Eliciting better quality architecture evaluation scenarios: A controlled experiment on top-down vs. bottom-up

ISESE'06 - Proceedings of the 5th ACM-IEEE International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering

Volumn 2006, Issue , 2006, Pages 307-315

  Babar, Muhammed Ali ^a,b   Biffl, Stefan ^c  

^a CSIRO   (Australia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES   (Australia)

^c VIENNA UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Austria)

Author keywords

Architecture evaluation; Controlled experiments; Empirical software engineering; Quality attributes; Scenarios

Indexed keywords

ARCHITECTURE EVALUATION; EMPIRICAL SOFTWARE ENGINEERING; QUALITY ATTRIBUTES; STAKEHOLDERS;

COMPUTER SOFTWARE SELECTION AND EVALUATION; QUALITY ASSURANCE; STUDENTS;

SOFTWARE ARCHITECTURE;

EID: 34247331853     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1145/1159733.1159779     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (27)

1. Agarwal, R. and Tanniru, M.R. Knowledge Acquisition Using Structured Interviewing: An Empirical Investigation. Journal of Management Information Systems, 7(1), 1990, pp. 123-140.
2. Ali-Babar, M., Kitchenham, B., Jeffery, R. and Gorton, I. Design and Evaluation of a Research Program for Distributed Software Architecture Evaluation. Technical Report No. 0417, University of New South Wales, Sydney, 2004
3. Ali-Babar, M., Kitchenham, B. and Maheshwari, P., The Value of Architecturally Significant Information Extracted from Patterns: A Controlled Experiment. Accepted in the Australian Software Engineering Conference, (Sydney, 2006).
4. Ali-Babar, M., et al. An Empirical Study of Groupware Support for Distributed Software Architecture Evaluation Process. Journal of Systems and Software, In the press, 2006, pp.
5. Ali-Babar, M., Zhu, L. and Jeffery, R., A Framework for Classifying and Comparing Software Architecture Evaluation Methods. 15th Australian Software Engineering Conference, (Melbourne, Australia, 2004).
6. Barbacci, M.R., et al. Quality Attribute Workshops (QAWs). Technical Report CMU/SEI-2003-TR-016, SEI, Carnegie Mellon University, USA., 2003
7. Bass, L., Clements, P. and Kazman, R. Software Architecture in Practice. Addison-Wesley, 2003.
8. Bass, L., Klein, M. and Moreno, G. Applicability of General Scenarios to the Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method. Technical Report CMU/SEI-2000-TR-014, Softwar Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, 2001
9. Bengtsson, P. Architecture-Level Modifiability Analysis Department of Software Engineering and Computer Science, Blekinge Institute of Technology, Sweden, 2002.
10. Bengtsson, P. and Bosch, J. An Experiment on Creating Scenario Profiles for Software Change. Annals of Software Engineering, 9, 2000, pp. 59-78.
11. Bengtsson, P., Lassing, N., Bosch, J. and van Vliet, H. Architecture-level modifiability analysis (ALMA). Journal of Systems and Software, 69 (1-2), 2004, pp. 129-147.
12. Bengtsson, P., Lassing, N., Bosch, J. and Vliet, H.v. Analyzing Software Architectures for Modifiability. Technical Report HK-R-RES-00/11-SE, Hogskolan Karlskeona/Ronneby, 2000
13. Biuk-Aghai, R.P. and Hawryszkiewyez, I.T., Analysis of Virtual Workspaces. Proceedings of the Database Applications in Non-Traditional Environments, (Japan, 1999).
14. Bosch, J. Design & Use of Software Architectures: Adopting and evolving a product-line approach. Addison-Wesley, 2000.
15. Clemente, P., Kazman, R. and Klein, M. Evaluating Software Architectures: Methods and Case Studies. Addison-Wesley, 2002.
16. Host, M., Regnell, B. and Wholin, C. Using Students as Subjects - A Comparative Study of Students and Professionals in Lead-Time Impact Assessment. Empirical Software Engineering, 5, 2000, pp. 201-214.
17. Kazman, R., Abowd, G., Bass, L. and Clements, P. Scenario-Based Analysis of Software Architecture. IEEE Software Engineering, 13 (6), 1996, pp. 47-55.
18. Kazman, R., Barbacci, M., klein, M. and Carriere, S.J., Experience with Performing Architecture Tradoff Analysis. Proc. of the 21th International Conference on Software Engineering, (New York, USA, 1999), ACM Press.
19. Kazman, R., Bass, L., Abowd, G. and Webb, M., SAAM: A Method for Analyzing the Properties of Software Architectures. 16th Int'l Conf. of Software Eng., (1994).
20. Kazman, R., Carriere, S.J. and Woods, S.G. Toward a Discipline of Scenario-based Architectural Engineering. Annals of Software Engineering, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 9 (1-4), 2000, pp. 5-33.
21. Lassing, N., Bengteson, P., Bosch, J. and Vliet, H.V. Experience with ALMA: Architecture-Level Modifiability Analysis. Journal of Systems and Software, 61 (1), 2002, pp. 47-57.
22. Lassing, N., Rijsenbrij, D. and Vliet, H.v., The goal of software architecture analysis: Confidence building or risk assessment. Proceedings of First BeNeLux conference on software architecture, (1999).
23. Lassing, N., Rijsenbrij, D. and Vliet, H.v. How Well can we Predict Changes at Architecture Design Time? Journal of Systems and Software, 65 (2), 2003, pp. 141-153.
24. Lassing, N., Rijsenbrij, D. and Vliet, H.v., On Software Architecture Analysis of Flexibility, Complexity of Changes: Size isn't Everything. Proc. of 2nd Nordic Software Architecture Workshop, (1999).
25. Liu, A., Bass, L. and Klein, M. Analyzing Enterprise Java-Beans Systems Using Quality Attribute Design. Technical Report CMU/SEI-2001-TN-025, Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, 2001
26. Williams, L.G. and Smith, C.U., PASA: A Method for the Performance Assessment of Software Architecture. Proc. of the 3rd Workshop on Software Performance, (Rome, Italy, 2002).
27. Wohlin, C., et al. Experimentation in Software Engineering: An Introduction. Kluwer Academic Publications, 2000.