Toward an Integrated Quality Evaluation of Web Applications with DEVS

  • Verónica Bogado
  • Silvio Gonnet
  • Horacio Leone
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8295)


The increasing dynamic and complexity of Web systems turns quality evaluation at any stage of the development into a key issue for the project success in software development areas or organizations. This paper presents a novel approach to evaluate Web applications (WebApps) from their architectures, also considering their functionalities. Discrete EVents System Specification (DEVS) is proposed for behavior and structure analysis based on a set of quality criteria that serve as guidelines for development and evolution of these Web systems. Three quality attributes are considered in this version of the approach: performance, reliability, and availability, but the main advantages are potential scalability and adaptability that respond to the features of these systems.


WebApp Quality Evaluation Software Architecture DEVS 


  1. 1.
    Pressman, R.: What a Tangled Web We Weave. IEEE Software 18(1), 18–21 (2001)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Casteleyn, S., Florian, D., Dolog, P., Matera, M.: Engineering Web Applications. Springer (2009)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Clements, P., Kazman, R., Klein, M.: Evaluating Software Architectures: Methods and Case Studies. Addison-Wesley (2002)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bass, L., Clements, P., Kazman, R.: Software Architecture in Practice. Addison-Wesley (2012)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Zeigler, B., Praehofer, H., Kim, T.: Theory of Modeling and Simulation–Integrating Discrete Event and Continuous Complex Dynamic Systems. Academic Press (2000)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Amyot, D.: Introduction to the User Requirement Notation: Learning by Example. Computer Networks 42(3), 285–301 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wang, W., Pan, D., Chen, M.H.: Architecture-based Software Reliability Modeling. Journal of Systems and Software 79(1), 132–146 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sharma, V., Trivedi, K.: Quantifying Software Performance, Reliability and Security: An architecture-based Approach. Journal of Systems and Software 80(4), 493–509 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Spitznagel, B., Garlan, D.: Architecture-based Performance Analysis. In: Proc. 1998 Conference on Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering, pp. 146–151 (1998)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fukuzawa, K., Saeki, M.: Evaluating Software Architecture by Coloured Petri Nets. In: Proc. 14th International Conference on Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering, pp. 263–270 (2002)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Singh, L.K., Tripathi, A.K., Vinod, G.: Software Reliability Early Prediction in Architectural Design Phase: Overview and Limitations. Journal of Software Engineering and Applications 4(3), 181–186 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Christensen, H., Hansen, K.: An Empirical Investigation of Architectural Prototyping. Journal of Systems and Software 83(1), 133–142 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Becker, S., Koziolek, H., Reussner, R.: The Palladio Component Model for Model-driven Performance Prediction. Journal of Systems and Software 82(1), 3–22 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Brosch, F., Koziolek, H., Buhnova, B., Reussner, R.: Architecture-based reliability prediction with the Palladio Component Model. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering (2011)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Petriu, D.B., Woodside, M.: Software Performance Models from System Scenarios in Use Case Maps. In: Field, T., Harrison, P.G., Bradley, J., Harder, U. (eds.) TOOLS 2002. LNCS, vol. 2324, pp. 141–158. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Byon, E., Pérez, E., Ding, Y., Ntaimo, L.: Simulation of Wind Farm Maintenance Operations using DEVS. Simulation 87(12), 1091–1115 (2011)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ferayorni, A.E., Sarjoughian, H.S.: Domain driven Simulation Modeling for Software Design. In: Proc. of the 2007 Summer Computer Simulation Conference (SCSC 2007), pp. 297–304 (2007)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Buhr, R.: Use Case Maps as Architectural Entities for Complex Systems. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 24(12), 1131–1155 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Amyot, D., Mussbacher, G.: User Requirements Notation: The First Ten Years The Next Ten Years. Journal of Software 6(5), 747–768 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    de Bruin, H., van Vliet, H.: Quality-driven Software Architecture Composition. The Journal of Systems and Software 66(3), 269–284 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Bogado, V., Gonnet, S., Leone, H.: A Discrete Event Simulation Model for the Analysis of Software Quality Attributes. CLEI Electronic Journal 14(3), Paper 3 (2011)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    ISO/IEC 9126-1: Software Engineering – Product Quality – Part 1: Quality Model, Number 1 (2001)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Verónica Bogado
    • 1
  • Silvio Gonnet
    • 1
  • Horacio Leone
    • 1
  1. 1.INGAR, CONICETUniversidad Tecnológica NacionalSanta FeArgentina

Personalised recommendations