Experiences from Scenario-Based Architecture Evaluations with ATAM

Software architecture may go through many changes during its existence. Architecture evaluation can point out current problems, help to anticipate some of the future changes, and also show the absolute limits of a design. This paper presents experiences from eleven scenario based architecture evaluations with ATAM. The evaluations were completed on a tight two day evaluation schedule. This limited time forced to search for alternative scheduling options. The evaluated system designs had relatively long life cycle up to 30 years and all the designs were evaluated for the first time. We have learnt that in evaluations current issues often overshadow the long view of the future. We suggest that architecture evaluations should be integrated to the development process as a tool not only for today but also for tomorrow.

[1]  Paul Clements,et al.  Software architecture in practice , 1999, SEI series in software engineering.

[2]  Anthony J. Lattanze,et al.  Using the Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method to Evaluate a Wargame Simulation System: A Case Study , 2001 .

[3]  Mark Klein,et al.  Experience with performing architecture tradeoff analysis , 1999, Proceedings of the 1999 International Conference on Software Engineering (IEEE Cat. No.99CB37002).

[4]  Frank J. van der Linden.  Software Product-Family Engineering , 2003, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[5]  Motoei Azuma.  SquaRE The next generation of the ISO/IEC 9126 and 14598 international standards series on software product quality , 2001 .

[6]  Danny Weyns,et al.  Applying the ATAM to an Architecture for Decentralized Control of a Transportation System , 2006, QoSA.

[7]  W. W. Wagar,et al.  Foundations of Future Studies: Human Science for a New Era , 1998 .

[8]  Rick Kazman,et al.  Evaluating Software Architectures: Methods and Case Studies , 2001 .

[9]  Wendell Bell.  Foundations of Futures Studies , 1996 .

[10]  Mark Klein,et al.  Performing architecture tradeoff analysis , 1998, ISAW '98.

[11]  Peter Heidl,et al.  Reviewing Product Line Architectures: Experience Report of ATAM in an Automotive Context , 2001, PFE.

[12]  Rick Kazman,et al.  The architecture tradeoff analysis method , 1998, Proceedings. Fourth IEEE International Conference on Engineering of Complex Computer Systems (Cat. No.98EX193).

[13]  Mikael Svahnberg,et al.  Six years of evaluating software architectures in student projects , 2007, J. Syst. Softw..

[14]  Paul Clements,et al.  ATAM: Method for Architecture Evaluation , 2000 .