Advertisement

Challenges of Establishing Traceability in the Automotive Domain

  • Salome MaroEmail author
  • Miroslaw Staron
  • Jan-Philipp Steghöfer
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 269)

Abstract

Traceability, i.e., relationships between artifacts in software development, is prescribed by quality standards such as ISO 26262 and therefore mandatory for automotive companies that develop safety-critical systems. However, establishing traceability is a challenge for many automotive companies. The objective of this study is to identify traceability challenges and solutions in this domain and compare these challenges and solutions with the ones in literature. To achieve this, we conducted a case study with a large automotive supplier to discover their traceability challenges and a tertiary literature review on existing traceability literature surveys to identify reported challenges and their solutions. We found 13 challenges from the literature study, of which ten were also found at the company. Three challenges are solved at the company with solutions that correlate with those proposed in literature, three are partially solved while four are still unsolved even though there are solutions in literature.

Keywords

Traceability Software processes Distributed software development Tools Human factors Software development organisation 

References

  1. 1.
    Broy, M.: Challenges in automotive software engineering. In: Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Software Engineering, pp. 33–42. ACM (2006)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Pretschner, A., Broy, M., Kruger, I.H., Stauner, T.: Software engineering for automotive systems: a roadmap. In: 2007 Future of Software Engineering, pp. 55–71. IEEE Computer Society (2007)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    IEEE: Standard glossary of software engineering terminology. IEEE Std 610.12-1990, pp. 1–84, December 1990Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Salem, A.M.: Improving software quality through requirements traceability models. In: IEEE International Conference on Computer Systems and Applications, pp. 1159–1162. IEEE (2006)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Egyed, A., Biffl, S., Heindl, M., Grünbacher, P.: A value-based approach for understanding cost-benefit trade-offs during automated software traceability. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop on Traceability in Emerging Forms of Software Engineering, pp. 2–7. ACM (2005)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Nair, S., de la Vara, J.L., Sen, S.: A review of traceability research at the requirements engineering conference re@ 21. In: 2013 21st IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE), pp. 222–229. IEEE (2013)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    International Organization for Standardization: Road Vehicles - Functional Safety. ISO26262:2011, November 2011Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    VDA QMC Working Group 13/Automotive SIG: Automotive SPICE Process Assessment/Reference Model. Technical report, Automotive Special Interest, Group (2015)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Javed, M.A., Zdun, U.: A systematic literature review of traceability approaches between software architecture and source code. In: Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering, p. 16. ACM (2014)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Runeson, P., Höst, M.: Guidelines for conducting and reporting case study research in software engineering. Empirical Softw. Eng. 14(2), 131–164 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gotel, O., et al.: Traceability fundamentals. In: Cleland-Huang, J., Gotel, O., Zisman, A. (eds.) Software and Systems Traceability, pp. 3–22. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Petersen, K., Feldt, R., Mujtaba, S., Mattsson, M.: Systematic mapping studies in software engineering. In: 12th International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering, vol. 17, pp. 1–10 (2008)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Spanoudakis, G., Zisman, A.: Software traceability: a roadmap. Handb. Softw. Eng. Knowl. Eng. 3, 395–428 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Winkler, S., Pilgrim, J.: A survey of traceability in requirements engineering and model-driven development. Softw. Syst. Model. (SoSyM) 9(4), 529–565 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kannenberg, A., Saiedian, H.: Why software requirements traceability remains a challenge. CrossTalk J. Def. Softw. Eng. 22(5), 14–19 (2009)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gotel, O., Cleland-Huang, J., Hayes, J.H., Zisman, A., Egyed, A., Grünbacher, P., Antoniol, G.: The quest for ubiquity: a roadmap for software and systems traceability research. In: 2012 20th IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE), pp. 71–80. IEEE (2012)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Von Knethen, A., Paech, B.: A survey on tracing approaches in practice and research. Frauenhofer Institut Experimentelles Software Engineering, IESE-Report No. 95 (2002)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ramesh, B.: Factors influencing requirements traceability practice. Commun. ACM 41(12), 37–44 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Regan, G., McCaffery, F., McDaid, K., Flood, D.: The barriers to traceability and their potential solutions: towards a reference framework. In: 2012 38th EUROMICRO Conference on Software Engineering and Advanced Applications (SEAA), pp. 319–322. IEEE (2012)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Torkar, R., Gorschek, T., Feldt, R., Svahnberg, M., Raja, U.A., Kamran, K.: Requirements traceability: a systematic review and industry case study. Int. J. Softw. Eng. Knowl. Eng. 22(03), 385–433 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    De Lucia, A., Fasano, F., Oliveto, R.: Traceability management for impact analysis. In: Frontiers of Software Maintenance, FoSM 2008, pp. 21–30. IEEE (2008)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    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
  23. 23.
    Cleland-Huang, J., Czauderna, A., Gibiec, M., Emenecker, J.: A machine learning approach for tracing regulatory codes to product specific requirements. In: Proceedings of the 32nd ACM/IEEE International Conference on Software Engineering, vol. 1, pp. 155–164. ACM (2010)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Borg, M., Runeson, P., Ardö, A.: Recovering from a decade: a systematic mapping of information retrieval approaches to software traceability. Empirical Softw. Eng. 19(6), 1565–1616 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Galvão, I., Goknil, A.: Survey of traceability approaches in model-driven engineering. In: Proceedings - IEEE International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Workshop, pp. 313–324. EDOC (2007)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Gotel, O.C., Finkelstein, A.C.: An analysis of the requirements traceability problem. In: Proceedings of the First International Conference on Requirements Engineering, pp. 94-101. IEEE (1994)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Rempel, P., Mäder, P., Kuschke, T., Philippow, I.: Requirements traceability across organizational boundaries - a survey and taxonomy. In: Doerr, J., Opdahl, A.L. (eds.) REFSQ 2013. LNCS, vol. 7830, pp. 125–140. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-37422-7_10 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Königs, S.F., Beier, G., Figge, A., Stark, R.: Traceability in systems engineering-review of industrial practices, state-of-the-art technologies and new research solutions. Adv. Eng. Inf. 26(4), 924–940 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Asuncion, H.U., Asuncion, A.U., Taylor, R.N.: Software traceability with topic modeling. In: Proceedings of the 32nd ACM/IEEE International Conference on Software Engineering, vol. 1, pp. 95–104. ACM (2010)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Cuddeback, D., Dekhtyar, A., Hayes, J.H.: Automated requirements traceability: the study of human analysts. In: 2010 18th IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE), pp. 231–240. IEEE (2010)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Mäder, P., Gotel, O., Philippow, I.: Enabling automated traceability maintenance through the upkeep of traceability relations. In: Paige, R.F., Hartman, A., Rensink, A. (eds.) ECMDA-FA 2009. LNCS, vol. 5562, pp. 174–189. Springer, Heidelberg (2009). doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-02674-4_13 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Drivalos-Matragkas, N., Kolovos, D.S., Paige, R.F., Fernandes, K.J.: A state-based approach to traceability maintenance. In: Proceedings of the 6th ECMFA Traceability Workshop, pp. 23–30. ACM (2010)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Arkley, P., Riddle, S.: Overcoming the traceability benefit problem. In: Proceedings of the 13th IEEE International Conference on Requirements Engineering, pp. 385–389. IEEE (2005)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Pedreira, O., García, F., Brisaboa, N., Piattini, M.: Gamification in software engineering-a systematic mapping. Inf. Softw. Technol. 57, 157–168 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Seaman, C.B.: Qualitative methods in empirical studies of software engineering. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 25(4), 557–572 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Salome Maro
    • 1
    Email author
  • Miroslaw Staron
    • 1
  • Jan-Philipp Steghöfer
    • 1
  1. 1.Chalmers Institute of Technology and University of GothenburgGothenburgSweden

Personalised recommendations