A UNIFIED APPROACH FOR SOFTWARE PROCESS REPRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS

Vassilis C. Gerogiannis, George Kakarontzas, Ioannis Stamelos

2006

Abstract

This paper presents a unified approach for software process management which combines object-oriented (OO) structures with formal models based on (high-level timed) Petri nets. This pairing may be proved beneficial not only for the integrated representation of software development processes, human resources and work products, but also in analysing properties and detecting errors of a software process specification, before the process is put to actual use. The use of OO models provides the advantages of graphical abstraction, high- level of understanding and manageable representation of software process classes and instances. Resulted OO models are mechanically transformed into a high-level timed Petri net representation to derive a model for formally proving process properties as well as applying managerial analysis. We demonstrate the applicability of our approach by addressing a simple software process modelling example problem used in the literature to exercise various software process modelling notations.

References

  1. Armenise, P., Bandinelli, S., Ghezzi, C., and Morzenti, A. (1992). Software Process Representation Languages: Survey and Assessment. In 4th International Conference on Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering, pages 455-462.
  2. Baresi, L. and Pezze, M. (2001a). Improving UML with Petri Nets. Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science, 44(4):1-13.
  3. Baresi, L. and Pezze, M. (2001b). On Formalizing UML with High-Level Petri Nets. Concurrent ObjectOriented Programming and Petri Nets, Advances in Petri Nets, LNCS 2001:276-304.
  4. Cantor, M. (1998). Object - Oriented Project Management with UML. John Wiley & Sons.
  5. Chang, C. and Christensen, M. (1999). Net Practice for Software Project Management. IEEE Software, 16(6):80-88.
  6. Delatour, J. and Paludetto, M. (1998). UML/PNO: A Way to Merge UML and Petri Net Objects for the Analysis of Real-Time Systems. In OO Technology and Real Time Systems Workshop (ECOOP' 98), volume LNCS 1543, pages 511-514.
  7. Eshuis, R. and Wieringa, R. (2001). A Real-Time Execution Semantics for UML Activity Diagrams. In Proc. of Fundamental Approaches to Software Engineering (FASE 2001), volume LNCS 2029, pages 76-90.
  8. Fowler, M. (2004). UML Distilled. Addison-Wesley.
  9. Gerogiannis, V. C., Kameas, A., and Pintelas, P. (1998). Classification & Comparative Study of High-Level Petri Nets. Journal of Systems & Software, 43(2):133- 160.
  10. Ghezzi, C., Mandriolli, D., Morasca, S., and Pezze, M. (1991). A Unified High-Level Petri Net Formalism for Time-Critical Systems. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 17:160-172.
  11. Jacobson, I., Booch, G., and Rumbaugh, J. (1999). The Unified Software Development Process. Addison-Wesley.
  12. Jensen, K. (1995). Coloured Petri Nets: Basic Concepts, Analysis Methods and Practical Use, volume 1 & 2. Springer.
  13. Kellner, M., Feiler, P. H., Finkelstein, A., Katayama, T., Osterweil, L. J., Penedo, M. H., and Rombach, H. D. (1991). ISPW-6 Software Process Example. In CS, I., editor, 1st International Conference on the Software Process, pages 176-187.
  14. Liu, L. C. and Horowitz, E. (1989). A Formal Model for Software Project Management. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 15(10):280-293.
  15. Mehrez, A., Muzumdar, M., Acar, W., and Weinroth, G. (1995). A Petri-Net Model View of Decision Making: An Operational Management Analysis. Omega International Journal in Management Science, 23(1):63- 78.
  16. Min, S. Y., Lee, D. H., and Bae, D. H. (2000). SoftPM: A SW Process Management System Reconciling Formalism with Easiness. Information & Software Technology, 42(1):1-16.
  17. Murata, T. (1989). Petri Nets: Properties, Analysis and Applications. Proceedings of the IEEE, 77(4):541-580.
  18. OMG (2005). Software Process Engineering Metamodel, Ver. 1.1. OMG.
  19. Pooley, R. and King, P. (1999). Using UML to Derive Stochastic Petri Net Models. In 15th Annual UK Performance Engineering Workshop, pages 45-56.
  20. Royce, W. (1998). Software Project Management: A Unified Framework. Addison-Wesley.
  21. Wallace, L. and Keil, M. (2004). Software Project Risks & Their Effect on Outcomes. Communications of the ACM, 47(4):68-73.
Download


Paper Citation


in Harvard Style

C. Gerogiannis V., Kakarontzas G. and Stamelos I. (2006). A UNIFIED APPROACH FOR SOFTWARE PROCESS REPRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS . In Proceedings of the First International Conference on Software and Data Technologies - Volume 2: ICSOFT, ISBN 978-972-8865-69-6, pages 127-132. DOI: 10.5220/0001317201270132


in Bibtex Style

@conference{icsoft06,
author={Vassilis C. Gerogiannis and George Kakarontzas and Ioannis Stamelos},
title={A UNIFIED APPROACH FOR SOFTWARE PROCESS REPRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS},
booktitle={Proceedings of the First International Conference on Software and Data Technologies - Volume 2: ICSOFT,},
year={2006},
pages={127-132},
publisher={SciTePress},
organization={INSTICC},
doi={10.5220/0001317201270132},
isbn={978-972-8865-69-6},
}


in EndNote Style

TY - CONF
JO - Proceedings of the First International Conference on Software and Data Technologies - Volume 2: ICSOFT,
TI - A UNIFIED APPROACH FOR SOFTWARE PROCESS REPRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS
SN - 978-972-8865-69-6
AU - C. Gerogiannis V.
AU - Kakarontzas G.
AU - Stamelos I.
PY - 2006
SP - 127
EP - 132
DO - 10.5220/0001317201270132