Nicolas Sannier
ABSTRACT
Product comparators and configurators aim to assist customers in choosing a product that meets their expectations. While comparators present similarities and differences between competing products, configurators propose an assisted environment to gradually choose and customize products. The two systems have pros and cons and are inherently different. But both share the same variability information background and operate over a set of (possible) products, typically represented through product comparison matrices (PCMs). A key issue is that current PCMs have no clear semantics, making their analysis and transformations imprecise and hard. In this paper, we sketch a research plan for generating dedicated comparators or configurators from PCMs. The core of our vision is the use of formal variability models to encode PCMs and enables a further exploitation by developers of comparators or configurators. We elaborate on five research questions and describe the expected outputs of the research.
- R. Abraham and M. Erwig. Ucheck: A spreadsheet type checker for end users. J. Vis. Lang. Comput., 18(1):71--95, 2007. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- M. Acher, B. Baudry, P. Heymans, A. Cleve, and J.-L. Hainaut. Support for reverse engineering and maintaining feature models. In S. Gnesi, P. Collet, and K. Schmid, editors, VaMoS, page 20. ACM, 2013. Google ScholarDigital Library
- M. Acher, A. Cleve, G. Perrouin, P. Heymans, C. Vanbeneden, P. Collet, and P. Lahire. On extracting feature models from product descriptions. In VaMoS'12, pages 45--54. ACM, 2012. Google ScholarDigital Library
- N. Andersen, K. Czarnecki, S. She, and A. Wasowski. Efficient synthesis of feature models. In SPLC'12, pages 106--115, 2012. Google ScholarDigital Library
- K. Bak, K. Czarnecki, and A. Wasowski. Feature and meta-models in clafer: mixed, specialized, and coupled. In SLE'10, LNCS, pages 102--122. Springer, 2011. Google ScholarDigital Library
- D. Benavides, A. Ruiz-Cortés, and P. Trinidad. Automated reasoning on feature models. CAiSE'05, 3520:491--503, 2005. Google ScholarDigital Library
- D. Benavides, S. Segura, and A. Ruiz-Cortes. Automated analysis of feature models 20 years later: a literature review. Information Systems, 35(6), 2010. Google ScholarDigital Library
- T. Berger, S. She, R. Lotufo, A. Wasowski, and K. Czarnecki. A study of variability models and languages in the systems software domain. Software Engineering, 99(PrePrints):1, 2013.Google Scholar
- Q. Boucher, G. Perrouin, and P. Heymans. Deriving configuration interfaces from feature models: A vision paper. In VAMOS'12, 2012. Google ScholarDigital Library
- A. Classen, Q. Boucher, and P. Heymans. A text-based approach to feature modelling: Syntax and semantics of TVL. Sci. Comput. Program., 76(12):1130--1143, 2011. Google ScholarDigital Library
- M. Cordy, P.-Y. Schobbens, P. Heymans, and A. Legay. Beyond boolean product-line model checking: dealing with feature attributes and multi-features. In ICSE'2013, pages 472--481, 2013. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. Cunha, J. Visser, T. L. Alves, and J. Saraiva. Type-safe evolution of spreadsheets. In FASE'11, pages 186--201, 2011. Google ScholarDigital Library
- K. Czarnecki, S. She, and A. Wasowski. Sample spaces and feature models: There and back again. In SPLC '08, pages 22--31, 2008. Google ScholarDigital Library
- H. Dumitru, M. Gibiec, N. Hariri, J. Cleland-Huang, B. Mobasher, C. Castro-Herrera, and M. Mirakhorli. On-demand feature recommendations derived from mining public product descriptions. In ICSE'11, pages 181--190, New York, NY, USA, 2011. ACM. Google ScholarDigital Library
- H. Eichelberger and K. Schmid. A systematic analysis of textual variability modeling languages. In SPLC'13, pages 12--21, 2013. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. T. Gourville and D. Soman. Overchoice and assortment type: When and why variety backfires. Marketing Science, 24(3):382--395, 2005. Google ScholarDigital Library
- E. N. Haslinger, R. E. Lopez-Herrejon, and A. Egyed. On extracting feature models from sets of valid feature combinations. In FASE'13, pages 53--67, 2013. Google ScholarDigital Library
- F. Hermans, M. Pinzger, and A. v. Deursen. Detecting and visualizing inter-worksheet smells in spreadsheets. In ICSE'12, pages 441--451, 2012. Google ScholarDigital Library
- A. Hubaux, P. Heymans, P.-Y. Schobbens, D. Deridder, and E. K. Abbasi. Supporting multiple perspectives in feature-based configuration. Software and Systems Modeling, pages 1--23, 2011. Google ScholarDigital Library
- N. Kano, N. Seraku, F. Takahashi, and S. Tsuji. Attractive quality and must-be quality. Journal of the Japanese Society for Quality Control, 14(2):147--156, 1984.Google Scholar
- E. Khalil Abbasi, A. Hubaux, M. Acher, Q. Boucher, and P. Heymans. The anatomy of a sales configurator: An empirical study of 111 cases. In M. Norrie and C. Salinesi, editors, CAiSE'13, 2013. Google ScholarDigital Library
- A. Murashkin, M. Antkiewicz, D. Rayside, and K. Czarnecki. Visualization and exploration of optimal variants in product line engineering. SPLC'13, 13, 2013. Google ScholarDigital Library
- A. Nöhrer and A. Egyed. C2o configurator: a tool for guided decision-making. Autom. Softw. Eng., 20(2):265--296, 2013. Google ScholarDigital Library
- R. R. Panko. Thinking is bad: Implications of human error research for spreadsheet research and practice. CoRR, abs/0801.3114, 2008.Google Scholar
- A. Pleuss, B. Hauptmann, D. Dhungana, and G. Botterweck. User interface engineering for software product lines: the dilemma between automation and usability. In Proc. of EICS'12, pages 25--34, 2012. Google ScholarDigital Library
- R. Rabiser, P. Grünbacher, and M. Lehofer. A qualitative study on user guidance capabilities in product configuration tools. In Proceedings of the 27th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering, ASE 2012, pages 110--119, New York, NY, USA, 2012. ACM. Google ScholarDigital Library
- U. Ryssel, J. Ploennigs, and K. Kabitzsch. Extraction of feature models from formal contexts. In FOSD'11, pages 1--8, 2011. Google ScholarDigital Library
- C. Salinesi, R. Triki, and R. Mazo. Combining configuration and recommendation to define an interactive product line configuration approach. CoRR, abs/1206.2520, 2012.Google Scholar
- N. Sannier, M. Acher, and B. Baudry. From comparison matrix to variability model: The wikipedia case study. In ASE, pages 580--585. IEEE, 2013.Google ScholarDigital Library
- S. She, R. Lotufo, T. Berger, A. Wasowski, and K. Czarnecki. Reverse engineering feature models. In ICSE'11, pages 461--470. ACM, 2011. Google ScholarDigital Library
- A. Trentin, E. Perin, and C. Forza. Sales configurator capabilities to avoid the product variety paradox: Construct development and validation. Computers in Industry, 64(4):436--447, 2013. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Y. Xiong, A. Hubaux, S. She, and K. Czarnecki. Generating range fixes for software configuration. In M. Glinz, G. C. Murphy, and M. Pezzè, editors, ICSE, pages 58--68. IEEE, 2012. Google ScholarDigital Library
Index Terms
- Comparing or configuring products: are we getting the right ones?
Recommendations
Using regression testing to analyze the impact of changes to variability models on products
SPLC '12: Proceedings of the 16th International Software Product Line Conference - Volume 1Industrial product lines are typically maintained for a long time and evolve continuously to address changing requirements and new technologies. Already derived products often have to be re-derived after such changes to benefit from new and updated ...
Supporting business calculations in a product line engineering tool suite
SPLC '11: Proceedings of the 15th International Software Product Line Conference, Volume 2Software Product Line Engineering (SPLE) involves defining the commonalities and variability of similar products to leverage extensive reuse and to accelerate the derivation of customized products. However, sales people and customers do not only care ...
Configuring Software Product Line Specific Products with SMarty and PLUS: An Experimental Study on Use Case Diagrams
SBQS '18: Proceedings of the XVII Brazilian Symposium on Software QualitySoftware Product Line (SPL) represents a set of systems that share common and variable elements, to meet the specific needs of a particular market segment, providing the necessary flexibility for product customization and diversification. The adoption ...
Comments