Escaping the software tar pit: model clashes and how to avoid them

ABSTRACT

"No scene from prehistory is quite so vivid as that of the mortal struggles of great beasts in the tar pits… Large system programming has over the past decade been such a tar pit, and many great and powerful beasts have thrashed violently in it…"Everyone seems to have been surprised by the stickiness of the problem, and it is hard to discern the nature of it. But we must try to understand it if we are to solve it."Fred Brooks, 1975Several recent books and reports have confirmed that the software tar pit is at least as hazardous today as it was in 1975. Our research into several classes of models used to guide software development (product models, process models, property models, success models), has convinced us that the concept of model clashes among these classes of models helps explain much of the stickiness of the software tar-pit problem.We have been developing and experimentally evolving an approach called MBASE -- Model-Based (System) Architecting and Software Engineering -- which helps identify and avoid software model clashes. Section 2 of this paper introduces the concept of model clashes, and provides examples of common clashes for each combination of product, process, property, and success model. Sections 3 and 4 introduce the MBASE approach for endowing a software project with a mutually supportive set of models, and illustrate the application of MBASE to an example corporate resource scheduling system. Section 5 summarizes the results of applying the MBASE approach to a family of small digital library projects. Section 6 presents conclusions to date.

REFERENCES

• 1: [Babcock, 1985]. C. Babcock, "New Jersey Motorists in Software Jam," ComputerWorld, September 30, 1985, pp. 1, 6.
• 2: [Balzer, 1996]. R. Balzer. Current state and future perspectives of software process technology. Keynote Speech, Software Process (SP 96), Brighton, 2-6 December 1996.
• 3: [Boehm, 1989]. B. Boehm, Software Risk Management, IEEE-CS Press, 1989.
• 4: [Boehm-Bose, 1994]. B. Boehm and P. Bose, "A Collaborative Spiral Process Model Based on Theory W," Proceedings, ICSP3, IEEE, 1994.
• 5: Barry Boehm, Anchoring the Software Process, IEEE Software, v.13 n.4, p.73-82, July 1996 [doi>10.1109/52.526834]
• 6: Barry Boehm , Hoh In, Identifying Quality-Requirement Conflicts, IEEE Software, v.13 n.2, p.25-35, March 1996 [doi>10.1109/52.506460]
• 7: Barry Boehm , Alex Egyed , Julie Kwan , Ray Madachy, Developing multimedia applications with the WinWin spiral model, Proceedings of the 6th European conference held jointly with the 5th ACM SIGSOFT international symposium on Foundations of software engineering, p.20-39, September 22-25, 1997, Zurich, Switzerland
• 8: Barry W. Boehm, A Spiral Model of Software Development and Enhancement, Computer, v.21 n.5, p.61-72, May 1988 [doi>10.1109/2.59]
• 9: Barry Boehm , Alexander Egyed , Julie Kwan , Dan Port , Archita Shah , Ray Madachy, Using the WinWin Spiral Model: A Case Study, Computer, v.31 n.7, p.33-44, July 1998 [doi>10.1109/2.689675]
• 10: Barry W. Boehm , Daniel Port , Alexander Egyed , Marwan Abi-Antoun, The MBASE Life Cycle Architecture Milestone Package, Proceedings of the TC2 First Working IFIP Conference on Software Architecture (WICSA1), p.511-528, February 22-24, 1999
• 11: Grady Booch, Object oriented design with applications, Benjamin-Cummings Publishing Co., Inc., Redwood City, CA, 1990
• 12: Frederick P. Brooks, Jr., The mythical man-month (anniversary ed.), Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc., Boston, MA, 1995
• 13: [Fisher et al., 1998]. J. Fisher et al., "Model-Based Systems Engineering: A New Paradigm," INCOSE INSIGHT, October 1998, pp. 3-16.
• 14: [Fisher-Ury, 1981]. R. Fisher and W. Ury, Getting To Yes, Houghton-Mifflin, 1981.
• 15: [Gargaro-Peterson, 1996]. A. Gargaro and A.S. Peterson, "Transitioning a Model-Based Software Engineering Architectural Style to Ada 95," SEI Technical Report CMU/SEI-96-TR-017, 1996. See also http://sei/cmu.edu/mbse/is.html
• 16: David Garlan , Robert Allen , John Ockerbloom, Architectural Mismatch: Why Reuse Is So Hard, IEEE Software, v.12 n.6, p.17-26, November 1995 [doi>10.1109/52.469757]
• 17: [Honeywell, 1998]. Honeywell Technology Center, "Model-Based Software Development," Course Announcement, Minneapolis, MN, 1998.
• 18: M. A. Jackson, Principles of Program Design, Academic Press, Inc., Orlando, FL, 1975
• 19: [Jacobson et al., 1997]. I. Jacobson, M. Griss, and P. Jonsson, Software Reuse, Addison Wesley, 1997.
• 20: Rick Kazman , Len Bass , Mike Webb , Gregory Abowd, SAAM: a method for analyzing the properties of software architectures, Proceedings of the 16th international conference on Software engineering, p.81-90, May 16-21, 1994, Sorrento, Italy
• 21: [Kruchten, 1999]. P. Kruchten, The Rational Unified Process, Addison Wesley, 1999.
• 22: Ming-June Lee, Foundations of the winwin requirements negotiation system, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, 1996
• 23: [Madachy, 1995]. R. Madachy, "Knowledge-Based Risk Assessment Using Cost Factors", Automated Software Engineering, 2, 1995.
• 24: [Marenzano, 1995]. J. Maranzano, "System Architecture Validation Review Findhags," in D. Garlan, ed., ICSEI7 Architecture Workshop Proceedings, CMU, Pittsburgh, PA 1995.
• 25: [Port, 1999]. D. Port, Integrated Systems Development Methodology, Telos Press, 1999 (to appear).
• 26: [Rational, 1997]. Rational Objectory Process, Version 4.1, Rational Software Corp., Santa Clara, CA, 1997.
• 27: [Rechtin, 1991]. E. Rechtin, Systems Architecting, Prentice Hall, 1991.
• 28: Eberhardt Rechtin , Mark W. Maier, The art of systems architecting, CRC Press, Inc., Boca Raton, FL, 1997
• 29: [Rosove, 1967]. P. E. Rosove, Developing Computer-Based Information Systems, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1967.
• 30: [Ross-Schoman, 1977]. D. T. Ross and K. E. Schoman, "Structured Analysis for Requirements Definition," IEEE Trans. SW Engr., January 1977, pp. 41-48.
• 31: Walker Royce, Software project management: a unified framework, Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc., Boston, MA, 1998
• 32: [Shaw-Garlan, 1996]. M. Shaw and D. Garlan, Software Architecture, Prentice Hall, 1996.
• 33: W. Tracz, Domain Analysis, Domain Modeling, and Domain-Specific Software Architectures: Lessons Learned, Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Software Reuse, p.232, April 23-26, 1996
• 34: Bruce W. Weide , Stephen H. Edwards , Wayne D. Heym , Timothy J. Long , William F. Ogden, Characterizing Observability and Controllability of Software Components, Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Software Reuse, p.62, April 23-26, 1996

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  D. Software
  D.2 SOFTWARE ENGINEERING
      D.2.4 Software/Program Verification
          Subjects: Model checking

Additional Classification:
  K. Computing Milieux
  K.6 MANAGEMENT OF COMPUTING AND INFORMATION SYSTEMS
      K.6.3 Software Management
          Subjects: Software development

General Terms:
Design, Management, Performance, Reliability