nach oben

Software Quality Journal

Erschienen in:

01.09.2011

Assessing the maintainability of software product line feature models using structural metrics

verfasst von: Ebrahim Bagheri, Dragan Gasevic

Erschienen in: Software Quality Journal | Ausgabe 3/2011

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

A software product line is a unified representation of a set of conceptually similar software systems that share many common features and satisfy the requirements of a particular domain. Within the context of software product lines, feature models are tree-like structures that are widely used for modeling and representing the inherent commonality and variability of software product lines. Given the fact that many different software systems can be spawned from a single software product line, it can be anticipated that a low-quality design can ripple through to many spawned software systems. Therefore, the need for early indicators of external quality attributes is recognized in order to avoid the implications of defective and low-quality design during the late stages of production. In this paper, we propose a set of structural metrics for software product line feature models and theoretically validate them using valid measurement-theoretic principles. Further, we investigate through controlled experimentation whether these structural metrics can be good predictors (early indicators) of the three main subcharacteristics of maintainability: analyzability, changeability, and understandability. More specifically, a four-step analysis is conducted: (1) investigating whether feature model structural metrics are correlated with feature model maintainability through the employment of classical statistical correlation techniques; (2) understanding how well each of the structural metrics can serve as discriminatory references for maintainability; (3) identifying the sufficient set of structural metrics for evaluating each of the subcharacteristics of maintainability; and (4) evaluating how well different prediction models based on the proposed structural metrics can perform in indicating the maintainability of a feature model. Results obtained from the controlled experiment support the idea that useful prediction models can be built for the purpose of evaluating feature model maintainability using early structural metrics. Some of the structural metrics show significant correlation with the subjective perception of the subjects about the maintainability of the feature models.

Vorheriger Artikel Benchmarking library and application software with Data Envelopment Analysis

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

http://splot-research.org/.

http://fm.gsdlab.org/index.php?title=Format:SXFM.

Al-Kilidar, H., Cox, K., & Kitchenham, B. (2005). The use and usefulness of the ISO/IEC 9126 quality standard. In 2005 International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering, 2005 (p. 7). IEEE.

Babar, M., Chen, L., & Shull, F. (2010). Managing variability in software product lines. IEEE Software, 27(3), 89–91.

Bagheri, E., Noia, T. D., Ragone, A., & Gasevic, D. (2010). Configuring software product line feature models based on stakeholders’ soft and hard requirements. In The 14th International Software Product Line Conference. Springer.

Bansiya, J., & Davis, C. (2002). A hierarchical model for object-oriented design quality assessment. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 28(1), 4–17.

Barbacci, M., Klein, M., Longstaff, T., & Weinstock, C. (1995). Quality attributes. SEI, December.

Basili, V., Shull, F., & Lanubile, F. (1999). Building knowledge through families of experiments. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 25(4), 456–473.CrossRef

Batory, D. (2005). Feature models, grammars, and propositional formulas. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 3714, 7.

Benavides, D., Segura, S., Trinidad, P., & Ruiz-Cortes, A. (2007). FAMA: Tooling a framework for the automated analysis of feature models. In Proceeding of the 1st International Workshop on Variability Modelling of Software-intensive Systems (VAMOS) (pp. 129–134).

Benavides, D., Trinidad, P., & Ruiz-Cortes, A. (2005). Automated reasoning on feature models. In LNCS, Advanced Information Systems Engineering: 17th International Conference, CAiSE 2005 (Vol. 3520, pp. 491–503). Springer.

Boskovic, M., Bagheri, E., Gasevic, D., Mohabbati, B., Kaviani, N., & Hatala, M. (2010). Automated staged configuration with semantic web technologies. In International Journal of Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering. World Scientific.

Briand, L., Bunse, C., & Daly, J. (2001). A controlled experiment for evaluating quality guidelines on the maintainability of object-oriented designs. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 27(6), 513–530.CrossRef

Briand, L., Morasca, S., & Basili, V. (1996). Property-based software engineering measurement. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 22(1), 68–86.CrossRef

Briand, L., Wust, J., Daly, J., & VictorPorter, D. (2000). Exploring the relationships between design measures and software quality in object-oriented systems. Journal of Systems and Software, 51(3), 245–273.CrossRef

Briand, L. C., Wüst, J., Ikonomovski, S. V., & Lounis, H. (1999). Investigating quality factors in object-oriented designs: An industrial case study. In ICSE’99: Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Software engineering (pp. 345–354). New York, NY: ACM.

Cant, S., Henderson-Sellers, B., & Jeffery, D. (1994). Application of cognitive complexity metrics to object-oriented programs. Journal of Object Oriented Programming, 7, 52–52.

Chidamber, S., Kemerer, C., & MIT, C. (1994). A metrics suite for object oriented design. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 20(6), 476–493.CrossRef

Cruz-Lemus, J. A., Genero, M., Manso, M. E., Morasca, S., & Piattini, M. (2009). Assessing the understandability of uml statechart diagrams with composite states—A family of empirical studies. Empirical Software Engineering, 14(6), 685–719.CrossRef

Cruz-Lemus, J. A., Maes, A., Genero, M., Poels, G., & Piattini, M. (2010). The impact of structural complexity on the understandability of uml statechart diagrams. Information Science, 180(11), 2209–2220.MathSciNetCrossRef

Czarnecki, K., Helsen, S., & Eisenecker, U. (2005). Formalizing cardinality-based feature models and their specialization. Software Process: Improvement and Practice, 10(1), 7–29.CrossRef

de Oliveira, E. A. Jr., Gimenes, I. M. S., & Maldonado, J. C. (2008). A metric suite to support software product line architectures. In XXXIV Conferncia Latinoamericana de Informtica (CLEI 2008).

Etxeberria, L., & Sagardui, G. (2008). Variability driven quality evaluation in software product lines. In Proceedings of the 12th International Software Product Line Conference (pp. 243–252). IEEE.

Fenton, N. (1994). Software measurement: A necessary scientific basis. IEEE Transactions on software engineering, 20(3), 199–206.

Fenton, N., & Neil, M. (1999). A critique of software defect prediction models. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 25(5), 675–689.CrossRef

Fenton, N., & Neil, M. (1999). Software metrics: Successes, failures and new directions. Journal of Systems and Software, 47(2–3), 149–157.CrossRef

Fenton, N., & Pfleeger, S. L. (1997). Software metrics: A rigorous and practical approach (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: PWS Publishing Co.

Finkelstein, L. (2003). Widely, strongly and weakly defined measurement. Measurement, 34(1), 39–48.CrossRef

Garner, S. (1995). Weka: The waikato environment for knowledge analysis. In Proceedings of the New Zealand Computer Science Research Students Conference (pp. 57–64). Citeseer.

Genero, M., Olivas, J., Piattini, M., & Romero, F. (2001). Using metrics to predict OO information systems maintainability. In Advanced Information Systems Engineering (pp. 388–401). Springer.

Genero, M., Poels, G., & Piattini, M. (2008). Defining and validating metrics for assessing the understandability of entity-relationship diagrams. Data and Knowledge Engineering, 64(3), 534–557.CrossRef

Griss, M., Favaro, J., & dAlessandro, M. (1998). Integrating feature modeling with the RSEB. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Software Reuse (pp. 76–85). Citeseer.

Hall, M., & Smith, L. (1997). Feature subset selection: A correlation based filter approach. In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (pp. 855–858).

Herrmannsdoerfer, M., Ratiu, D., & Koegel, M. (2010). Metamodel usage analysis for identifying metamodel improvements. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Software Language Engineering.

Hershey, J., & Olsen, P. (2007). Approximating the Kullback Leibler divergence between Gaussian mixture models. In IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing, 2007, Vol. 4, ICASSP 2007.

Hitz, M., & Montazeri, B. (1995). Measuring coupling and cohesion in object-oriented systems. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Applied Corporate Computing, 50, 75–76.

Hosmer, D., & Lemeshow, S. (2000). Applied logistic regression. New York: Wiley.MATHCrossRef

Hubbard, D., & Evans, D. (2010). Problems with scoring methods and ordinal scales in risk assessment. IBM Journal of Research and Development, 54(3), 2–10.CrossRef

Janota, M., & Kiniry, J. (2007). Reasoning about feature models in higher-order logic. In Software Product Line Conference, 2007. SPLC 2007. 11th International (pp. 13–22).

Jarzabek, S., Yang, B., & Yoeun, S. (2006). Addressing quality attributes in domain analysis for product lines. IEE Proceedings-Software, 153, 61.

Jones, C. (2008). Applied software measurement. New York: McGraw-Hill Osborne Media.

Kang, K., Cohen, S., Hess, J., Novak, W., & Peterson, A., C.-M. U. P. P. S. E. INST. (1990). Feature-oriented domain analysis (FODA) feasibility study. Pittsburgh, PA: Carnegie Mellon University, Software Engineering Institute.

Kazman, R., Klein, M., Barbacci, M., Longstaff, T., Lipson, H., & Carriere, J. (1998). The architecture tradeoff analysis method. In iceccs. Published by the IEEE Computer Society, p. 0068.

Kent, J. (1983). Information gain and a general measure of correlation. Biometrika, 70(1), 163.MathSciNetMATHCrossRef

Khoshgoftaar, T. M., & Seliya, N. (2003). Fault prediction modeling for software quality estimation: Comparing commonly used techniques. Empirical Software Engineering, 8(3), 255–283.CrossRef

Khoshgoftaar, T. M., Munson, J. C., Bhattacharya, B. B., & Richardson, G. D. (1992). Predictive modeling techniques of software quality from software measures. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 18(11), 979–987.CrossRef

Khoshgoftaar, T. M., Rebours, P., & Seliya, N. (2009). Software quality analysis by combining multiple projects and learners. Software Quality Journal, 17(1), 25–49.CrossRef

Khoshgoftaar, T., Bhattacharyya, B., & Richardson, G. (1992). Predicting software errors, during development, using nonlinear regression models: A comparative study. IEEE Transactions on Reliability, 41(3), 390–395.MATHCrossRef

Kitchenham, B., & Pfleeger, S. (1996). Software quality: The elusive target. IEEE Software, 13(1), 12–21.CrossRef

Kleppe, A. G., Warmer, J., & Bast, W. (2003). MDA explained: The model driven architecture: Practice and promise. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co Inc.

Kocaguneli, E., Kultur, Y., & Bener, A. (2009). Combining Multiple Learners Induced on Multiple Datasets for Software Effort Prediction. ISSRE.

Korson, T., & McGregor, J. D. (1990). Understanding object-oriented: A unifying paradigm. Communications of the ACM, 33(9), 40–60.CrossRef

Lee, K., Kang, K., & Lee, J. (2002). Concepts and guidelines of feature modeling for product line software engineering. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 2319, 62–77.CrossRef

Liu, Y., Khoshgoftaar, T. M., & Seliya, N. (2010). Evolutionary optimization of software quality modeling with multiple repositories. In IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 99, no. PrePrints.

Lopez-Herrejon, R., Batory, D. (2001). A standard problem for evaluating product-line methodologies. In Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 10–24.

Lozano, L. M., García-Cueto E., & Muñiz, J. (2008). Effect of the number of response categories on the reliability and validity of rating scales. Methodology: European Journal of Research Methods for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, 4(2), 73–79. [Online]. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.1027/1614-2241.4.2.73.

Manso, M., Genero, M., & Piattini, M. (2010). No-redundant metrics for UML class diagram structural complexity. In Advanced Information Systems Engineering (pp. 1029–1029). Springer.

McGregor, J. D., Muthig, D., Yoshimura, K., & Jensen, P. (2010). Guest editors’ introduction: Successful software product line practices. IEEE Software, 27(3), 16–21.CrossRef

Mendonca, M., Branco, M., & Cowan, D. (2009). S.p.l.o.t.: Software product lines online tools. In OOPSLA’09: Proceeding of the 24th ACM SIGPLAN Conference Companion on Object Oriented Programming Systems Languages and Applications (pp. 761–762). New York, NY: ACM.

Mendonca, M., Wasowski, A., Czarnecki, K., & Cowan, D. (2008). Efficient compilation techniques for large scale feature models. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Generative Programming and Component Engineering (pp. 13–22). New York, NY: ACM.

Olumofin, F. G., & Mišić, V. B. (2007). A holistic architecture assessment method for software product lines. Information and Software Technology, 49(4), 309–323.CrossRef

Poels, G., & Dedene, G. (1999). DISTANCE: A framework for software measure construction. Technical Report, KU Leuven-Departement toegepaste economische wetenschappen.

Poels, G., & Dedene, G. (2000). Distance-based software measurement: Necessary and sufficient properties for software measures. Information and Software Technology, 42(1), 35–46.CrossRef

Pohl, K., & Metzger, A. (2006). Software product line testing. Communications of the ACM, 49(12), 78–81.CrossRef

Pohl, K., Böckle, G., & Van DerLinden, F. (2005). Software product line engineering: Foundations, principles, and techniques. Berlin, Heidelberg, New York: Springer.MATH

Quinlan, J. (1986). Induction of decision trees. Machine learning, 1(1), 81–106.

Scott, W. (1998). Organizations: Rational, natural, and open systems. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice hall.

Selic, B. (2006). Model-driven development: Its essence and opportunities. In ISORC’06: Proceedings of the 9th IEEE International Symposium on Object and Component-Oriented Real-Time Distributed Computing (pp. 313–319). Washington, DC: IEEE Computer Society.

Serrano, M. A., Calero, C., Sahraoui, H. A., & Piattini, M. (2008). Empirical studies to assess the understandability of data warehouse schemas using structural metrics. Software Quality Journal, 16(1), 79–106.CrossRef

Siau, K., & Tan, X. (2005). Improving the quality of conceptual modeling using cognitive mapping techniques. Data and Knowledge Engineering, 55(3), 343–365.CrossRef

Simon, H. (1978). Rationality as process and as product of thought. The American Economic Review, 68(2), 1–16.

Tessier, P., Gérard, S., Terrier, F., & Geib, J. (2005). “Using variation propagation for model-driven management of a system family.” In Software Product Lines, pp. 222–233.

Wang, H., Li, Y., Sun, J., Zhang, H., & Pan, J. (2007). Verifying feature models using OWL. Web Semantics: Science, Services and Agents on the World Wide Web, 5(2), 117–129.CrossRef

Weiss, D. M., Clements, P. C., Kang, K., & Krueger, C. (2006). Software product line hall of fame. In SPLC’06: Proceedings of the 10th International on Software Product Line Conference (p. 237). Washington, DC: IEEE Computer Society.

Weyuker, E. (1988). Evaluating software complexity measures. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 14, 1357–1365.

Yu, E., & Mylopoulos, J. (1994). Understanding “why” in software process modelling, analysis, and design. In Proceedings of the 16th international conference on Software engineering (p. 168). IEEE Computer Society Press.

Zhang, T., Deng, L., Wu, J., Zhou, Q., & Ma, C. (2008). Some metrics for accessing quality of product line architecture. In CSSE’08: Proceedings of the 2008 International Conference on Computer Science and Software Engineering (pp. 500–503). Washington, DC: IEEE Computer Society.

Titel: Assessing the maintainability of software product line feature models using structural metrics
verfasst von: Ebrahim Bagheri
Dragan Gasevic
Publikationsdatum: 01.09.2011
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: Software Quality Journal / Ausgabe 3/2011
Print ISSN: 0963-9314
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-1367
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11219-010-9127-2

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 3/2011

A comparative study for estimating software development effort intervals

A multiple-population genetic algorithm for branch coverage test data generation

An industrial case study of classifier ensembles for locating software defects

Benchmarking library and application software with Data Envelopment Analysis

In this issue

Premium Partner