Predicting change impact in architecture design with bayesian belief networks

Proceedings - 5th Working IEEE/IFIP Conference on Software Architecture, WICSA 2005

Volumn 2005, Issue , 2005, Pages 67-76

  Tang, Antony ^a   Jin, Yan ^a   Han, Jun ^a   Nicholson, Ann ^b  

^a SWINBURNE UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Australia)

^b MONASH UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

KNOWLEDGE REPRESENTATION; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; REQUIREMENTS ENGINEERING; SOFTWARE ARCHITECTURE; SOFTWARE DESIGN; UNIFIED MODELING LANGUAGE;

ARCHITECTURE DESIGN; ARCHITECTURE RATIONALE AND ELEMENT LINKAGE (AREL); PROBABILISTIC MODELING;

BAYESIAN NETWORKS;

EID: 33947170650     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1109/WICSA.2005.51     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (29)

1. L. Bass, P. Clements, and R. Kazman, Software Architecture in Practice. Boston: Addison Wesley, 2003.
2. J. Bosch, "Software Architecture: The Next Step," Software Architecture: First European Workshop, EWSA 2004, St Andrews, UK., pp 194-199, 2004.
3. L. Bratthall, E. Johansson, and B. Regnell, "Is a Design Rationale Vital when Predicting Change Impact? - A Controlled Experiment on Software Architecture Evolution," Second International Conference on Product Focused Software Process Improvement, pp 126-139, 2000.
4. L. Chung, B. Nixon, E. Yu, and J. Mylopoulos, Non-functional requirements in software engineering. Boston: Kluwer Academic, 2000.
5. J. Conklin and M. Begeman, "gIBIS: a hypertext tool for exploratory policy discussion," Proceedings of the 1988 ACM conference on Computer-supported cooperative work, pp 140-152, 1988.
6. G. F. Cooper, "The Computational Complexity of Probabilistic Inference Using Bayesian Belief Networks," Artificial Intelligence, vol. 42, pp. 393-405, 1990.
7. L. M. Cysneiros and J. C. S. P. Leite, "Using UML to Reflect Non-Functional Requirements," Proceedigns of the 11 GASCON, Toronto, pp 202-216, 2001.
8. A. Dardenne, A. Van-Lamsweerde, and S. Fickas, "Goal-directed Requirements Acquisition," Science of Computer Programming, vol. 20, pp. 1-36, 1993.
9. M. Denford, J. Leaney, and T. O'Neill, "Non-Functional Refinement of Computer Based Systems Architecture," The 11th IEEE International Conference and Workshop on the Engineering of Computer-Based Systems, pp 168-177, 2004.
10. N. Fenton and M. Neil, "Software Metrics: Roadinap," Proceedings of the Conference on the Future of Software Engineering, pp 357-370, 2000.
11. FSTC, "Paperless Automated Check Exchange and Settlement (PACES)," 2000, http://www.fstc.org/projects/paces/index.cfm.
12. J. Galliers, A. Sutcliffe, and S. Minocha, "An Impact Analysis Method for Safety-Critical User Interface Design," ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, vol. 6, pp. 341-369, 1999.
13. J. Han, "Designing for Increased Software Maintainability," International Conference on Software Maintenance, Bari, Italy, pp 278-286, 1997.
14. IEEE, "IEEE Recommended Practice for Architecture Description of Software-Intensive System (IEEE Std 1471-2000)," IEEE Computer Society 2000.
15. K. B. Korb and A. E. Nicholson, Bayesian Artificial Intelligence: Chapman & Hall / CRC, 2004.
16. J. Lee and K. Lai, "What is Design Rationale?," in Design Rationale - Concepts, Techniques, and Use, T. Moran and J. Carroll, Eds. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1996, pp. 21-51.
17. A. Maclean, R. Young, V. Bellotti, and T. Moran, "Questions, Options and Criteria: Elements of Design Space Analysis," in Design Rationale - Concepts, Techniques, and Use, T. Moran and J. Carroll, Eds. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1996, pp. 53-105.
18. T. Moran and J. Carroll, Design Rationale: Concepts, Techniques, and Use: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers, 1996.
19. Norsys Software Corp, "Netica - Application for Belief Networks and Influence Diagrams User's Guide," 1997, http://www.norsys.com/dl/ NeticaMan_Win.pdf.zip.
20. J. Pearl, Probabilistic Reasoning in Intelligent Systems. San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufmann, 1988.
21. D. E. Perry and A. L. Wolf, "Foundation for the Study of Software Architecture," ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes, vol. 17, pp. 40-52, 1992.
22. B. Ramesh and M. Jarke, "Towards Reference Models for Requirements Traceability," IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. 27, pp. 58-93, 2001.
23. L. Rapanotti, J. G. Hall, M. Jackson, and B. Nuseibeh, "Architecture-driven problem decomposition," 12th IEEE International Conference on Requirements Engineering, pp 73-82, 2004.
24. W. C. Regli, X. Hu, M. Atwood, and W. Sun, "A Survey of Design Rationale Systems: Approaches, Representation, Capture and Retrieval," Engineering with Computers, pp. 209-235, 2000.
25. B. S. Shum and N. Hammond, "Argumentation-Based Design Rationale: What Use at What Cost?," International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, vol. 40, pp. 603-652, 1994.
26. Sparx Systems, "Enterprise Architect V4.51," 2005, http://www.sparxsystems.com/.
27. A. Tang and J. Han, "Architecture Rationalization: a Methodology for Architecture Verifiability, Traceability and Completeness," 12th Annual IEEE International Conference and Workshop on the Engineering of Computer Based Systems ECBS 2005. U.S.A., pp 135-144, 2005.
28. A. Tang, M.A. Barbar, I. Gorton, and J. Han, "A Survey of Architecture Design Rationale," Swinburne University of Technology SUTICT-TR2005.02, 2005.
29. J. Tyree and A. Akerman, "Architecture Decisions: Demystifying Architecture," IEEE SOFTWARE, vol. 22, pp. 19-27, 2005.