short-paper

Preemptive Management of Model Driven Technical Debt for Improving Software Quality

Authors:

Clemente Izurieta,

Isaac GriffithAuthors Info & Claims

QoSA '15: Proceedings of the 11th International ACM SIGSOFT Conference on Quality of Software Architectures

Pages 31 - 36

https://doi.org/10.1145/2737182.2737193

Published: 04 May 2015 Publication History

Abstract

Technical debt has been the subject of numerous studies over the last few years. To date, most of the research has concentrated on management (detection, quantification, and decision making) approaches ?most performed at code and implementation levels through various static analysis tools. However, if practitioners are to adopt model driven techniques, then the management of technical debt also requires that we address this problem during the specification and architectural phases. This position paper discusses several questions that need to be addressed in order to improve the quality of software architecture by exploring the management of technical debt during modeling, and suggests various lines of research that are worthwhile subjects for further investigation.

References

[1]

J. M. Bieman and H. Wang, ?Design pattern coupling, change proneness, and change coupling: a pilot study,? Technical Report. Colorado State University, 2006.

[2]

R. Binder, Testing Object Oriented Systems: Models, Patterns, and Tools. Addison-Wesley Publishers, 2000.

Digital Library

[3]

CAST, ?Cast worldwide application software quality study: Summary of key findings,? Technical Report, Available: http://www.castsoftware.com/resources/resource/cast-research-labs/cast-worldwide-application-software-quality-study-2010/, 2010.

[4]

W. Cunningham, ?The WyCash portfolio management system,? in Proceedings on Object-oriented programming systems, languages, and applications (Addendum) (OOPSLA '92), ACM, New York, NY, USA, pp. 29--30, 1992.

Digital Library

[5]

J. Delange. Blog: Managing Model Complexity. http://blog.sei.cmu.edu/post.cfm/managing-model-complexity. Software Engineering Institute (SEI), Carnegie Mellon University. Accessed 12/29/2014.

[6]

B. Dobing and J. Parsons, ?How UML is used,? Commun. ACM, 49, 5, pp.109--113, May 2006

Digital Library

[7]

M. Fowler, Refactoring: Improving the Design of Existing Code. Addison-Wesley. 1999.

Digital Library

[8]

A. Forward and T. C. Lethbridge, ?Problems and opportunities for model-centric versus code-centric development: A Survey of Software Professionals,? in Proceedings of the International Workshop on Models in Software Engineering (MiSE?08)@ICSE?08, pages 27--32, New York, 2008.

Digital Library

[9]

R. B. France, D. K. Kim, E. Song, and S. Ghosh. 2002. Patterns as Precise Characterizations of Designs. Technical Report. Colorado State University.

[10]

M. Genero, M. Piattini, and C. Calero. Metrics for software conceptual models. London: Imperial College Press, 2005.

Digital Library

[11]

F. D. Giraldo, S. España, M. A. Pineda, W. J. Giraldo, O. Pastor., ?Integrating Technical Debt into MDE,? 26th International Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering, Pre-proceedings CAISE ?14 Forum, 16--20 June, Greece.

[12]

C. Izurieta and J. Bieman, ?How software designs decay: A pilot study of pattern evolution,? in Proceedings of the First Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement (ESEM 2007), Madrid, Spain, pp. 449--451, September 2007.

Digital Library

[13]

C. Izurieta and J. Bieman, ?Testing consequences of grime buildup in object oriented design patterns,? in Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Software Testing, Verification, and Validation (ICST 2008), Lillehammer, Norway, pp. 171--179, April, 2008.

Digital Library

[14]

C. Izurieta C., and J. Bieman, ?A multiple case study of design pattern decay, grime, and rot in evolving software systems,? Software Quality Journal, vol.21, pp. 1--35, June 2013.

Digital Library

[15]

C. Izurieta, A. Vetro, N. Zazworka, Y. Cai, C. Seaman, and F. Shull, ?Organizing the technical debt landscape,? in Proceedings of the Third International Workshop on Managing Technical Debt (MTD?12), Zurich, Switzerland, pp. 23--26, June 2012.

Digital Library

[16]

D. K. Kim, ?A meta-modeling approach to specifying patterns.? Colorado State University PhD Dissertation, June 21, 2004.

Digital Library

[17]

S. McConnell, ?Technical debt,? in: 10x Software Development, Available from: http://blogs.construx.com/blogs/stevemcc/archive/2007/ 11/01/technical-debt-2.aspx (Online), 2007.

[18]

T. Mens, Taentzer, G., and Müller, D., "Model-Driven Software Refactoring," in Model-Driven Software Development: Integrating Quality Assurance, IGI Global, pp.170--203, 2009.

[19]

D.L. Moody, G. Sindre, T. Brasethvik, and A. Sølvberg, "Evaluating the quality of information models: empirical testing of a conceptual model quality framework," in Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Software Engineering. IEEE Computer Society, Portland, OR, USA, pp. 295--305, May 2003.

Digital Library

[20]

D. L. Moody. ?The physics of notations: Toward a scientifc basis for constructing visual notations in software engineering,? IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 35(6):756--779, 2009.

Digital Library

[21]

A. Nugroho, J. Visser, T. Kuipers, ?An empirical model of technical debt and interest,? in Proceedings of the Second International Workshop on Managing Technical Debt (MTD?11), New York, NY, USA, pp. 1--8, May 2011.

Digital Library

[22]

M. Olszewska. ?Simulink-Specific Design Quality Metrics,? TUCS Technical Reports 1002, Turku Centre for Computer Science, 2011.

[23]

OMG, Object Management Group: Meta Object Facility (MOF) 2.0 Core Specification. Final Adopted Specification pct/03--10-04 edn. from http://www.omg.org/docs/ptc/03--10-04.pdf, 2003.

[24]

OMG, Object Managament Group: MDA Guide Version 1.0.1. Document omg/03-06-01 edn from http://www.omg.org/docs/omg/03-06-01.pdf, 2003.

[25]

J. Prabhu. ?Complexity Analysis of Simulink Models to improve the Quality of Outsourcing in an Automotive Company,? Manuscript, August 2010. http://alexandria.tue.nl/extra1/afstversl/wsk-i/prabhu2010.pdf

[26]

T. Schanz and C. Izurieta, ?Object oriented design pattern decay: a taxonomy,? in Proceedings of the 4th ACM-IEEE International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement (ESEM 2010), Bolzano-Bozen, Italy, pp. 1--8, September, 2010.

Digital Library

[27]

C. Seaman, Y. Guo, C. Izurieta, Y. Cai, N. Zazworka, F. Shull, and A. Vetrò, ?Using technical debt data in decision making: potential decision approaches,? in Proceedings of the Third International Workshop on Managing Technical Debt (MTD?12), Zurich, Switzerland, pp.45--48, June 2012.

Digital Library

[28]

B. Selic, ?The pragmatics of model-driven development,? IEEE Software, vol.20, pp.19--25, September-October 2003.

Digital Library

[29]

Sonar. Available online: http://www.sonarsource.org/

[30]

S. Strasser, C. Frederickson, K. Fenger, C. Izurieta, ?An automated software tool for validating design patterns,? ISCA 24th International Conference on Computer Applications in Industry and Engineering. CAINE ?11, Honolulu, HI, USA, November 2011.

[31]

G. Sunyé, D. Pollet, Y. L. Traon, J. M. Jézéquel, ?Refactoring UML Models. UML ?01, LNCS, vol. 2185, pp. 134--148. Springer (2001).

Digital Library

[32]

E. Tom, A. Aybuke, and R. Vidgen, ?An exploration of technical debt,? The Journal of Systems and Software 86, pp. 1498--1516. 2013.

Digital Library

[33]

Unified Modeling Language (UML). Available online: http://www.uml.org

Cited By

Kleinwaks HBatchelor ABradley T(2023)Ontology for Technical Debt in Systems EngineeringIEEE Open Journal of Systems Engineering10.1109/OJSE.2023.33163951(111-122)Online publication date: 2023
https://doi.org/10.1109/OJSE.2023.3316395
Di Ruscio DDi Salle AIovino LPierantonio A(2023)A modeling assistant to manage technical debt in coupled evolutionInformation and Software Technology10.1016/j.infsof.2022.107146156:COnline publication date: 1-Apr-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1016/j.infsof.2022.107146
Rouhi ALano K(2023)Towards a pattern‐based model transformation frameworkSoftware: Practice and Experience10.1002/spe.321553:9(1815-1849)Online publication date: 16-May-2023
https://doi.org/10.1002/spe.3215
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

Preemptive Management of Model Driven Technical Debt for Improving Software Quality
1. Software and its engineering

Recommendations

A portfolio approach to technical debt management
MTD '11: Proceedings of the 2nd Workshop on Managing Technical Debt

Technical debt describes the effect of immature software artifacts on software maintenance - the potential of extra effort required in future as if paying interest for the incurred debt. The uncertainty of interest payment further complicates the ...
Integrating technical debt management and software quality management processes: a framework and field tests
ICSE '18: Proceedings of the 40th International Conference on Software Engineering

Technical debt, defined as the maintenance obligations arising from shortcuts taken during the design, development, and deployment of software systems, has been shown to significantly impact the reliability and long-term evolution of software systems [1],...
Technical Debt in Agile Development: Report on the Ninth Workshop on Managing Technical Debt (MTD 2017)

We report on the Ninth International Workshop on Managing Technical Debt, collocated with the 18th International Conference on Agile Software Development (XP 2017) in Cologne. The technical debt research community continues to expand through ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

QoSA '15: Proceedings of the 11th International ACM SIGSOFT Conference on Quality of Software Architectures

May 2015

152 pages

ISBN:9781450334709

DOI:10.1145/2737182

General Chair:
Philippe Kruchten
University of British Columbia, Canada
,
Program Chairs:
Ipek Ozkaya
Carnegie Mellon University, Software Engineering Institute, Pittsburgh, USA
,
Heiko Koziolek
ABB Corporate Research, Ladenburg, Germany

Copyright © 2015 ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Sponsors

SIGSOFT: ACM Special Interest Group on Software Engineering
IEEE-CS\DATC: IEEE Computer Society

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 04 May 2015

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Short-paper

Conference

CompArch '15

Sponsor:

SIGSOFT
IEEE-CS\DATC

CompArch '15: Federated Events on Component-Based Software Engineering and Software Architecture

May 4 - 8, 2015

QC, Montréal, Canada

Acceptance Rates

QoSA '15 Paper Acceptance Rate 14 of 42 submissions, 33%;

Overall Acceptance Rate 46 of 131 submissions, 35%

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

17
Total Citations
View Citations
223
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)12
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

Reflects downloads up to 03 Oct 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Kleinwaks HBatchelor ABradley T(2023)Ontology for Technical Debt in Systems EngineeringIEEE Open Journal of Systems Engineering10.1109/OJSE.2023.33163951(111-122)Online publication date: 2023
https://doi.org/10.1109/OJSE.2023.3316395
Di Ruscio DDi Salle AIovino LPierantonio A(2023)A modeling assistant to manage technical debt in coupled evolutionInformation and Software Technology10.1016/j.infsof.2022.107146156:COnline publication date: 1-Apr-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1016/j.infsof.2022.107146
Rouhi ALano K(2023)Towards a pattern‐based model transformation frameworkSoftware: Practice and Experience10.1002/spe.321553:9(1815-1849)Online publication date: 16-May-2023
https://doi.org/10.1002/spe.3215
Das DMaruf AIslam RLambaria NKim SAbdelfattah ACerny TFrajtak KBures MTisnovsky P(2022)Technical debt resulting from architectural degradation and code smellsACM SIGAPP Applied Computing Review10.1145/3512753.351275521:4(20-36)Online publication date: 19-Jan-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3512753.3512755
López JCánovas Izquierdo JCuadrado J(2021)ModelSet: a dataset for machine learning in model-driven engineeringSoftware and Systems Modeling10.1007/s10270-021-00929-321:3(967-986)Online publication date: 17-Oct-2021
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-021-00929-3
Rahad KBadreddin OMohsin Reza S(2021)The human in model‐driven engineering loop: A case study on integrating handwritten code in model‐driven engineering repositoriesSoftware: Practice and Experience10.1002/spe.295751:6(1308-1321)Online publication date: 18-Feb-2021
https://doi.org/10.1002/spe.2957
Iovino LDi Salle ADi Ruscio DPierantonio AGuerra EIovino L(2020)Metamodel deprecation to manage technical debt in model co-evolutionProceedings of the 23rd ACM/IEEE International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems: Companion Proceedings10.1145/3417990.3419625(1-10)Online publication date: 16-Oct-2020
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3417990.3419625
Freire SPassos AMendonca MSant'Anna CSpinola R(2020)On the Influence of UML Class Diagrams Refactoring on Code Debt: A Family of Replicated Empirical Studies2020 46th Euromicro Conference on Software Engineering and Advanced Applications (SEAA)10.1109/SEAA51224.2020.00064(346-353)Online publication date: Aug-2020
https://doi.org/10.1109/SEAA51224.2020.00064
Freire Ede O. Passos ASant'Anna CSpínola Rde Mendonça Neto MMachado ISouza RMaciel RSant'Anna C(2019)Influence of Model Refactoring on Code DebtProceedings of the XXXIII Brazilian Symposium on Software Engineering10.1145/3350768.3350793(452-456)Online publication date: 23-Sep-2019
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3350768.3350793
Baddreddin ORahad KOnut IPetriu DChen W(2018)The impact of design and UML modeling on codebase quality and sustainabilityProceedings of the 28th Annual International Conference on Computer Science and Software Engineering10.5555/3291291.3291315(236-244)Online publication date: 29-Oct-2018
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/3291291.3291315
Show More Cited By

View Options

Get Access

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Table of Contents