Two controlled experiments on model-based architectural decision making

Lytra, Ioanna; Gaubatz, Patrick; Zdun, Uwe

doi:10.1016/j.infsof.2015.03.006

Cited by 9 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 46 publications

(93 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To a different this kind of changes of how designers work have been observed in other research works as well (Tang et al, 2008;van Heesch et al, 2013). Works such as (Lytra et al, 2015;Van Heesch et al, 2012) used architecture knowledge, viewpoints, etc to induce design reasoning and better decision making, and they also made similar observations that methods can help designers to reason better.…”

Section: Use Of Reasoning Techniques By Test and Control Groupsmentioning

confidence: 78%

Improving software design reasoning–A reminder card approach

Tang

Bex

Schriek³

et al. 2018

Journal of Systems and Software

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Use Of Reasoning Techniques By Test and Control Groupsmentioning

confidence: 78%

Improving software design reasoning–A reminder card approach

Tang

Bex

Schriek³

et al. 2018

Journal of Systems and Software

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…It can be said that there needs to be more focus on providing the future architects with sufficient training and experience in different aspects of designing and evaluating design decisions and providing appropriate support for (semi) automate decision-making to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the architecture design and evaluation activities. In a recent study, it was found that most of the existing design decision tools just focus on modeling, capturing and documenting decisions without providing sufficient automation support for decision-making [11]. We assert that the areas for automation support can be ranking design options, generating design alternatives, and supporting quality attributes trade-off analysis.…”

Section: More Training and (Semi) Automated Decision Making Supportmentioning

confidence: 92%

“…We noticed that the participants documented the design decisions using the template (i.e., see Table 1, we name them as templatebased decision) as well as without using the template (i.e., unstructured decision). In order to evaluate the quality of both types of design decisions, we extended the criteria proposed in [11] by adding three elements, which are expected to reflect architectural decision's quality. The quality of each decision was evaluated by the first author and the doubtful situations were discussed and agreed upon with the second author.…”

Section: The Quality Of Architecture Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

Improving the Quality of Architecture Design Through Peer-Reviews and Recombination

Shahin

Babar

2015

Software Architecture

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Software architecture reviews help improve the quality of architecture design decisions. Traditional reviews are considered expensive and timeconsuming. We assert that organizations can consider leveraging peer-reviews and recombination (i.e., promoting design improvement through sharing design ideas) activities to improve the quality of architectures and getting staff trained. This paper reports a case study aimed at exploring the potential impact of combining peer-review and recombination on the quality of architecture design and design decisions made by novice architects, who usually have limited practical experience of architecture design. The findings show that the use of peer-review and recombination can improve both the quality of architecture design and documented decisions. From the decision-making perspective, this study also identifies the main types of challenges that the participants faced during architectural decision making and reasoning. These findings can be leveraged to focus on the types of training novice architects may need to effectively and efficiently address the types of challenges identified in this study.

show abstract

“…After experiment execution, the answers given were evaluated. For that purpose, a method proposed by Lytra et al [53] was applied, which comprises the independent evaluation of the answers by three experts, and a discussion of large differences in grading until a consensus is achieved. The attempted formalization in each experiment tasks was graded independently by the first, second and third author, who are experts in the investigated languages.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Modeling compliance specifications in linear temporal logic, event processing language and property specification patterns: a controlled experiment on understandability

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mature verification and monitoring approaches, such as complex event processing and model checking, can be applied for checking compliance specifications at design time and runtime. Little is known about the understandability of the different formal and technical languages associated with these approaches. This uncertainty regarding understandability might be a major obstacle for the broad practical adoption of those techniques. This article reports a controlled experiment with 215 participants on the understandability of modeling compliance specifications in representative modeling languages, namely linear temporal logic (LTL), the complex event processing-based event processing language (EPL) and property specification patterns (PSP). The formalizations in PSP were overall more correct. That is, the pattern-based approach provides a higher level of understandability than EPL and LTL. More advanced users, however, seemingly are able to cope equally well with PSP and EPL in modeling compliance specifications. Keywords Controlled experiment • Understandability • Linear temporal logic • Property specification patterns • Complex event processing • Event processing language 1 Introduction Many domains are subject to a vast and ever-growing number of rules and constraints stemming from sources including laws, legislation, regulations, standards, guidelines, contracts and best practices. One example is compliance in the corporate and financial sector. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (SOX) [55] is a federal law that defines rules in reaction to major corporate accounting scandals in the USA (e.g.,

show abstract

Two controlled experiments on model-based architectural decision making

Cited by 9 publications

References 46 publications

Improving software design reasoning–A reminder card approach

Improving software design reasoning–A reminder card approach

Improving the Quality of Architecture Design Through Peer-Reviews and Recombination

Modeling compliance specifications in linear temporal logic, event processing language and property specification patterns: a controlled experiment on understandability

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About