Moda - multiple objective decision analysis: balancing quality attributes in software architectures

ABSTRACT

A high-quality software architecture facilitates in developing a high quality software-intensive system. To design such architecture, the architect must consider multiple stakeholders' inconsistent, contradictory, and partially understood objectives, and balance the myriad tradeoffs among them. Our approach proposes to balance quality attributes in software architectures by identify the important-yet-to-be-addressed quality attributes during the design process and provide architecture analysis methods to help compare the resulting architecture candidates with respect to required quality attributes.

REFERENCES

• 1: M.R. Barbacci, R. Ellison, et al, Quality-attribute Attribute Workshops, Technical Report, CMU/SEI-2003-TR-016.
• 2: Tianjun Feng , L. Robin Keller, A Multiple-Objective Decision Analysis for Terrorism Protection: Potassium Iodide Distribution in Nuclear Incidents, Decision Analysis, v.3 n.2, p.76-93, June 2006 [doi>10.1287/deca.1060.0072]
• 3: S.P.Mattingly, Decision Theory for Performance Evaluation of New Technologies Incorporating Institutional Issues: Application to Traffic Control Implementation, PhD Dissertation, University of California, Irvine, CA.Tavel, P. 2007 Modeling and Simulation Design. AK Peters Ltd.
• 4: R.Keeney and H.Raiffa, Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Tradeoffs. New York: Wiley.
• 5: Christopher Fox, Introduction to Software Engineering Design: Processes, Principles and Patterns with UML2, Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc., Boston, MA, 2006
• 6: M.Svahnberg, G.Wohlin, L.Lundberrg, and M.Mattsson, A Quality-Driven Decision-Support Method for Identifying Software Architecture Candidates, International Journal of Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering, 2003.
• 7: Tariq Al-Naeem , Ian Gorton , Muhammed Ali Babar , Fethi Rabhi , Boualem Benatallah, A quality-driven systematic approach for architecting distributed software applications, Proceedings of the 27th international conference on Software engineering, May 15-21, 2005, St. Louis, MO, USA [doi>10.1145/1062455.1062508]
• 8: Liming Zhu , Aybüke Aurum , Ian Gorton , Ross Jeffery, Tradeoff and Sensitivity Analysis in Software Architecture Evaluation Using Analytic Hierarchy Process, Software Quality Control, v.13 n.4, p.357-375, December 2005 [doi>10.1007/s11219-005-4251-0]
• 9: Lihua Xu , Scott A. Hendrickson , Eric Hettwer , Hadar Ziv , André van der Hoek , Debra J. Richardson, Towards supporting the architecture design process through evaluation of design alternatives, Proceedings of the ISSTA 2006 workshop on Role of software architecture for testing and analysis, p.81-87, July 17-20, 2006, Portland, Maine [doi>10.1145/1147249.1147260]
• 10: L.Chung, B.A.Nixon, E.Yu, and J.Mylopoulos. Quality-attribute Requirements in Software Engineering. Springer.
• 11: ArchStudio 4, http://www.isr.uci.edu/projects/archstudio/
• 12: Rick Kazman, Tool support for architecture analysis and design, Joint proceedings of the second international software architecture workshop (ISAW-2) and international workshop on multiple perspectives in software development (Viewpoints '96) on SIGSOFT '96 workshops, p.94-97, October 16-18, 1996, San Francisco, California, United States [doi>10.1145/243327.243618]
• 13: M.Barbacci, SEI Architecture Analysis Techniques and When to Use Them, technical report, CMU/SEI-2002-TN-005.
• 14: Chung-Horng Lung , Sonia Bot , Kalai Kalaichelvan , Rick Kazman, An approach to software architecture analysis for evolution and reusability, Proceedings of the 1997 conference of the Centre for Advanced Studies on Collaborative research, p.15, November 10-13, 1997, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
• 15: L. Chung , B. A. Nixon , E. Yu, Using non-functional requirements to systematically support change, Proceedings of the Second IEEE International Symposium on Requirements Engineering, p.132, March 27-29, 1995
• 16: Rick Kazman , Jai Asundi , Mark Klein, Quantifying the costs and benefits of architectural decisions, Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Software Engineering, p.297-306, May 12-19, 2001, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  D. Software
  D.2 SOFTWARE ENGINEERING
        D.2.10 Design**
            Subjects: Methodologies**

Additional Classification:
  D. Software
  D.2 SOFTWARE ENGINEERING
      D.2.2 Design Tools and Techniques
          Subjects: Decision tables

General Terms:
Design, Human Factors

Keywords:
multiple objective decision making, quality attributes, software architecture, tradeoffs