skip to main content
10.1145/1987875.1987905acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesicseConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Goal-driven evaluation of process fragments using weighted dependency graphs

Published:21 May 2011Publication History

ABSTRACT

Software process improvement needs guidance in proposing, assessing, and selecting a right set of steps and measurements. Often, a process model or a specific methodology is used for this purpose, e.g. the V-Modell, RUP, or agile process methodologies. Each such model or methodology consists of certain activities, procedures, or methods, i.e. a set of process fragments. Debates usually focus on the choice among these models or methodologies as a whole, but not on the specific, quantitative contributions of the distinct process fragments with respect to the particular goals of the organization. Such a simplification misses important chances for adaptation and motivation in diversified system development environments. Therefore, a conceptual framework and tool set is presented in this paper to search for sets of process fragments, which are able to meet actual objectives in an optimal way.

References

  1. http://www.processexperience.org/home. Last accessed on 2011-1-15.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. O. Armbrust. Determining organization-specific process suitability. In Münch et al. {11}, pages 26--38. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. K. Beck. Test-Driven Development. By Example. Addison-Wesley, 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. T. Birkhölzer, C. Dickmann, H. Klein, J. Vaupel, S. Ast, and L. Meyer. Customized predictive models for process improvement projects. In A. Jedlitschka and O. Salo, editors, PROFES, volume 5089 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 304--316. Springer, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. B. W. Boehm. A risk-driven decision table for software process selection. In Münch et al. {11}, page 1.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. H. Erdogmus, M. Morisio, and M. Torchiano. On the effectiveness of the test-first approach to programming. IEEE Trans. Software Eng., 31(3):226--237, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. H. C. Esfahani and E. Yu. A repository of agile method fragments. In Münch et al. {11}, pages 163--174. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. N. E. Fenton, P. Krause, and M. Neil. Software measurement: Uncertainty and causal modeling. IEEE Software, 19(4):116--122, 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. D. G. Luenberger. Linear and Nonlinear Programming. Addison Wesley, second edition, 1984.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. R. Moore. Interval analysis. Prentice-Hall, 1966.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. J. Münch, Y. Yang, and W. Schäfer, editors. New Modeling Concepts for Today's Software Processes, International Conference on Software Process, ICSP 2010, Paderborn, Germany, July 8--9, 2010. Proceedings, volume 6195 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. D. Raffo and M. I. Kellner. Empirical analysis in software process simulation modeling. Journal of Systems and Software, 53(1):31--41, 2000. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. A. Rausch, M. Broy, K. Bergner, R. Höhn, and S. Höppner. Das V-Modell XT. Grundlagen, Methodik und Anwendungen. Springer, Heidelberg, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Goal-driven evaluation of process fragments using weighted dependency graphs

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Other conferences
        ICSSP '11: Proceedings of the 2011 International Conference on Software and Systems Process
        May 2011
        256 pages
        ISBN:9781450307307
        DOI:10.1145/1987875

        Copyright © 2011 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 21 May 2011

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader