A Rationale-based Model for Architecture Design Reasoning

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Bibliography [1] D. Ahern, A. Clouse, and R. Turner, CMMI distilled : a practical introduction to integrated process improvementn. Boston, USA: Addison-Wesley, 2004. [2] T. Al-Naeem, I. Gorton, M. A. Babar, F. A. Rabhi, and B. Benatallah, “A qualitydriven systematic approach for architecting distributed software applications.” in Proceedings 27th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE), 2005, pp. 244–253. [3] M. Ali-Babar, I. Gorton, and B. Kitchenham, “A Framework for Supporting Architecture Knowledge and Rationale Management,” in Rationale Management in Software Engineering. Springer, 2006, pp. 237–254. [4] J. Asundi, R. Kazman, and M. Klein, “Using Economic Considerations to Choose Amongst Architecture Design Alternatives,” Carnegie Mellon University, Tech. Rep. CMU/SEI-2001-TR-035, ESC-TR-2001-035, December 2001. [5] B. Ayyub, “A Practical Guide on Conducting Expert-Opinion Elicitation of Probabilities and Consequences for Corps Facilities,” Technical Report IWR Report 01- R-01, Institute for Water Resources, Alexandria, VA, USA, Tech. Rep., 2001. [6] M. Babar, A. Tang, I. Gorton, and J. Han, “Industrial Perspective on the Usefulness of Design Rationale for Software Maintenance: A Survey,” in Proceedings 6th International Conference on Quality Software (QSIC 2006). IEEE, 2006. [7] R. Balzer, T. E. C. Jr., and C. C. Green, “Software technology in the 1990’s: Using a new paradigm.” IEEE Computer, vol. 16, no. 11, pp. 39–45, 1983. [8] L. Bass, P. Clements, and R. Kazman, Software Architecture in Practice. Boston: Addison Wesley, 2003. [9] S. Beecham, T. Hall, C. Britton, M. Cottee, and A. Rainer, “Using an expert panel to validate a requirements process improvement model.” Journal of Systems and Software, vol. 76, no. 3, pp. 251–275, 2005. 213
BIBLIOGRAPHY [10] B. W. Boehm, Software Engineering Economics. New Jersey: Prentice Hall PTR, 1981. [11] J. Bosch, “Software Architecture: The Next Step,” in Proceedings 1st European Workshop on Software Architecture (EWSA), St Andrews, UK., 2004, pp. 194–199. [12] L. Bratthall, E. Johansson, and B. Regnell, “Is a Design Rationale Vital when Predicting Change Impact? A Controlled Experiment on Software Architecture Evolution,” in Second International Conference on Product Focused Software Process Improvement, 2000, pp. 126–139. [13] S. Buckingham Shum and N. Hammond, “Argumentation-Based Design Rationale: What Use at What Cost?” International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, vol. 40, no. 4, pp. 603–652, 1994. [14] J. Burge, “Software Engineering Using design RATionale,” Ph.D. dissertation, Worcester Polytechnic Institute, 2005. [15] S. Bushell, “It is the Business, Stupid.” http : //www.cio.com.au/index.php/id; 719608738; pp; 1; fp; 16; fpid; 0, 2006. [16] Carnegie Mellon Software Engineering Institute, “CMMI SE/SW Version 1.1,” http://www.sei.cmu.edu/cmmi/models/model-components-word.html, 2002. [17] Carrington, K. and Pratt, A., “How Far Have We Come? Gender Disparities in the Australian Higher Education System,” 2003. [18] J. Carroll and M. Rosson, “Deliberated Evolution: Stalking the View Matcher in Design Space,” in Design Rationale: Concepts, Techniques and Use, T. Moran and J. Carroll, Eds. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1996, ch. 4, pp. 107–146. [19] R. Charette, Software Engineering Risk Analysis and Management. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1989. [20] L. Chung, B. Nixon, E. Yu, and J. Mylopoulos, Non-functional requirements in software engineering. Boston: Kluwer Academic, 2000. [21] CIO-Council, “Federal Enterprise Architecture Framework version 1.1,” http://www.cio.gov/archive/fedarch1.pdf, 1999, last accessed: May 21, 2004. [22] ——, “A Practical Guide to Federal Enterprise Architecture version 1.0,” http://www.cio.gov/archive/bpeaguide.pdf, 2001, last accessed: May 21, 2004. [23] P. Clements, F. Bachmann, L. Bass, D. Garlan, J. Ivers, R. Little, R. Nord, and J. Stafford, Documenting Software Architectures : Views and Beyond, 1st ed. Addison Wesley, 2002. 214
Page 1 and 2:
A Rationale-based Model for Archite
Page 3 and 4:
maintenance. These techniques can h
Page 5 and 6:
Declaration This thesis contains no
Page 7 and 8:
2.2.6 DoD Architecture Framework .
Page 9 and 10:
5.4.6 Risk assessment in architectu
Page 11 and 12:
8.2 The architecture rationalisatio
Page 13 and 14:
12.2 Contributions . . . . . . . .
Page 15 and 16:
6.10 ≪AR≫ and ≪AAR≫ Stereot
Page 17 and 18:
11.13A Process to Synchronise Chang
Page 19 and 20:
5.13 Design Rationale Helps Evaluat
Page 21 and 22:
that architecture design is highly
Page 23 and 24:
1.2. Research motivations and resea
Page 25 and 26:
1.2. Research motivations and resea
Page 27 and 28:
1.4. Structure of the thesis the ch
Page 29 and 30:
Part I Problem Analysis 10
Page 31 and 32:
2.1. Industry practice of design ra
Page 33 and 34:
2.2. Architecture frameworks and de
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Chapter 3 Related work in design ra
Page 45 and 46:
3.2. Why do we need design rational
Page 47 and 48:
3.2. Why do we need design rational
Page 49 and 50:
3.3. Existing methods for capturing
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
3.4. Other related studies 3.3.7 Qu
Page 59 and 60:
3.4. Other related studies evolutio
Page 61 and 62:
3.5. How well design rationale meth
Page 63 and 64:
3.5. How well design rationale meth
Page 65 and 66:
Chapter 4 Research methodology and
Page 67 and 68:
4.1. Software engineering research
Page 69 and 70:
4.2. The chosen research and valida
Page 71 and 72:
Part II Architecture Design Rationa
Page 73 and 74:
on a regular basis. Their inputs ha
Page 75 and 76:
5.1. Architecture rationale in the
Page 77 and 78:
5.2. Survey methodology data collec
Page 79 and 80:
5.3. Survey findings experience). I
Page 81 and 82:
5.3. Survey findings Table 5.1: Fre
Page 83 and 84:
5.3. Survey findings Business Goals
Page 85 and 86:
5.3. Survey findings 5.3.5 Document
Page 87 and 88:
5.3. Survey findings Table 5.8 summ
Page 89 and 90:
5.3. Survey findings We used Spearm
Page 91 and 92:
5.3. Survey findings previous desig
Page 93 and 94:
5.4. Discussion of findings Since t
Page 95 and 96:
5.4. Discussion of findings or cons
Page 97 and 98:
5.5. Limitations and use design rat
Page 99 and 100:
Part III The Representation and App
Page 101 and 102:
6.1. A conceptual model for design
Page 103 and 104:
6.2. Architecture Rationale and Ele
Page 105 and 106:
6.2. Architecture Rationale and Ele
Page 107 and 108:
6.3. Architecture elements Figure 6
Page 109 and 110:
6.4. Architecture rationale Figure
Page 111 and 112:
6.4. Architecture rationale • ris
Page 113 and 114:
6.4. Architecture rationale depicts
Page 115 and 116:
6.5. The extended AREL To prevent c
Page 117 and 118:
6.6. A UML representation of AREL a
Page 119 and 120:
6.6. A UML representation of AREL a
Page 121 and 122:
6.7. AREL usability AE by ≪AEsupe
Page 123 and 124:
6.8. Summary The AREL model is exte
Page 125 and 126:
7.1. The EFT system reasoning, a co
Page 127 and 128:
7.1. The EFT system The processing
Page 129 and 130:
7.1. The EFT system not chosen beca
Page 131 and 132:
7.1. The EFT system Figure 7.5: Int
Page 133 and 134:
7.1. The EFT system sequence checki
Page 135 and 136:
7.1. The EFT system Figure 7.7: Dec
Page 137 and 138:
7.1. The EFT system Therefore, in a
Page 139 and 140:
7.1. The EFT system Figure 7.10: De
Page 141 and 142:
7.2. An empirical study to validate
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
7.3. Summary The case study is spec
Page 153 and 154:
8.1. Background Based on these assu
Page 155 and 156:
8.2. The architecture rationalisati
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
8.3. Other applications of ARM As d
Page 165 and 166:
8.3. Other applications of ARM Figu
Page 167 and 168:
8.3. Other applications of ARM area
Page 169 and 170:
Chapter 9 Architecture rationale an
Page 171 and 172:
9.1. Background 9.1 Background In t
Page 173 and 174:
9.2. Traceability of architecture r
Page 175 and 176:
9.4. AREL and eAREL traceability ap
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182: 9.4. AREL and eAREL traceability ap
Page 183 and 184: 9.4. AREL and eAREL traceability ap
Page 185 and 186: Chapter 10 Architecture decision de
Page 187 and 188: 10.1. Background 10.1.2 Introductio
Page 189 and 190: 10.2. Building a BBN to represent a
Page 197 and 198: 10.3. Reasoning about change impact
Page 209 and 210: 10.5. Summary design object may cau
Page 211 and 212: 11.1. Capturing architecture design
Page 213 and 214: 11.1. Capturing architecture design
Page 215 and 216: 11.2. Checking AREL models Figure 1
Page 217 and 218: 11.3. Tracing AREL models Figure 11
Page 219 and 220: 11.4. Analysing AREL with BBN • S
Page 221 and 222: 11.5. Limitations Figure 11.13: A P
Page 223 and 224: Chapter 12 Conclusions 12.1 Summary
Page 225 and 226: 12.2. Contributions reasoning metho
Page 227 and 228: 12.2. Contributions implementations
Page 229 and 230: 12.3. Future work architecture deci
Page 231: 12.3. Future work to examine the co
Page 235 and 236: BIBLIOGRAPHY [37] A. Eden and R. Ka
Page 237 and 238: BIBLIOGRAPHY [62] J. D. Herbsleb an
Page 239 and 240: BIBLIOGRAPHY [89] N. Lassing, D. Ri
Page 241 and 242: BIBLIOGRAPHY [115] D. L. Parnas,
Page 243 and 244: BIBLIOGRAPHY [142] Z. Simsek and J.
Page 245 and 246: BIBLIOGRAPHY [167] W. F. Tichy, N.
Page 247 and 248: Appendix A AREL Tool User Manual 1
Page 249 and 250: 4.1 AREL Check Model When the Check
Page 251 and 252: 4.2 AREL Model Tracing AREL model t
Page 253 and 254: Figure 9 - result of downward trace
Page 255 and 256: To initiate the graph’s creation,
Page 257 and 258: onto the diagram 14 Assign values t
Page 259 and 260: Useful Definitions The following ar
Page 261 and 262: ) Some projects only c) Not at all
Page 263 and 264: 19. I revisit architecture design d
Page 265 and 266: Complaint Procedure If you have any
Page 267 and 268: Privacy Protection Only investigato
Page 269 and 270: B. Exploring design reasoning. 1. W
Page 271 and 272: 3. Why does the system use asynchro
Page 273 and 274: C. General Comments on AREL Modelli
Page 275: IEEE Computer Society Press. A. Tan
show all

A Rationale-based Model for Architecture Design Reasoning

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?