CFP last date
20 January 2025
Call for Paper
February Edition
IJCA solicits high quality original research papers for the upcoming February edition of the journal. The last date of research paper submission is 20 January 2025

Submit your paper
Know more
The week's pick
Responsive image
SFLA-Based Line Balancing and Task Optimization in Master-Slave Controlled Hanger Transportation Systems for Garment Production

Duc Hoang Nguyen
Random Articles
Reseach Article

Software Performance Quality Evaluation of MINPHIS Architecture using ATAM

by Ishaya Gambo, Abimbola Soriyan, Philip Achimugu
journal cover thumbnail

International Journal of Computer Applications
Foundation of Computer Science (FCS), NY, USA
Volume 46 - Number 23
Year of Publication: 2012
Authors: Ishaya Gambo, Abimbola Soriyan, Philip Achimugu
10.5120/7107-9782

Ishaya Gambo, Abimbola Soriyan, Philip Achimugu . Software Performance Quality Evaluation of MINPHIS Architecture using ATAM. International Journal of Computer Applications. 46, 23 ( May 2012), 30-36. DOI=10.5120/7107-9782

@article{ 10.5120/7107-9782,
author = { Ishaya Gambo, Abimbola Soriyan, Philip Achimugu },
title = { Software Performance Quality Evaluation of MINPHIS Architecture using ATAM },
journal = { International Journal of Computer Applications },
issue_date = { May 2012 },
volume = { 46 },
number = { 23 },
month = { May },
year = { 2012 },
issn = { 0975-8887 },
pages = { 30-36 },
numpages = {9},
url = { https://ijcaonline.org/archives/volume46/number23/7107-9782/ },
doi = { 10.5120/7107-9782 },
publisher = {Foundation of Computer Science (FCS), NY, USA},
address = {New York, USA}
}
%0 Journal Article
%1 2024-02-06T20:40:26.043170+05:30
%A Ishaya Gambo
%A Abimbola Soriyan
%A Philip Achimugu
%T Software Performance Quality Evaluation of MINPHIS Architecture using ATAM
%J International Journal of Computer Applications
%@ 0975-8887
%V 46
%N 23
%P 30-36
%D 2012
%I Foundation of Computer Science (FCS), NY, USA
Abstract

Software architecture evaluation plays an important role in the validation of quality models of software systems. This paper is based on the research carried out where the Architecture Trade-off Analysis Method (ATAM) was used. ATAM was chosen and used because it provides insight into the way quality attributes are mapped onto architecture and also shows the trade-offs existing between the identified quality and others. The evaluation was based on the developed Software Architecture Scenario-Based Performance Quality Model (SASPUM). The paper presents the results of the analysis with ATAM by providing the set of scenarios and their prioritization from brainstorming, the utility tree, the risks discovered and non-risk documented; the sensitivity points and trade-off points found. The evaluation supports the fact that performance can be identified as a software quality attribute, which is part of the execution model of software system determined by the architecture of the software system, and that is suitable for software architectural evaluation.

References
  1. Kazman, R. , Bass, Len. , and Klein, M. 2006. The essential component of software architecture design and analysis. The Journal of Systems and Software 79 (2006) 1207-1216.
  2. Clements, P. , Kazman, R. , and Klein, M. 2002. Evaluating Software Architecture: Methods and Case Studies: Addison-Wesley, Boston, MA.
  3. Barbacci, M. , and Klein, M. (1995). Quality attributes. Technical report, 1995.
  4. Kazman, R. , Abowd, G. , Bass, Len. , Webb, M. 1994. SAAM: a method for analyzing the properties of software architectures. In: Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Software Engineering. Sorrento, Italy, May 16-12, 1994. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos, CA pp. 81-90.
  5. Barbacci, M. , Ellison, R. , Lattanze, A. , Stafford, J. , Weinstock, C. , and Wood, W. (2003). Quality Attribute Workshops (QAW), third ed. (CMU/SEI-2003-TR-016), third ed. Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA.
  6. Kazman, R. , Barbacci, M. , Klein, M. , Carriere, S. , 1999. Experience with performing architecture tradeoff analysis. In: Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Software Engineering, May 1999, Los Angeles, CA, pp. 54-63.
  7. Kazman, R. , Asundi, J. , Klein, M. , 2001. Quantifying the costs and benefits of architectural decisions. In: Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Software Engineering, May 2001, Toronto, Canada, pp. 297-306.
  8. Gambo, I. , Soriyan, A. , and Achimugu, P. , 2011. Software Architecture Performance Quality Model: Qualitative Approach. ARPN Journal of Systems and Software, Vol. 1. April 2011, pp. 28-33.
  9. Ozkaya, I. , Bass, L. , Sangwan, R. , and Nord, R. 2008. Making Practical Use of Quality Attribute Information. IEEE Software, vol 25, no. 2, March/April 2008, pp. 28-31.
  10. Korpela, M. 1990. The Ife Project: Report 1989. Health care informatics in the context of a developing country. University of Koupio, 1990.
  11. Kazman, R. , Klein, M. , and Clements, P. 2000. ATAM: A Method for Architecture Evaluation. Technical Report CMU/SEI-2000-TR-004, Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh PA.
  12. Bass, L. , Clements, P. , and Kazman, R. (2003). Software Architecture in Practice, second ed. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.
Index Terms

Computer Science
Information Sciences

Keywords

Software Quality Atam Software Architecture Minphis Saspum

Powered by PhDFocusTM