1 / 15

An Empirical Study on MBASE and LeanMBASE

An Empirical Study on MBASE and LeanMBASE. Supannika Koolmanojwong Center for Systems and Software Engineering CSSE- Annual Research Review February 13, 2007. Outline. Introduction Research Questions MBASE & its problem LeanMBASE Content Comparison Performance Comparison Conclusion

xenia
Télécharger la présentation

An Empirical Study on MBASE and LeanMBASE

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. An Empirical Study on MBASE and LeanMBASE Supannika Koolmanojwong Center for Systems and Software Engineering CSSE- Annual Research Review February 13, 2007 (c) USC-CSSE

  2. Outline • Introduction • Research Questions • MBASE & its problem • LeanMBASE • Content Comparison • Performance Comparison • Conclusion • Future Work (c) USC-CSSE

  3. Introduction • Light weighted Software Engineering Projects • CSCI577ab: Software Engineering Course Sequence for graduate students in Computer Science • 12 weeks in Fall semester, 12 weeks in Spring semester • 6 on-campus students, 2 off-campus students • From 1998-2005, use MBASE as methodology to develop real-client projects. • Problems • MBASE is too heavy for software engineering classes. (c) USC-CSSE

  4. Research Question • With small-sized, limited schedule, real client project, how can we provide the best opportunity for students to learn good software engineering approaches and apply them to the real software project development? (c) USC-CSSE

  5. MBASEModel-Based (Systems) Architecting and Software Engineering • Approach • MBASE/ RUP Activity / Process Model • WinWin Spiral model • Risk-driven strategy • Iterative refinement • Stakeholder commitment at anchor-point milestones • Emphasis of system and life-cycle issues. • The MBASE Guidelines provide content, format and templates for project artifacts • Project Artifacts • Operational Concept, System Requirements, System Architecture, Lifecycle Plan, Feasibility Studies • Plans and reports for constructions and Transition phase • Software tools • The Easy WinWin negotiation tool • Effort reporting tool • Risk identification tool • USC COCOMO II • COCOTS (c) USC-CSSE

  6. Problems in MBASE • Problems with MBASE • MBASE is designed for large industry projects • Hugh Amount of effort in documentation • Less time to focus on project implementation • Strategies • Analyze data from our project repositories • Shape up MBASE  leanMBASE (c) USC-CSSE

  7. Solutions in LeanMBASE • Solutions in LeanMBASE • Minimum-essential documentation • Tailor up if proper • More time in project implementation • Fall 2005, • the 260 pages of MBASE Inception and Elaboration phase Guidelines were replaced with 90 pages of LeanMBASE Guidelines. (c) USC-CSSE

  8. LeanMBASE • Same approach, same documentation set, same tool but light-weight • Identify high-value activities, balance the workload of a development • Off-campus V&V  IIV&V (Integrated Independent) involve more to the team • In Fall 2006, add one new document (SID: Supporting Information Document) as package header; combined all similar information. (c) USC-CSSE

  9. Outline • Introduction • Research Questions • MBASE & its problem • LeanMBASE • Content Comparison • Performance Comparison • Effort Comparison • Client Evaluation Comparison • Conclusion • Future Work (c) USC-CSSE

  10. Content Comparison I Inception & Elaboration Document Size Comparison: LeanMBASE: smaller size; except SSAD in fall 2005 Inception Elaboration Construction Transition Operational Concept Definition (OCD); System and Software Requirements Definition (SSRD); System and Software Architecture Description (SSAD); Life Cycle Plan (LCP); Feasibility Rationale Document (FRD) (c) USC-CSSE

  11. Content Comparison II Construction and Transition Document Size Comparison; Not much different in CTS documents; Room for improvement • Plans and Reports in Construction and Transition Phase • Peer Review Plan (PRP) • Peer Review Report (PRP) • Iteration Plan (IP) • Iteration Assessment Report (IAR) • Quality Management Report (QMP) • Test Plan (TP) • Test Description and Result (TDR) • Release Description (RD) • Transition Plan (TRP) • Support Plan (SP) • Packaged Tools and Procedures (PTP) • Regression Test Package (RTP) • User Manual (UM) (c) USC-CSSE

  12. Effort Comparison Average number of hours spent for documentation: Less Effort, except SSAD in Fall 2005 Average number of hour/page in documentation: Less number of hours per page; except SSRD in Fall 2006 (c) USC-CSSE

  13. Client Evaluation Uniformly high; relatively close (c) USC-CSSE

  14. Conclusion • With LeanMBASE • Smaller document size • Less time in documenting • Comparably satisfied with the project result from Clients • Off-campus students or IIV&V personnel play more roles • At least for small real-client student-team projects, the LeanMBASE more efficiently supports students in • developing software projects, • learning software development • providing a win-win result to all key stakeholders. (c) USC-CSSE

  15. Future Work • Additional Comparison • Risk Comparison • Defect List Comparison • Process Enhancement • Electronic Process Guideline (LeanMBASE Plug-Ins on EPF OpenUp Framework) • WikiWinWin • Mentor Program (c) USC-CSSE

More Related