Abstract
In configuration processes with multiple stakeholders, conflicts are very likely because each decision maker has a different concerns and expectations about the product. They may not be aware of features selected by others or the restrictions that these selections impose. To help solve the conflicts, this paper introduces a new approach to provide explanations about their causes. Our approach is based on representing features from different concerns using different Feature Models (FMs), and relating them through Feature-Solution Graphs. An FSG contains dependency relationships between two FMs: one feature from the left side forces or prohibits the selection of features in the right side feature model. The strategy to detect and explain conflicts is based on propagation of constraints over the FSGs. We claim that our approach is more expressive and efficient than when using a single FM that contains all concerns and SAT solvers to detect conflicts.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Kang, K.C., Cohen, S.G., Hess, J.A., Novak, W.E., Peterson, A.S.: Feature-Oriented Domain Analysis (FODA) feasibility study (CMU/SEI-90-TR-021). Technical report, Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University (1990)
Czarnecki, K., Helsen, S., Eisenecker, U.: Staged Configuration through Specialization and Multilevel Configuration of Feature Models. Software Process: Improvement and Practice 10(2), 143–169 (2005)
Hubaux, A., Tun, T.T., Heymans, P.: Separation of Concerns in Feature Diagram languages: A Systematic Survey. ACM Computing Surveys 45(4), 1–23 (2013)
White, J., Schmidt, D., Benavides, D., Trinidad, P., Ruiz-Cortes, A.: Automated Diagnosis of Product-Line Configuration Errors in Feature Models. In: 12th International Software Product Line Conference (SPLC 2008), pp. 225–234 (2008)
Janota, M.: SAT Solving in Interactive Configuration. PhD thesis, University College of Dublin (2010)
Nöhrer, A., Biere, A., Egyed, A.: Managing SAT inconsistencies with HUMUS. In: Proceedings of the Sixth International Workshop on Variability Modelling of Software-Intensive Systems, Leipzig, Germany, January 25-27, pp. 83–91. ACM (2012)
Nöhrer, A., Biere, A., Egyed, A.: A Comparison of Strategies for Tolerating Inconsistencies during Decision-Making. In: 16th International Software Product Line Conference (SPLC 2012), pp. 11–20. ACM (2012)
Chavarriaga, J., Noguera, C., Casallas, R., Jonckers, V.: Supporting Multi-Level Configuration with Feature-Solution Graphs: Formal Semantics and Alloy implementation. Technical report, Vrije Universiteit Brussel (2013)
Bass, L., Clements, P., Kazman, R.: Software Architecture in Practice. Addison-Wesley Professional (2012)
Chavarriaga, J., Noguera, C., Casallas, R., Jonckers, V.: Architectural Tactics support in Cloud Computing Providers: the Jelastic case. In: Proceedings of the International ACM Sigsoft Conference on the Quality of Software Architectures, QoSA 2014 (2014)
Classen, A., Hubaux, A., Heymans, P.: A Formal Semantics for Multi-Level Staged Configuration. In: Benavides, D., Metzger, A., Eisenecker, U.W. (eds.) Third International Workshop on Variability Modelling of Software-Intensive Systems (VaMoS 2009). ICB Research Report, vol. 29, pp. 51–60. Universität Duisburg-Essen (2009)
Hubaux, A., Heymans, P., Schobbens, P.Y., Deridder, D., Abbasi, E.: Supporting Multiple Perspectives in Feature-Based Configuration. Software and Systems Modeling (SoSyM), 1–23 (2011)
de Bruijn, H., van Vliet, H.: Scenario-based Generation and Evaluation of Software Architectures. In: Dannenberg, R.B. (ed.) GCSE 2001. LNCS, vol. 2186, pp. 128–139. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)
Janota, M., Botterweck, G.: Formal Approach to integrating Feature and Architecture Models. In: Fiadeiro, J.L., Inverardi, P. (eds.) FASE 2008. LNCS, vol. 4961, pp. 31–45. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)
Benavides, D., Segura, S., Trinidad, P., Ruiz-Cortés, A.: FAMA: Tooling a framework for the automated analysis of Feature Models. In: First International Workshop on Variability Modelling of Software-intensive Systems, VAMOS (2007)
Pohl, R., Lauenroth, K., Pohl, K.: A Performance Comparison of Contemporary Algorithmic Approaches for Automated Analysis Operations on Feature Models. In: Proceeedings of the 26th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE 2011), pp. 313–322. IEEE (2011)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this paper
Cite this paper
Chavarriaga, J., Noguera, C., Casallas, R., Jonckers, V. (2014). Propagating Decisions to Detect and Explain Conflicts in a Multi-step Configuration Process. In: Dingel, J., Schulte, W., Ramos, I., Abrahão, S., Insfran, E. (eds) Model-Driven Engineering Languages and Systems. MODELS 2014. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 8767. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-11653-2_21
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-11653-2_21
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-11652-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-11653-2
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)