skip to main content
10.1145/2908446.2908447acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesinfosConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Analyzing Preferences and Interactions of Software Quality Attributes Using Choquet Integral Approach

Published: 09 May 2016 Publication History

Abstract

Achieving the desired levels of quality attributes is inevitable when developing software. In reality, software engineers take into account stakeholders' preferences of quality attributes when developing software. Furthermore, it is not practical to perform the needed level of each quality attribute individually without considering its interaction with other quality attributes in the potential system. While the conventional aggregations methods such as weighted arithmetic mean consider the preferences among criteria, they do not take into consideration the interactions between them. To accomplish this, a method of fuzzy measures using Choquet Integral can be utilized. Choquet Integral method also has an advantage of helping decision makers in providing insights about interactions among quality attributes. It can define if two quality attributes interplay in complementary way or in redundancy way. In this paper we utilized Choquet Integral approach to investigate the preferences and the interactions of quality attributes when developing transaction processing information systems. The investigation results are drawn based on analyzing the impact of architectural tactics on quality attributes when building software architecture.

References

[1]
ANSI/ASQC A3. (1978). Quality systems terminology. American National Standards Institute.
[2]
ISO/IEC 9126-1. (2001). Software engineering, Product quality, Part 1: Quality model.
[3]
Deissenboeck, F., Juergens, E., Lochmann, K., and Wagner, S. (2009). Software quality models: Purposes, usage scenarios and requirements. In Software Quality, (May 2009). WOSQ'09. ICSE Workshop, pp. 9--14, IEEE.
[4]
Kazman, R., and Bass, L. (1994). Toward deriving software architectures from quality attributes. Technical Report CMU/SEI-94-TR-10, Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University.
[5]
Bass, L., Clements, P., and Kazman, R. (2013). Software architecture in practice. SEI Series in Software Engineering.
[6]
Bocij, P., Greasley, A., and Hickie S. (2015). Business Information Systems: Technology, Development and Management for the E-Business. 5th Edition, Pearson Education Limited.
[7]
Behkamal, B., Kahani, M., and Akbari, M. K. (2009). Customizing ISO 9126 quality model for evaluation of B2B applications. Information and software technology, 51(3), 599--609.
[8]
Al-Safadi, L. A., and Garcia, R. A. (2012). ISO9126 Based Quality Model for Evaluating B2C e-Commerce Applications, A Saudi Market Perspective. IJCIT, 3(2), 8--15.
[9]
Boehm, B., and In, H. (1996). Identifying quality-requirement conflicts. IEEE software, 13(2), 25--35.
[10]
McCall, J. (1994). Encyclopaedia of Software Engineering, chapter Quality Factors, pp. 958--969. John Wiley & Sons.
[11]
Henningsson, K., and Wohlin, C. (2002). Understanding the relations between software quality attributes, a survey approach. In Proceedings 12th International Conference for Software Quality (October 2002), Ottawa, Canada.
[12]
Zulzalil, H., Ghani, A. A., Selamat, M. H., and Mahmod, R. (2008). A case study to identify quality attributes relationships for web-based applications. IJCSNS, 8(11), 215--220.
[13]
Svahnberg, M., and Wohlin, C. (2005). An investigation of a method for identifying a software architecture candidate with respect to quality attributes. Empirical Software Engineering, 10(2), 149--181.
[14]
Al-Daajeh, S. H., Al-Qutaish, R. E., and Al-Qirem, F. (2012). A tactic-based framework to evaluate the relationships between the software product quality attributes. International Journal of Software Engineering, 5(1), 5--26.
[15]
Saaty, T. L. (2008). Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. International journal of services sciences, 1(1), 83--98.
[16]
Grabisch, M., Kojadinovic, I., and Meyer, P. (2008). A review of methods for capacity identification in Choquet integral based multi-attribute utility theory: Applications of the Kappalab R package. European journal of operational research, 186(2), 766--785.
[17]
Torra, V., and Narukawa, Y. (2007). Modeling decisions. Information Fusion and Aggregation Operators. Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg.
[18]
Kassab, M., El-Boussaidi, G., and Mili, H. (2012). A quantitative evaluation of the impact of architectural patterns on quality requirements. In Software Engineering Research, Management and Applications, pp. 173--184, Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
[19]
Al-Daajeh, S., and Svahnberg, M. (2009). Balancing Dependability Quality Attributes Relationships for Increased Embedded Systems Dependability.
[20]
Grabisch, M., Kojadinovic, I., Meyer, P., and Kojadinovic, M. I. (2015). Package kappalab: Non-Additive Measure and Integral Manipulation Functions. DOI=https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/kappalab/index.html.
[21]
The R Foundation for Statistical Computing. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. 1020 Vienna, Austria. DOI= http://www.r-project.org/.

Cited By

View all
  • (2022)Flood disaster risk assessment of and countermeasures toward Yangtze River Delta by considering index interactionNatural Hazards10.1007/s11069-021-05189-4Online publication date: 15-Jan-2022
  • (2021)Mining architecture tactics and quality attributes knowledge in Stack OverflowJournal of Systems and Software10.1016/j.jss.2021.111005(111005)Online publication date: May-2021

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Other conferences
INFOS '16: Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Informatics and Systems
May 2016
347 pages
ISBN:9781450340625
DOI:10.1145/2908446
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: 09 May 2016

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. Architectural Tactics
  2. Choquet
  3. MCDM
  4. Quality Attributes

Qualifiers

  • Research-article
  • Research
  • Refereed limited

Conference

INFOS '16

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)0
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 20 Jan 2025

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2022)Flood disaster risk assessment of and countermeasures toward Yangtze River Delta by considering index interactionNatural Hazards10.1007/s11069-021-05189-4Online publication date: 15-Jan-2022
  • (2021)Mining architecture tactics and quality attributes knowledge in Stack OverflowJournal of Systems and Software10.1016/j.jss.2021.111005(111005)Online publication date: May-2021

View Options

Login options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media