Advertisement

Technical requirements for the implementation of an experience base

  • Mikael Broomé
  • Per Runeson
Chapter 2: Methodology
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1756)

Abstract

Reuse of different types of experience is a key issue in successful improvement in software engineering. The approach taken in the Quality Improvement Paradigm (QIP) and its supporting organisation, the Experience Factory (EF), is to define an Experience Base (EB), where all types of reusable objects are organised and stored. The objects may be of any type related to software development, for example, code, methods, quality models and specifications. Furthermore, not only objects identical to the target object needed can be reused, but also similar ones. This paper defines important concepts in a reuse context, elaborates a reuse scenario from which the requirements for the implementation of an Experience Base are derived. A list of 22 technical requirements is defined which cover the functional aspects related to the use of an Experience Base. The evaluation of three alternative implementation approaches are presented as an example: two database alternatives and one based on Case-Based Reasoning (CBR). Future work is to investigate the costs for extending the functionality to fulfil the requirements and to use the requirements in a real setting.

Keywords

Target Object Technical Requirement Current Project Target Classification Modification Effort 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    A. Aamodt and E. Plaza, “Case-Based Reasoning: Foundational Issues, Methodological Variation, and Systems”, AI Communications, 7(1), (1994) 39–49Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    V. R. Basili and H. D. Rombach, “Support for comprehensive reuse”, IEE Software Engineering Journal, (1991) 303–316Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    V. R. Basili, G. Caldiera and H. D. Rombach, “Experience Factory”, Encyclopedia of Software Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, Volume 1, (1994) 469–476Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    V. R. Basili and G. Caldiera, “Improve Software Quality by Reusing Knowledge and Experience”, Sloan Management Review, (Fall 1995) 55–64Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    V. R. Basili, S. Green, O. Laitenberger, F. Shull, F. Lanubile, S. Sørumgård and M. V. Zelkowitz, “The Empirical Investigation of Perspective-Based Reading”, Journal of Empirical Software Engineering, 1(2), (1996) 133–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    C. L. Braun, “Reuse”, Encyclopedia of Software Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, Volume 2, (1994) 1055–1069Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    M. Broomé, “Requirements and Implementation Approaches for an Experience Base”, Master Thesis, Department of Communication Systems, Lund University, CODEN: LUTEDX(TETS-5326)/1-110/(1998)&LOCAL 13, (1998)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    W. B. Frakes and T. P. Pole, “An Empirical Study of Representation Methods for Reusable Software Components”, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 20(8) (1994) 617–630CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    K. L. Heninger, “Specifying Software Requirements for Complex Systems: New Technologies and their Application”, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, SE-6(1) (1980) 2–13Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    W. Kim, Introduction to Object-Oriented Databases, Computer Systems Series (1990)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    R. C. Linger, H. D. Mills and B. I. Witt, Structured Programming—Theory and Practice, Addison-Wesley (1979)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    M. Oivo, “Quantitative management of software production using object-oriented models”, VTT Publications 169 (1994)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    E. Ostertag, “A Classification System for Software Reuse”, PhD dissertation, University of Maryland (1992)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    A. A. Porter, L. Votta and V. R. Basili, “Comparing Detection Methods for Software Requirements Inspection: A Replicated Experiment” IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 21(6) (1995) 563–575CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    R. Prieto-Diaz, “Domain analysis for reusability”, Proceedings of the 11th International Computer Software and Applications Conference (COMPSAC'87) Tokyo, Japan (1987), 23–29.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mikael Broomé
    • 1
  • Per Runeson
    • 2
  1. 1.Q-LabsIDEON Research ParkLundSweden
  2. 2.Dept. of Communications SystemsLund UniversityLundSweden

Personalised recommendations