Skip to main content

Comparative Evaluation of Performance Assessment and Modeling Method for Software Architecture

  • Conference paper

Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS,volume 181)


Conducting performance assessment during the early phases of system development enhances early design decisions of system design. The generated performance models from system design will help in identifying the potential performance problems in the system design based on the result of the performance assessment. In recent years, several methods for performance assessment and modeling have been proposed. This paper presents the comparative evaluation of performance assessment and modeling methods to discover the strengths and weaknesses of the existing methods based on a set of criteria which includes process and modeling elements that was developed with the purpose to represent a specific process to assess the performance attributes with the help of modeling concepts. The four selected methods were evaluated based on these criterions and the results will hopefully guidance for developers to propose better methods for performance assessment and modeling in the future.


  • Performance Assessment
  • Performance Model
  • Model Transformation
  • Software Performance Engineering
  • Model Driven Engineering
  • Unified Modeling Language (UML)
  • Model Evaluation

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Buying options

USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
USD   129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. ISO9126-2. Software engineering - Product quality - Part 2: External Metrics. ISO/IEC. Engineering Structures 31 (June 2001), doi: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2009.05.007.(2001)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Antoniou, G., van Harmelen, F.: A Semantic Web Primer. The MIT Press, Cambridge (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  3. UML Profile for MARTE : Modeling and Analysis of Real-Time Embedded Systems (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Balsamo, S., Di Marco, A., Inverardi, P., Simeoni, M.: Model-based performance prediction in software development: a survey. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 30(5), 295–310 (2004), doi:10.1109/TSE.2004.9

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  5. Williams, L.G., Lane, R., Smith, C.U.: PASA SM: A Method for the Performance Assessment of Software Architectures. Architecture, 179–189 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Pooley, R.J., Abdullatif, A.A.L.: CPASA: Continuous Performance Assessment of Software Architecture. In: 2010 17th IEEE International Conference and Workshops on Engineering of Computer Based Systems, pp. 79–87 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Ho, C.W., Williams, L.: Deriving Performance Requirements and Test Cases with the Performance Refinement and Evolution Model ( PREM ). Evolution

    Google Scholar 

  8. Woodside, M., Petriu, D.C., Petriu, D.B., Shen, H., Israr, T., Merseguer, J.: Performance by unified model analysis (PUMA). In: Proceedings of the 5th international workshop on Software and performance - WOSP 2005, pp. 1–12. ACM Press, New York (2005), doi:10.1145/1071021.1071022

    Google Scholar 

  9. Smith, C.: Introduction to software performance engineering: Origins and outstanding problems. In: Bernardo, M., Hillston, J. (eds.) SFM 2007. LNCS, vol. 4486, pp. 395–428. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  10. Petriu, D.B., Woodside, M.: An intermediate metamodel with scenarios and resources for generating performance models from UML designs. Software & Systems Modeling 6(2), 163–184 (2006)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  11. OMG. Uml profile for schedulability, performance and time specification (2002),

  12. Kitchenham, B., Linkman, S., Law, D.: DESMET: a methodology for evaluating software engineering methods and tools. Computing and Contrological Engineering Journal 8, 120–126 (1997)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  13. Asadi, M., Ramsin, R.: MDA-Based Methodologies: An Analytical Survey. In: Model Driven Architecture Foundations and Applications, pp. 419–431. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Ali-Babar, M., Zhu, L., Jeffery, R.: A framework for classifying and comparing software architecture evaluation methods. In: Proceedings of 2004 Australian Software Engineering Conference, pp. 309–318 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Mohagheghi, P.: An Approach for Empirical Evaluation of Model-Driven Engineering in Multiple Dimensions., (retrieved February 24, 2011)

  16. Downey, A.B.: The elusive goal of workload characterization. ACM SIGMETRICS Performance Evaluation Review 26(4), 14–29 (1999)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  17. Schmidt, D.C.: Model-driven engineering. IEEE computer 39(2), 25–31 (2006)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations


Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2011 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Isa, M.A., Jawawi, D.N.A. (2011). Comparative Evaluation of Performance Assessment and Modeling Method for Software Architecture. In: Zain, J.M., Wan Mohd, W.M.b., El-Qawasmeh, E. (eds) Software Engineering and Computer Systems. ICSECS 2011. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol 181. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.

Download citation

  • DOI:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-22202-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-22203-0

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)