Advertisement

Choreography Modelling Language for the Embedded Systems Domain

Empirical Evaluation and Lessons Learned
  • Nebojša TaušanEmail author
  • Jari Lehto
  • Jouni Markkula
  • Pasi Kuvaja
  • Markku Oivo
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10027)

Abstract

Choreography, as a service-oriented architecture-specific viewpoint, is increasingly present in the embedded systems domain. Existing languages for choreography modelling, however, are insufficiently expressive to capture the complexities that are typical in the embedded systems domain. To address this, a new language for choreography modelling was designed. This study presents an empirical evaluation of the language and findings based on the evaluation. The empirical evaluation was conducted with experts from four software companies and two university research groups. Data were collected using focus group method and analysed with template-based thematic analysis. The findings of the evaluation revealed (a) software testing and protocol development as areas in which the new language can be applied, (b) design requirements for the language improvement, and (c) practical challenges regarding the use of the language. For practitioners, the findings confirmed the applicability of choreography modelling in protocol development and that users’ level of expertise has a significant influence on the introduction of the language into practice. For researchers, the findings revealed how choreography can by used beyond its original purpose in the testing phase and identified new aspects that can be considered during choreography modelling language design.

Keywords

Choreography Focus group Evaluation Embedded systems 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful to FG participants for their time and effort and to the AMALTHEA partners for their cooperation. This study was supported by ITEA2 and Tekes, the Finnish Funding Agency for Technology and Innovation.

References

  1. 1.
    Bond, G., Cheung, E., Fikouras, I., Levenshteyn, R.: Unified telecom and web services composition: problem definition and future directions. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Principles, Systems and Applications of IP Telecommunications, p. 13. ACM (2009)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cambronero, M.E., Díaz, G., Martínez, E., Valero, V.: A Comparative Study between WSCI, WS-CDL, and OWL-S. In: IEEE International Conference on e-Business Engineering, ICEBE 2009, pp. 377–382. IEEE (2009)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Choreography Modelling Language and Editor (publicly accessible version) (2015). http://www.oulu.fi/sites/default/files/content/cml.zip
  4. 4.
    Cortes-Cornax, M., Dupuy-Chessa, S., Rieu, D., Dumas, M.: Evaluating choreographies in BPMN 2.0 using an extended quality framework. In: Dijkman, R., Hofstetter, J., Koehler, J. (eds.) BPMN 2011. LNBIP, vol. 95, pp. 103–117. Springer, Heidelberg (2011). doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-25160-3_8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hu, R., Neykova, R., Yoshida, N., Demangeon, R., Honda, K.: Practical interruptible conversations. In: Legay, A., Bensalem, S. (eds.) RV 2013. LNCS, vol. 8174, pp. 130–148. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-40787-1_8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hut, P.M.: Affinity Diagram - Kawakita Jiro or KJ Method (2015)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Iwai, A., Oohashi, N., Kelly, S.: Experiences with automotive service modeling. In: Proceedings of the 10th Workshop on Domain-Specific Modeling. ACM (2010)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kaur, N., McLeod, C.S., Jain, A., Harrison, R., Ahmad, B., Colombo, A.W., Delsing, J.: Design and simulation of a SOA-based system of systems for automation in the residential sector. In: 2013 IEEE International Conference on Industrial Technology (ICIT), pp. 1976–1981. IEEE (2013)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    King, N.: Using templates in the thematic analysis of texts. In: Cassell, C., Symon, G. (eds.) Essential Guide to Qualitative Methods in Organizational Research, pp. 256–270. Sage, London (2004)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kontio, J., Lehtola, L., Bragge, J.: Using the focus group method in software engineering: obtaining practitioner and user experiences. In: Proceedings of the 2004 International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering, ISESE 2004, pp. 271–280. IEEE (2004)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kothmayr, T., Kemper, A., Scholz, A., Heuer, J.: Schedule-based service choreographies for real-time control loops. In: 20th Conference on Emerging Technologies & Factory Automation (ETFA), pp. 1–8. IEEE, Luxembourg (2015)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lethbridge, T.C., Sim, S.E., Singer, J.: Studying software engineers: data collection techniques for software field studies. Empirical Softw. Eng. 10(3), 311–341 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lewis, G., Morris, E., Simanta, S., Smith, D.: Service orientation and systems of systems. IEEE Softw. 28(1), 58–63 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lin, L., Lin, P.: Orchestration in Web Services and real-time communications. IEEE Commun. Mag. 45(7), 44–50 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Litosseliti, L.: Using focus groups in research. A&C Black (2003)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Mancioppi, M., Perepletchikov, M., Ryan, C., Heuvel, W.-J., Papazoglou, M.P.: Towards a quality model for choreography. In: Dan, A., Gittler, F., Toumani, F. (eds.) ICSOC/ServiceWave-2009. LNCS, vol. 6275, pp. 435–444. Springer, Heidelberg (2010). doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-16132-2_41 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Miles, M.B., Huberman, A.M.: Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook. Sage, Thousand Oaks (1994)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Peltz, C.: Web services orchestration and choreography. Computer 36(10), 46–52 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    QSR-International: NVivo 10 research software for analysis and insight (2014)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    AMALTHEA. www.amalthea-project.org (2014). Accessed 25 May 2014
  21. 21.
    Scholz, A., Gaponova, I., Sommer, S., Kemper, A., Knoll, A., Buckl, C., Heuer, J., Schmitt, A.: SOA-service oriented architectures adapted for embedded networks. In: 7th IEEE International Conference on Industrial Informatics (INDIN 2009), pp. 599–605. IEEE, Cardiff (2009)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Shenton, A.K.: Strategies for ensuring trustworthiness in qualitative research projects. Educ. Inf. 22(2), 63–75 (2004)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Sridhar, T.: Designing Embedded Communications Software. CRC Press (2003)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Starke, G., Kunkel, T., Hahn, D.: Flexible collaboration and control of heterogeneous mechatronic devices and systems by means of an event-driven, SOA-based automation concept. In: 2013 IEEE International Conference on Industrial Technology (ICIT), pp. 1982–1987. IEEE (2013)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Taušan, N., Aaramaa, S., Lehto, J., Kuvaja, P., Markkula, J., Oivo, M.: Customized choreography and requirement template models as a means for addressing software architects challenges. In: The Ninth International Conference on Software Engineering Advances, ICSEA 2014. IARIA XPS Press, Nice (2014)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Taušan, N., Lehto, J., Kuvaja, P., Markkula, J., Oivo, M.: Comparative influence evaluation of middleware features on choreography DSL. In: The Eighth International Conference on Software Engineering Advances, ICSEA 2013, pp. 184–193. IARIA XPS Press (2013)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Taušan, N., Markkula, J., Kuvaja, P., Oivo, M.: Choreography in Embedded Systems Domain: A Systematic Literature Review (submitted for publication, 2016)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Taušan, N., Markkula, J., Kuvaja, P., Oivo, M.: Choreography modelling in embedded systems domain -requirements and implementation technologies-. In: 4th International Conference on Model-Driven Engineering and Software Development, MODELSWARD 2016. Scitepress, Rome (2016)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Tremblay, M.C., Hevner, A.R., Berndt, D.J.: Focus groups for artifact refinement and evaluation in design research. Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 26 (2010). Article 27Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nebojša Taušan
    • 1
    Email author
  • Jari Lehto
    • 2
  • Jouni Markkula
    • 1
  • Pasi Kuvaja
    • 1
  • Markku Oivo
    • 1
  1. 1.M3S Research GroupUniversity of OuluOuluFinland
  2. 2.Research and Development, Management and AutomationNOKIAEspooFinland

Personalised recommendations