A Basis for Analyzing Software Architecture Analysis Methods

  • Authors:

  • Rick Kazman;Len Bass;Mark Klein;Tony Lattanze;Linda Northrop

  • Affiliations:

  • Aff1 Aff2;Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, USA;Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, USA;Institute for Software Research International, Carnegie Mellon University, USA;Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, USA

  • Venue:
  • Software Quality Control
  • Year:
  • 2005

Quantified Score

Hi-index 0.00

Visualization

Abstract

A software architecture is a key asset for any organization that builds complex software-intensive systems. Because of an architecture's central role as a project blueprint, organizations should analyze the architecture before committing resources to it. An analysis helps to ensure that sound architectural decisions are made. Over the past decade a large number of architecture analysis methods have been created, and at least two surveys of these methods have been published. This paper examines the criteria for analyzing architecture analysis methods, and suggests a new set of criteria that focus on the essence of what it means to be an architecture analysis method. These criteria could be used to compare methods, to help understand the suitability of a method, or to improve a method. We then examine two methods--the Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method and Architecture-level Modifiability Analysis--in light of these criteria, and provide some insight into how these methods can be improved.