The KIPS Transactions:PartD (정보처리학회논문지D)

Korea Information Processing Society (한국정보처리학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

A Requirement Priority Process of Embedded Systems based on the Dependency and Aspect

의존과 관점 기반 임베디드 시스템의 요구사항 우선순위 프로세스

  • 황위용 (고려대학교 컴퓨터.전파통신공학과) ;
  • 강동수 (고려대학교 컴퓨터.전파통신공학과) ;
  • 송치양 (경북대학교 소프트웨어공학과) ;
  • 성재석 (LG전자 MC연구소) ;
  • 백두권 (고려대학교 컴퓨터.전파통신공학과)
  • Published : 2009.10.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Setting up a priorityfor an embedded system is greatly significant because a release plan at the early stage of product developments can properly be established through right decision making procedures based on the priorities. For instance, both dependencies among requirements and the aspects of product developers should be considered into the priorities to improve the embedded system. Especially, trade-offs among the requirements, which are quite different depending on H/W and S/W architecture styles they use, should be acknowledged without exception. However, the selection process on the priority has hitherto been fairly systematic in the existing environment where hardware and software are not being considered at once. Therefore, this paper suggests an dependency and aspect-based model and process for the requirements of the priority. For this, the paper analyzes the trade-offs between the requirements depending on the disparate Architecture styles of H/W and S/W, and it also reflects the viewpoints of the developers. For thelast thing, the model and process suggested will be applied to the case of the development of both cell phones and cameras to gain authenticity and reliability. In conclusion, the danger occurring when the release plan is constructed can be minimized by screening the priorities that optimizes the embedded system more explicitly.

임베디드 시스템을 위한 릴리스 플랜 수립은 제품 개발 초기 요구사항 분석 단계에서 요구사항의 우선순위 결정을 통해 달성되므로 우선순위 결정은 매우 중요하다. 이때, 우선순위 활동에서는 요구사항간 의존관계와 제품 개발에 관여하는 관점들을 고려해야 한다. 특히 임베디드 시스템에서 하드웨어와 소프트웨어의 특징에 기반한 아키텍처 스타일에 따른 요구사항간 상충관계는 반드시 반영해야 한다. 그러나, 기존 연구에는 하드웨어 및 소프트웨어로 구성된 시스템에 대한 요구사항을 고려하는 우선순위 선정 프로세스가 체계적이지 못하다. 따라서, 본 논문에서는 임베디드 시스템을 위한 요구사항간 의존관계, 관점에 기반한 요구사항 우선순위의 모델과 프로세스를 제안한다. 이를 위해 아키텍처 스타일에 따른 우선순위 요소 또는 요구사항간 상충관계를 분석하고, 임베디드 시스템 제품 개발에 관여하는 관점들을 식별하여 요구사항 우선순위를 정립한다. 그리고 제안된 방법을 핸드폰 개발 사례의 요구사항 우선순위에 적용하여 신뢰성을 보인다. 본 논문의 기법을 적용하여 임베디드 시스템의 특성에 부합하도록 요구사항을 좀 더 명확하게 최적화하여 우선순위화함으로써 제품 릴리스에 대한 위험성을 최소화할 수 있다.

Keywords

References

  1. CMP Media. 2006 State of Embedded Market Survey. April, 2006.
  2. Vahid, F. and Givargis, T., Embedded System Design: A Unified Hardware / Software Introduction, John Wiley, 2002.
  3. Philip Koopman, "Embedded System Design Issues(the Rest of the Story),"Proceedings of the 1996 International Conference on Computer Design(ICCD96), October, 1996. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICCD.1996.563572
  4. 황위용, 강동수, 송치양, 백두권, "임베디드 시스템을 위한 요구 사항 우선순위 프로세스”, 제31회 한국정보처리학회 춘계학술발표대회 논문집, 제16권 제1호, pp.444-447, 2009.4
  5. Wolf, Wayne, Computers as Components – Principles of Embedded Computing System Design, Morgan-Kaufmann, 2005.
  6. 성재석, 강동수, 송치양, 백두권, “릴리즈 플랜의 적응적 요구사항 우선순위,” 정보처리학회논문지D, 제15-D권, 제6호, pp. 841-856, 2008. 12. https://doi.org/10.3745/KIPSTD.2008.15-D.6.841
  7. Joachkim K., Claes W., Bjorn R., "An Evaluation of methods for prioritizing software requirements," Information and Software Technology, 39(14-15), pp.939-947, 1998. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0950-5849(97)00053-0
  8. Firesmith, D. G., "Prioritizing Requirements," Journal of Object Technology (JOT), 3(8), Swiss Federal Institute of Technology(ETH), Zurich, Switzerland, pp.35-47, September/October, 2004. https://doi.org/10.5381/jot.2004.3.8.c4
  9. Aybuke A., Claes W., Engineering and Managing Software Requirements, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, August, 2005.
  10. Berander, P. and Andrews, A., "Requirements Prioritization," in Engineering and Managing Software Requirements, ed. Aurum, A., and Wohlin, C., Springer Verlag, Berlin, Germany, pp.69-94, 2005.
  11. Karlsson, J., and Ryan, K. "A Cost-Value Approach for Prioritizing Requirements," IEEE Software 14(5), pp.67-74, 1997. https://doi.org/10.1109/52.605933
  12. Karl E. Wiegers, Software Requirements, second edition, pp.247-258, Microsoft Press, 2003.
  13. Berander P, "Using students as subjects in requirements prioritization,"Proceedings of the 2004 International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering(ISESE'04), IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos, pp.167-176, 2004. https://doi.org/10.1109/ISESE.2004.1334904
  14. K. Beck, "Extreme Programming Explained: Embrace Change", Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass., 2000.
  15. Carlshamre P, Sandahl K, Lindvall M, Regnell B, Natt och Dag J., "An industrial survey of requirements interdependencies in software Release Planning," Proceedings of the 5th IEEE international symposium on requirements engineering, pp.84-91, 2001. https://doi.org/10.1109/ISRE.2001.948547
  16. Penny D. A., "An Estimation-Based Management Framework for Enhancive Maintenance in Commercial Software Products," In Proceedings of International Conference on Software Maintenance (ICSM), pp.122-130, 2002.
  17. Denne, M. and Cleland-Huang, J., "The Incremental Funding Method: Data Driven Software Development,"21(3), pp.39-47, 2004. https://doi.org/10.1109/MS.2004.1293071
  18. Ruhe, G., Saliu, M. O., "The Science and Practice of Software Release Planning," IEEE Software, 2005.
  19. Greer, D., and Ruhe, G., "Software Release Planning: an Evolutionary and Iterative Approach,"Information and Software Technology, 46(4), pp.243-253, 2004. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2003.07.002
  20. Saliu O, Ruhe G., "Supporting software Release Planning decisions for evolving systems," Proceedings of 29th IEEE/NASA software engineering workshop, Greenbelt, MD, USA, 6-7 April, 2005. https://doi.org/10.1109/SEW.2005.42
  21. Lee, Dong-hyun, In, Hoh Peter, Lee, Keun, Park, Sooyong, Hinchey, Mike,"A Survival Kit Adaptive Hardware Software Codesign Life-Cycle Model," IEEE COMPUTER SOC, Volume: 42, Issue: 2, Ppp.100-102, FEB., 2009. https://doi.org/10.1109/MC.2009.34
  22. Kalavade, A. and Lee, E., "A Hardware-software codesign methodology for DSP applications", IEEE Design & Test of Comp. 10, 3, pp.16-28, 1993. https://doi.org/10.1109/54.232469
  23. B. Regnell and S. Brinkkemper, "Market-Driven Requirements Engineering for Software Products,"Engineering and Managing Software Requirements, A. Aurum and C., Wohlin (eds.), Berlin, Germany, Springer Verlag, pp.287-308, 2005. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-28244-0_13
  24. Jacobson, I., Booch, G.,Rumbaugh, J., The Unified Software Development Process, pp.94-98, Addison Wesley, Object Technology Series, 1999.
  25. Karl E. Wiegers, "More about software requirements: Thorny Issues and Practical Advice", Microsoft Press, 2006.
  26. A. Rashid, "Website: Early Aspects: Aspect-Oriented Requirements Engineering and Architecture Design," URL: Early Aspects: Aspect-Oriented Requirements Engineering and Architecture Design, 2005.
  27. Y. Yu, J. C. S. P. Leite, J. Mylopoulos, "From Goals to Aspects: Discovering Aspects from Requirements Goal Models," Proceedings of Requirements Engineering Conference, Kyoto, Japan, pp.38-47, 2004. https://doi.org/10.1109/RE.2004.23
  28. A. I. Antón, "Goal-Based Requirements Analysis," Proceedings of ICRE'96, pp. 136-144, 1996. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICRE.1996.491438
  29. A. Lamsweerde, "Goal-Oriented Requirements Engineering: A Guided Tour," 5th International Symposium on Requirements Engineering, IEEE Computer Society Press, pp.249-261, 2001. https://doi.org/10.1109/ISRE.2001.948567
  30. Dean Leffingwell, Don Widrig, Managing Software Requirements ; A Use Case Approach, Second Edition, pp.10–11, pp.95-100, pp.50, Addison Wesley, 2003.
  31. Lehtola, L., and Kauppinen, M. "Empirical Evaluation of Two Requirements Prioritization Methods in Product Development Projects," Proceedings of the European Software Process Improvement Conference (EuroSPI 2004),Trondheim, Norway, pp.161-170, 2004.
  32. Karlsson, L., Thelin, T., Regnell, B., Berander, P., and Wohlin, C., "Pair-Wise Comparisons versus Planning Game Partitioning– Experiments on Requirements Prioritisation Techniques," Journal of Empirical Software Engineering, Vol.1.11 Nr2, 2006. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10664-006-7240-4
  33. Ahl, Viggo. "An Experimental Comparison of Five Prioritization Techniques - Investigating Ease of Use, Accuracy, and Scalability,"Master Thesis No. MSE-2005-11, School of Engineering, Blekinge Institute of Technology, 2005.
  34. Taehee Gwak and Yoonjung JangAn, "Empirical Study on SW Metrics for Embedded System." LNCS 3966, pp.302–313, 2006. https://doi.org/10.1007/11754305_33