2017Unpublished venueRequires access

Evaluating Software Architecture Evaluation Methods

Silvia Abrahão, Emilio Insfrán

Open publisher page 6 citations

Abstract

Context: The size and complexity of software systems along with the demand for ensuring quality requirements have fostered the interest in software architecture evaluation methods. Although several empirical studies have been reported, the actual body of knowledge is still insufficient. To address this concern, we presented a family of four controlled experiments that compares a recently proposed method, the Quality-Driven Architecture Derivation and Improvement (QuaDAI) method against the well-known Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method (ATAM).

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Context: The size and complexity of software systems along with the demand for ensuring quality requirements have fostered the interest in software architecture evaluation methods. Although several empirical studies have been reported, the actual body of knowledge is still insufficient. To address this concern, we presented a family of four controlled experiments that compares a recently proposed method, the Quality-Driven Architecture Derivation and Improvement (QuaDAI) method against the well-known Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method (ATAM).

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 6 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Context: The size and complexity of software systems along with the demand for ensuring quality requirements have fostered the interest in software architecture evaluation methods. Although several empirical studies have been reported, the actual body of knowledge is still insufficient. To address this concern, we presented a family of four controlled experiments that compares a recently proposed method, the Quality-Driven Architecture Derivation and Improvement (QuaDAI) method against the well-known Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method (ATAM).

Key concepts: Architecture tradeoff analysis method, Computer science, Software architecture description, Software architecture, Reference architecture, Architecture, Software quality, Software engineering

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Evaluating Software Architecture Evaluation Methods — Research Paper | ScholarLens