Advertisement

Towards Automated Traceability Assessment through Augmented Lifecycle Space

  • Miklós BiróEmail author
  • József Klespitz
  • Johannes Gmeiner
  • Christa Illibauer
  • Levente Kovács
Conference paper
First Online:
  • 769 Downloads
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 633)

Abstract

The assessment and improvement of the satisfaction of traceability requirements during the development of software in general and of safety-critical software in particular is demanding and costly. The special requirements are reflected in software process related general and industry specific standards and the popular agile approaches as well. It is imminent, for practical and logical reasons, that there is a need for the automation of the assessment of the completeness and consistency of traceability as far as possible. In addition to highlighting experienced weaknesses of current either homogeneous or heterogeneous tool environments intending to support development lifecycle traceability, this paper outlines new solutions and suggests the exploitation of emerging technologies for the automation of traceability assessment and improvement.

Keywords

Application lifecycle management Process assessment Process improvement Open services for lifecycle collaboration Tools integration Heterogeneous tools environment Existence Non-existence 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgement

The authors are grateful for the support of Research and Innovation Center of Óbuda University. The work is supported by the European Research Council Starting Grant ERC-StG 679681.

The research reported in this paper has been supported by the Austrian Ministry for Transport, Innovation and Technology, the Federal Ministry of Science, Research and Economy, and the Province of Upper Austria in the frame of the COMET center SCCH.

References

  1. 1.
    Lepmets, M., Clarke, P., McCaffery, F., Finnegan, A., Dorling, A.: Development of a process assessment model for medical device software development. In: Industrial Proceedings of the 21st European Conference on Systems, Software and Services Process Improvement (EuroSPI 2014), 25–27 June, Luxembourg (2014)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    McCaffery, F., Clarke, P., Lepmets, M.: Bringing medical device software development standards into a single model - MDevSPICE. Ir. Med. Board Medi. Devices Newslett. 1(40), 2–3 (2014)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    McCaffery, F., Casey, V., Sivakumar, M.S., Coleman, G., Donnelly, P., Burton, J.: Medical device software traceability. In: Cleland-Huang, J., Gotel, O., Zismanm, A. (eds.) Software and Systems Traceability, pp. 321–339. Springer, London (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ambler, S.: Agile requirements best practices. In: Agile Modeling (2014). http://www.agilemodeling.com/essays/agileRequirementsBestPractices.htm. Accessed 08 Apr 2016
  5. 5.
    Ambler, S.: Tracing your design. In: Dr. Dobb’s Journal: The World of Software Development (1999). http://www.drdobbs.com/tracing-your-design/184415675. Accessed 08 Apr 2016
  6. 6.
    Murphy, T.E., Duggan, J.: Magic quadrant for application life cycle management. In: Gartner (2012)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chapman, D.: What is application lifecycle management? white paper (2010). http://www.davidchappell.com/writing/white_papers/What_is_ALM_v2.0–Chappell.pdf. Accessed 08 Apr 2016
  8. 8.
    Capers, J.: Software quality in 2011: a survey of the state of the ART. Capers Jones & Associates LLC (2011)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Nistala, P., Kumari, P.: Establishing content traceability for software applications: an approach based on structuring and tracking of configuration elements. In: 7th Workshop on Traceability in Emerging Forms of Software Engineering (TEFSE) (2013)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bouillon, E., Mäder, P., Philippow, I.: A survey on usage scenarios for requirements traceability in practice. In: Doerr, J., Opdahl, A.L. (eds.) REFSQ 2013. LNCS, vol. 7830, pp. 158–173. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Biró, M.: Open services for software process compliance engineering. In: Geffert, V., Preneel, B., Rovan, B., Štuller, J., Tjoa, A.M. (eds.) SOFSEM 2014. LNCS, vol. 8327, pp. 1–6. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Panis, M.: Successful deployment of requirements traceability in a commercial engineering organization…really. In: 18th IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE), pp. 303–307. (2010)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cleland-Huang, J, Gotel, O. C., Huffman Hayes, J., Mäder, P., Zisman, A.: Software traceability: trends and future directions. In: Proceedings of the on Future of Software Engineering, pp. 55–69. ACM (2014)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gotel, O., Cleland-Huang, J., Huffman Hayes, J., Zisman, A., Egyed, A., Grünbacher, P., Dekhtyar, A., Antoniol, G., Maletic, J.: The grand challenge of traceability (v1.0). In: Cleland-Huang, J., Gotel, O., Zisman, A. (eds.) Software and Systems Traceability, pp. 343–409. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Regan, G., Biro, M., Mc Caffery, F., Mc Daid, K., Flood, D.: A traceability process assessment model for the medical device domain. In: Barafort, B., O’Connor, R.V., Poth, A., Messnarz, R. (eds.) EuroSPI 2014. CCIS, vol. 425, pp. 206–216. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Automotive, S. I. G., VDA QMC Working Group 13.: Automotive SPICE Process Assessment/ Reference Model, v3.0 (2015). http://www.automotivespice.com/fileadmin/software-download/Automotive_SPICE_PAM_30.pdf. Accessed 08 Apr 2016
  17. 17.
    Dreves, R., Hällmeyer, F., Haunert, L., Sechser, B.: Method to realize traceability in development processes. In: Proceedings of EuroSPI2 (2015)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    OSLC Core Specification Workgroup.: OSLC core specification version 2.0. Open Services for Lifecycle Collaboration (2013). http://open-services.net/bin/view/Main/OslcCoreSpecification. Accessed 08 Apr 2016
  19. 19.
    Jolliffe, G.: Cost-efficient methods and processes for safety relevant embedded systems (CESAR)–an objective overview. In: Dale, C., Anderson, T. (eds.) Making Systems Safer, pp. 37–50. Springer, London (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Pflügl, H., El-Salloum, C., Kundner, I.: Crystal, critical system engineering acceleration, a truly European dimension. ARTEMIS Mag. 14, 12–15 (2013)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Biró, M.: functional safety, traceability, and open services. In: Madeyski, L., Ochodek, M. (eds.) Software Engineering from Research and Practice Perspective. Wyd. Nakom, Poznan, pp. 73–82. ISBN:978–83–63919–16–0 (2014)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Miklós Biró
    • 1
    • 3
    Email author
  • József Klespitz
    • 2
  • Johannes Gmeiner
    • 1
  • Christa Illibauer
    • 1
  • Levente Kovács
    • 2
  1. 1.Software Competence Center HagenbergHagenbergAustria
  2. 2.Óbuda UniversityBudapestHungary
  3. 3.Johannes Kepler UniversitätLinzAustria

Personalised recommendations

Cite paper

Buy options