A case study in applying a systematic method for COTS selection
Proceedings of the 18th international conference on Software engineering
Distributed Systems: Principles and Paradigms
Distributed Systems: Principles and Paradigms
Challenges in COTS decision-making: a goal-driven requirements engineering perspective
SEKE '02 Proceedings of the 14th international conference on Software engineering and knowledge engineering
Truth vs Knowledge: The Difference Between What a Component Does and What We Know It Does
IWSSD '96 Proceedings of the 8th International Workshop on Software Specification and Design
IT Architectures and Middleware: Strategies for Building Large, Integrated Systems (2nd Edition)
IT Architectures and Middleware: Strategies for Building Large, Integrated Systems (2nd Edition)
OOPSLA '04 Companion to the 19th annual ACM SIGPLAN conference on Object-oriented programming systems, languages, and applications
Operations Management
A Component Assembly Approach Based On Aspect-Oriented Generative Domain Modeling
Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science (ENTCS)
Identifying “interesting” component assemblies for NFRs using imperfect information
EWSA'06 Proceedings of the Third European conference on Software Architecture
Explicit architectural policies to satisfy NFRs using COTS
MoDELS'05 Proceedings of the 2005 international conference on Satellite Events at the MoDELS
Identifying “interesting” component assemblies for NFRs using imperfect information
EWSA'06 Proceedings of the Third European conference on Software Architecture
| Hi-index | 0.00 |
Component-based approaches to elaborate software must deal with the fact that in practical settings, components information may be incomplete, imprecise and uncertain, and requirements may be likewise. Architects wanting to evaluate candidate architectures regarding requirements satisfaction need to use whatever information be available about components, however imperfect. Imperfect information can be dealt with using specialized analytical formalisms, such as fuzzy values for imprecision and rough sets for incompleteness; but if used, evaluations need to compare and rank using non-scalar, non-symbolic values. This article presents an approach to systematically describe components’ imperfect information, and to evaluate and rank whole component assemblies, by using credibility values-based “support scores” that aggregate imperfect information about requirements, mechanisms and components. The approach builds on the Azimut framework, which offers progressive refinement of architectural entities via architectural policies, architectural mechanisms, components, and component assemblies. An example of the proposed approach and “what-if” analysis are illustrated.