and Unit Operations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About