Defining and Validating a Multimodel Approach for Product Architecture Derivation and Improvement

González-Huerta, Javier; Insfrán, Emilio; Abrahão, Silvia

doi:10.1007/978-3-642-41533-3_24

Cited by 9 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The two software architecture evaluation methods evaluated in our family of experiments are: the ATAM [50] and our proposal QuaDAI [41], both of which are introduced in the following subsections.…”

Section: Software Architecture Evaluation Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is based on an artifact (the multimodel [41]) that represents the SPL viewpoints and a process consisting of a set of activities conducted by model transformations. QuaDAI has been designed by taking into account the weak points of existing architecture evaluation methods in order to improve their usability and effectiveness (e.g., the need for a highly experienced team: QuaDAI relies on knowledge reuse, which allows a less skilled evaluator to perform architecture evaluations using the domain expert's knowledge).…”

Section: Quadaimentioning

confidence: 99%

“…6. The original experiment (UPV1) [41] was replicated [42] so as to obtain more evidence for the results obtained in the experiment and to verify the remaining issues. The second experiment (i.e., UPV2) was differentiated internal replication of the original experiment performed in different settings and the third experiment (i.e., UPV3) as a differentiated internal replication of the second experiment (i.e., UPV2).…”

Section: Step 4: Individual Experimentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We have addressed the first issue by proposing the Quality-Driven Architecture Derivation and Improvement (QuaDAI) method in previous studies [40], [41]. QuaDAI is a model-driven approach to ensure the desired quality attribute levels for a product by applying architectural transformations to a product architecture derived from a product line architecture.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…With regard to the second issue, in previous works, we have presented a first controlled experiment [41] and a replication study [42] as an initial step in the empirical validation of the QuaDAI strategy for the evaluation and improvement of product architectures that consist on the evaluation and transformation activities. The objective of these experiments was to compare the effectiveness, efficiency, perceived ease of use, perceived usefulness and intention to use with regard to participants using the product evaluation and transformation activities of QuaDAI (from now on QuaDAI) as opposed to the Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method (ATAM) [50], a well-known and widely-used software architecture evaluation method.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Validating a model-driven software architecture evaluation and improvement method: A family of experiments

González-Huerta

Insfrán

Abrahão

et al. 2015

Information and Software Technology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ElsevierGonzález Huerta, J.; Insfrán Pelozo, CE.; Abrahao Gonzales, SM.; Scanniello, G. (2015 Context: Software architectures should be evaluated during the early stages of software development in order to verify whether the Non-Functional Requirements (NFRs) of the product can be fulfilled. This activity is even more crucial in Software Product Line (SPL) development, since it is also necessary to identify whether the NFRs of a particular product can be achieved by exercising the variation mechanisms provided by the product line architecture or whether additional transformations are required. These issues have motivated us to propose QuaDAI, a method for the derivation, evaluation and improvement of software architectures in model-driven SPL development.Objective: We present in this paper the results of a family of four experiments carried out to empirically validate the evaluation and improvement strategy of QuaDAI. Method:The family of experiments was carried out by 92 participants: Computer Science Master's and undergraduate students from Spain and Italy. The goal was to compare the effectiveness, efficiency, perceived ease of use, perceived usefulness and intention to use with regard to participants using the evaluation and improvement strategy of QuaDAI as opposed to the Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method (ATAM). Results:The main result was that the participants produced their best results when applying QuaDAI, signifying that the participants obtained architectures with better values for the NFRs faster, and that they found the method easier to use, more useful and more likely to be used. The results of the meta-analysis carried out to aggregate the results obtained in the individual experiments also confirmed these results. Conclusions:The results support the hypothesis that QuaDAI would achieve better results than ATAM in the experiments and that QuaDAI can be considered as a promising approach with which to perform architectural evaluations that occur after the product architecture derivation in model-driven SPL development processes when carried out by novice software evaluators.

show abstract

Section: Software Architecture Evaluation Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Quadaimentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Step 4: Individual Experimentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations