A framework for design tradeoffs
Andrews, A ; Mancebo, E ; Runeson, Per LU
and France, R
(2005)
In Software Quality Journal
13(4).
p.377-405
- Abstract
- Designs almost always require tradeoffs between competing design choices to meet system requirements. We present a framework for evaluating design choices with respect to meeting competing requirements. Specifically, we develop a model to estimate the performance of a UML design subject to changing levels of security and fault-tolerance. This analysis gives us a way to identify design solutions that are infeasible. Multi-criteria decision making techniques are applied to evaluate the remaining feasible alternatives. The method is illustrated with two examples: a small sensor network and a system for controlling traffic lights.
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
https://lup.lub.lu.se/record/212474
- author
- Andrews, A
; Mancebo, E
; Runeson, Per
LU
and France, R
- organization
- publishing date
- 2005
- type
- Contribution to journal
- publication status
- published
- subject
- keywords
- design tradeoffs, UML, fault tolerance, security
- in
- Software Quality Journal
- volume
- 13
- issue
- 4
- pages
- 377 - 405
- publisher
- Springer
- external identifiers
-
- wos:000233276500004
- scopus:27844536396
- ISSN
- 0963-9314
- DOI
- 10.1007/s11219-005-4252-z
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- yes
- id
- aa255265-bcac-419d-bbda-cae20d9f1bd8 (old id 212474)
- date added to LUP
- 2016-04-01 16:22:15
- date last changed
- 2022-03-15 00:02:12
@article{aa255265-bcac-419d-bbda-cae20d9f1bd8,
abstract = {{Designs almost always require tradeoffs between competing design choices to meet system requirements. We present a framework for evaluating design choices with respect to meeting competing requirements. Specifically, we develop a model to estimate the performance of a UML design subject to changing levels of security and fault-tolerance. This analysis gives us a way to identify design solutions that are infeasible. Multi-criteria decision making techniques are applied to evaluate the remaining feasible alternatives. The method is illustrated with two examples: a small sensor network and a system for controlling traffic lights.}},
author = {{Andrews, A and Mancebo, E and Runeson, Per and France, R}},
issn = {{0963-9314}},
keywords = {{design tradeoffs; UML; fault tolerance; security}},
language = {{eng}},
number = {{4}},
pages = {{377--405}},
publisher = {{Springer}},
series = {{Software Quality Journal}},
title = {{A framework for design tradeoffs}},
url = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11219-005-4252-z}},
doi = {{10.1007/s11219-005-4252-z}},
volume = {{13}},
year = {{2005}},
}