Abstract
Our motivation is to determine whether risks such as implementation error-proneness can be isolated into three types of containers at design time. This paper identifies several container candidates in other research that fit the risk container concept. Two industrial case studies were used to determine which of three container types tested is most effective at isolating and predicting at design time the risk of implementation error-proneness. We found that Design Rule Containers were more effective than Use Case and Resource Containers.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Abdelmoez, W.M., Goseva-Popstojanova, K., Ammar, H.H.: Methodology for maintainability-based risk assessment. In: Annual Reliability and Maintainability Symposium, RAMS 2006, pp. 337–342. IEEE (2006)
Bass, L., Clement, P., Kazman, R.: Software Architecture in Practice, 3rd edn., pp. 121–124 and p. 280. Addison Wesley, Reading, USA (2012)
Cortellessa, V., Goseva-Popstojanova, K., Appukkutty, K., Guedem, A.R., Hassan, A., Elnaggar, R., Abdelmoez, W., Ammar, H.H.: Model-based performance risk analysis. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 31(1), 3–20 (2005)
Goseva-Popstojanova, K., Hassan, A., Guedem, A., Abdelmoez, W., Nassar, D.E.M., Ammar, H., Mili, A.: Architectural-level risk analysis using UML. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 29(10), 946–960 (2003)
Leigh, A., Wermelinger, M., Zisman, A.: An evaluation of design rule spaces as risk containers. In: Proceedings of the 13th Working International Conference on Software Architecture (WICSA), pp. 295–298. IEEE (2016)
Mustafiz, S., Sun, X., Kienzle, J., Vangheluwe, H.: Model-driven assessment of system dependability. J. Softw. Syst. Model. 7(4), 487–502 (2008)
Said, F.H., Ammar, H.H., Valenti, M.C., Ross, A., Lai, H.J.: Security-based Risk Assessment for Software Architecture, pp. 1–126. West Virginia University Libraries (2011)
Stevanetic, S., Zdun, U.: Exploring the understandability of components in architectural component models using component level metrics and participants’ experience. In: 19th International ACM SIGSOFT Symposium on Component-Based Software Engineering (CBSE), pp. 1–6. IEEE (2011)
Williams, L.G., Smith, C.U.: Performance evaluation of software architectures. In: Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Software and Performance, pp. 164–177. ACM (1998)
Wong, S., Cai, Y., Valetto, G., Simeonov, G., Sethi, K.: Design rule hierarchies and parallelism in software development tasks. In: Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE), pp. 197–208. ACM (2009)
Xiao, L., Cai, Y., Kazman, R.: Design rule spaces: a new form of architecture insight. In: Proceedings of the 36th International Conference on Software Engineering, pp. 967–977. ACM (2014)
Yacoub, S.M., Ammar, H.H.: A methodology for architecture-level reliability risk analysis. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 28(6), 529–547 (2002)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Leigh, A., Wermelinger, M., Zisman, A. (2017). Software Architecture Risk Containers. In: Lopes, A., de Lemos, R. (eds) Software Architecture. ECSA 2017. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 10475. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-65831-5_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-65831-5_12
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-65830-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-65831-5
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)