Abstract
Software architecture may go through many changes during its existence. Architecture evaluation can point out current problems, help to anticipate some of the future changes, and also show the absolute limits of a design. This paper presents experiences from eleven scenario based architecture evaluations with ATAM. The evaluations were completed on a tight two day evaluation schedule. This limited time forced to search for alternative scheduling options. The evaluated system designs had relatively long life cycle up to 30 years and all the designs were evaluated for the first time. We have learnt that in evaluations current issues often overshadow the long view of the future. We suggest that architecture evaluations should be integrated to the development process as a tool not only for today but also for tomorrow.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Bass, L., Clements, P., Kazman, R.: Software Architecture in Practice. Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc., Boston (1998)
Bell, W.: Foundations of Futures Studies, Human Science for a New Era. Transaction Publishers (1997)
Bouck, N., Weyns, D., Schelfthout, K., Holvoet, T.: Applying the ATAM to an architecture for decentralized control of a transportation system. In: Hofmeister, C., Crnković, I., Reussner, R. (eds.) QoSA 2006. LNCS, vol. 4214, pp. 180–198. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)
Clements, P., Kazman, R., Klein, M.: Evaluating Software Architectures: Methods and Case Studies. Addison-Wesley Professional, Reading (January 2002)
Ferber, S., Heidl, P., Lutz, P.: Reviewing product line architectures: Experience report of ATAM in an automotive context. In: van der Linden, F.J. (ed.) PFE 2002. LNCS, vol. 2290, pp. 194–197. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)
International Organization for Standardization: Software engineering - product quality - part 1: Quality model, ISO/IEC 9126-1:2001(E) (2001)
Jones, L., Lattanze, A.: Using the architecture tradeoff analysis method to evaluate a wargame simulation system: A case study. Tech. rep., Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University (2001)
Kazman, R., Klein, M., Barbacci, M., Longstaff, T., Lipson, H., Carriere, J.: The architecture tradeoff analysis method. In: IEEE International Conference on Engineering of Complex Computer Systems, p. 68. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (1998)
Kazman, R., Barbacci, M., Klein, M., Carriere, S.J., Woods, S.G.: Experience with performing architecture tradeoff analysis. In: Proceedings of the 1999 International Conference on Software Engineering, pp. 54–63 (May 1999)
Kazman, R., Klein, M.: Performing architecture tradeoff analysis. In: ISAW 1998: Proceedings of the third international workshop on Software architecture, pp. 85–88. ACM, New York (1998)
Kazman, R., Klein, M., Clements, P.: ATAM: Method for architecture evaluation. Tech. rep., Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University (2000)
Reijonen, V., Eloranta, V.P., Leppänen, M., Bachmann, F.: Discussion on ATAM at Tampere University of Technology (August 2009)
Svahnberg, M., Mårtensson, F.: Six years of evaluating software architectures in student projects. Journal of Systems and Software 80(11), 1893–1901 (2007)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2010 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Reijonen, V., Koskinen, J., Haikala, I. (2010). Experiences from Scenario-Based Architecture Evaluations with ATAM. In: Babar, M.A., Gorton, I. (eds) Software Architecture. ECSA 2010. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 6285. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-15114-9_17
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-15114-9_17
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-15113-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-15114-9
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)