mdh.sePublications
Change search
Refine search result
1 - 44 of 44
CiteExportLink to result list
Permanent link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Rows per page
  • 5
  • 10
  • 20
  • 50
  • 100
  • 250
Sort
  • Standard (Relevance)
  • Author A-Ö
  • Author Ö-A
  • Title A-Ö
  • Title Ö-A
  • Publication type A-Ö
  • Publication type Ö-A
  • Issued (Oldest first)
  • Issued (Newest first)
  • Created (Oldest first)
  • Created (Newest first)
  • Last updated (Oldest first)
  • Last updated (Newest first)
  • Standard (Relevance)
  • Author A-Ö
  • Author Ö-A
  • Title A-Ö
  • Title Ö-A
  • Publication type A-Ö
  • Publication type Ö-A
  • Issued (Oldest first)
  • Issued (Newest first)
  • Created (Oldest first)
  • Created (Newest first)
  • Last updated (Oldest first)
  • Last updated (Newest first)
Select
The maximal number of hits you can export is 250. When you want to export more records please use the 'Create feeds' function.
  • 1.
    Alvaro, Alexandre
    et al.
    Mälardalen University, Department of Computer Science and Electronics.
    Land, Rikard
    Mälardalen University, Department of Computer Science and Electronics.
    Crnkovic, Ivica
    Mälardalen University, Department of Computer Science and Electronics.
    Software Component Evaluation: A Theoretical Study on Component Selection and Certification2007Report (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    Software components need to be evaluated at several points during their life cycle, by different actors and for different purposes. Besides the quality assurance performed by component developers, there are two main activities which include evaluation of components: component selection (i.e. evaluation performed by the system developer in order to select the best fit component to use in a system) and an envisioned component certification (i.e. evaluation made by an independent actor in order to increase the trust in the component). This paper examines the fundamental similarities and differences between these two types of component evaluations and elaborates how these fit in the overall process views of component-based development for both COTS-based development and software product line development.

  • 2.
    Björnander, Stefan
    et al.
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Graydon, Patrick
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Land, Rikard
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Towards Automatic Verification of Safety Properties in AADL System Models2013In: Proceedings of the 31st International System Safety Conference (ISSC), 2013Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    In some domains, standards such as ISO 26262 or the UK Ministry of DefenceÂ’s Defence Standard 00-56 require developers to produce a safety case. As the safety case for a complex system can be rather large, automated verification of all or part of it would be valuable. We have approached the issue by designing a method supported by a framework including analysers for safety cases defined in the Goal Structuring Notation (GSN) and systems modelled in the Architecture Analysis and Design Language (AADL). In our approach, the safety case predicates are defined in a subset of the functional language Meta Language (ML). Our approach facilities formalising some parts of a typical safety argument in an ML-like notation, enabling automatic verification of some reasoning steps in the safety argument. Automatic verification not only justifies increased confidence, it can ease the burden of re-checking the safety argument as it (and the system) change.

  • 3.
    Björnander, Stefan
    et al.
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Land, Rikard
    System Safety CrossControl AB.
    Graydon, Patrick
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Lundqvist, Kristina
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Conmy, Philippa
    University of York.
    A method to formally evaluate safety case arguments against a system architecture model2012In: Proceedings of International Symposium on Software Reliability Engineering Workshops, ISSREW, 2012, 337-342 p.Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    For a large and complex safety-critical system, where safety is ensured by a strict control over many properties, the safety information is structured into a safety case. As a small change to the system design may potentially affect a large section of the safety argumentation, a systematic method for evaluating the impact of system changes on the safety argumentation would be valuable. We have chosen two of the most common notations: the Goal Structuring Notation (GSN) for the safety argumentation and the Architecture Analysis and Design Language (AADL) for the system architecture model. In this paper, we address the problem of impact analysis by introducing the GSN and AADL Graph Evaluation (GAGE) method that maps safety argumentation structure against system architecture, which is also a prerequisite for successful composition of modular safety cases. In order to validate the method, we have implemented the GAGE tool that supports the mapping between the GSN and AADL notations and highlight changes in impact on the argumentation. © 2012 IEEE.

  • 4.
    Bosnic, Ivana
    et al.
    University of Zagreb.
    Cavrak, Igor
    University of Zagreb.
    Zagar, Mario
    University of Zagreb.
    Land, Rikard
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Crnkovic, Ivica
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Customers' Role in Teaching Distributed Software Development2010In: Software Engineering Education Conference, Proceedings, Pittsburgh, PA, USA, 2010, 73-80 p.Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    This paper describes different aspects of teaching distributed software development, regarding the types of project customers: industry and academia. These approaches enable students to be more engaged in real-world situations, by having customers from the industry, local or distributed customers in universities, distributed customers in software engineering contests or being involved in an ongoing project, thus simulating the company merging. The methods we describe are used in a distributed project-oriented course, which is jointly carried out by two universities from Sweden and Croatia. The paper presents our experiences of such projects being done during the course, the differences in each approach, issues observed and ways to solve them, in order to create a more engaging education for better-prepared engineers of tomorrow.

  • 5.
    Causevic, Adnan
    et al.
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Krasteva, Iva
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Land, Rikard
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Sajeev, Abdulkadir
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Sundmark, Daniel
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    A Survey on Industrial Software Engineering2009In: AGILE PROCESSES IN SOFTWARE ENGINEERING AND EXTREME PROGRAMMING, Springer, 2009, 240-241 p.Chapter in book (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    In this paper, we present on-going work on data collected by a questionnaire surveying process practices, preferences, and methods in industrial software engineering.

  • 6.
    Causevic, Adnan
    et al.
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Krasteva, Iva
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering. Sofia University.
    Land, Rikard
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Sajeev, Abdulkadir
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering. University of New England, Australia.
    Sundmark, Daniel
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    An Industrial Survey on Software Process Practices, Preferences and Methods2009Report (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    This report presents the questionnaire questions and responses of a web-based survey conducted during early spring 2009. It was intended to survey current processes, practices, and methods in the software industry. The report contains no analysis of the data, but is intended to be a reference for other publications, both by ourselves, but by making the data publicly available, also by others.

  • 7.
    Dersten, Sara
    et al.
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Fröberg, Joakim
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Axelsson, Jakob
    Volvo CE, Eskilstuna.
    Land, Rikard
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Analysis of the Business Effects of Software Architecture Refactoring in an Automotive Development Organization2010In: Proceedings - 36th EUROMICRO Conference on Software Engineering and Advanced Applications, SEAA 2010, 2010, 269-278 p.Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    This paper presents an exploratory study of an automotive manufacturer, which develops embedded software for over 150 products and has adopted a company-wide software product-line approach. The company is facing the introduction of a new software architecture in all products in near time. This architecture introduces new paradigms more explicitly, such as explicit software components and signal-based communication, newer technologies, and adheres to new standards. Concretely, the architecture consists of common infrastructure and other generic components. Such a fundamental and drastic technology change can be expected to have far-reaching consequences, both of technical and non-technical nature. In this study we systematically investigate the introduction of the new software architecture, by mapping individual elements of the architectural change to system properties and company functions. The study implies that the whole organization is affected, and the new architecture also influences the cooperation with suppliers.

  • 8.
    Fredriksson, Johan
    et al.
    Mälardalen University, Department of Computer Science and Electronics.
    Land, Rikard
    Mälardalen University, Department of Computer Science and Electronics.
    Packaging Component-Analysis for Reuse2007Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Component-Based Software Engineering (CBSE) promises an improved ability to reuse software which would potentially decrease the development time while also improving the quality of the system, since the components are (re-)used by many. However, CBSE has not been as successful in the embedded systems domain as in the desktop domain, partly because requirements on embedded systems are stricter (e.g. requirements on safety, real-time and minimizing hardware resources). Moreover these requirements differ between industrial domains. Paradoxically, components should be context-unaware to be reusable at the same time as they should be context sensitive in order to be predictable and resource efficient. This seems to be a fundamental problem to overcome before the CBSE paradigm will be successful also in the embedded systems domain. Another problem is that some of the stricter requirements for embedded systems require certain analyses to be made, which may be very complicated and time-consuming for the system developer.

    This paper describes how one particular kind of analysis, of worst-case execution time, would fit into the CBSE development processes so that the component developer performs some analyses and presents the results in a form that is easily used for component and system verification during system development. This process model is not restricted to worst-case execution time analysis, but we believe other types of analyses could be performed in a similar way.

  • 9.
    Fredriksson, Johan
    et al.
    Mälardalen University, Department of Computer Science and Electronics. CC Systems, Västerås, Sweden.
    Land, Rikard
    Mälardalen University, Department of Computer Science and Electronics.
    Reusable Component Analysis for Component-Based Embedded Real-Time Systems2007In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Information Technology Interfaces, ITI, 2007, 2007, 615-620 p.Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Component-Based Software Engineering (CBSE) promises an improved ability to reuse software which would potentially decrease the development time while also improving the quality of the system, since the components are (re-)used by many. However, CBSE has not been as successful in the embedded systems domain as in the desktop domain, partly because requirements on embedded systems are stricter (e.g. requirements on safety, real-time and minimizing hardware resources). Moreover these requirements differ between industrial domains. Paradoxically, components should be context-unaware to be reusable at the same time as they should be context sensitive in order to be predictable and resource efficient. This seems to be a fundamental problem to overcome before the CBSE paradigm will be successful also in the embedded systems domain. Another problem is that some of the stricter requirements for embedded systems require certain analyses to be made, which may be very complicated and time-consuming for the system developer.

    This paper describes how one particular kind of analysis, of worst-case execution time, would fit into the CBSE development processes so that the component developer performs some analyses and presents the results in a form that is easily used for component and system verification during system development. This process model is not restricted to worst-case execution time analysis, but we believe other types of analyses could be performed in a similar way.

  • 10.
    Hjertström, Andreas
    et al.
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Nyström, Dag
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Sjödin, Mikael
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Land, Rikard
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Design-Time Management of Run-Time Data in Industrial Embedded Real-Time Systems Development2008In: Proceedings of 13th IEEE International Conference on Emerging Technologies and Factory Automation (ETFA'08), IEEE Industrial Electronics Society, Hamburg, Germany, 2008, 1285-1293 p.Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Efficient design-time management and documentation of run-time data elements are of paramount importance when developing and maintaining modern real-time systems. In this paper, we present the results of an industrial case-study in which we have studied the state of practice in data management and documentation. Representatives from five companies within various business segments have been interviewed and our results show that various aspects of current data management and documentation are problematic and not yet mature. Results show that companies today have a fairly good management of distributed signals, while internal ECU signals and states are, in many cases, not managed at all. This lack of internal data management results in costly development and maintenance and is often entirely dependent of the know-how of single individual experts.

    Furthermore, it has, in several cases, resulted in unused and excessive data in the systems due to the fact that

    whether or not a data is used is unknown.

  • 11.
    Krasteva, Iva
    et al.
    Mälardalen University, Department of Computer Science and Electronics.
    Branger, Per
    Mälardalen University, Department of Computer Science and Electronics.
    Land, Rikard
    Mälardalen University, Department of Computer Science and Electronics.
    A Systematic Comparison of Agile Principles and the Fundaments of Component-Based Software Development2007Report (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    This report presents a systematic comparison of the principles of agile software development and the fundaments of component-based software development with COTS (Commercial Off-the-Shelf) components. The fundamental assumptions and inherent characteristics of the two fields are compared, and any theoretical incompatibilities are reported. The study is limited to include only development activities, which are [31]: requirements, design, development, verification and validation, and integration. We do not consider activities such as project management, configuration management, maintenance and evolution, and documentation. Furthermore, the study concerns development with COTS components, not other types of component-based development, such as [15]: product-line development (where components are built in-house) or architecture-driven development (i.e. top-down design decomposition resulting in components to be developed in-house).

    This theoretical study should be seen as a first phase, laying the foundation for further empirical studies in an industrial setting. These two steps are well-defined parts of the research agenda of the established PROGRESS Centre for Predictable Embedded Software Systems and also the ITEA2 FLEXI project of which we are part.

  • 12.
    Krasteva, Iva
    et al.
    Sofia University.
    Branger, Per
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Land, Rikard
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Challenges for Agile Development of COTS Components and COTS-Based Systems - A Theoretical Examination2008In: ENASE 2008 - Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Evaluation of Novel Approaches to Software Engineering, 2008, 99-106 p.Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Component-based software engineering has had great impact in the desktop and server domain and is spreading to other domains as well, such as embedded systems. Agile software development is another approach which has gained much attention in recent years, mainly for smaller-scale production of less critical systems. Both of them promise to increase system quality, development speed and flexibility, but so far little has been published on the combination of the two approaches. This paper presents a comprehensive analysis of the applicability of the agile approach in the development processes of 1) COTS components and 2) COTS-based systems. The study method is a systematic theoretical examination and comparison of the fundamental concepts and characteristics of these approaches. The contributions are: first, an enumeration of identified contradictions between the approaches, and suggestions how to bridge these incompatibilities to some extent. Second, the paper provides some more general comments, considerations, and application guidelines concerning the introduction of agile principles into the development of COTS components or COTS-based systems. This study thus forms a framework which will guide further empirical studies.

  • 13.
    Krasteva, Iva
    et al.
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Land, Rikard
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Sajeev, Abdulkadir
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Being Agile when Developing Software Components and Component-Based Systems – Experiences from Industry2009In: EuroSPI, Madrid, Spain, 2009Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]
    Building software from components has some potential benefits in terms of reusing proven solutions and reducing time-to-market. However, component-based paradigm is sometimes in conflict with certain agile principles and practices, such as being responsive to change. This paper presents the results of a web-based survey investigating how industry today tries to manage these challenges. Based on the same data we also describe the preferences of industry professionals for improving development processes in their projects by introducing certain practices. A quantitative analysis using paired-samples t-tests has shown significant differences between current practices and process preferences for both component developers and component users, and the conclusion is that practitioners in general want less rigidity than in their respective currently performed practices.
  • 14.
    Land, Rikard
    Mälardalen University, Department of Computer Science and Electronics.
    An architectural approach to software evolution and integration2003Licentiate thesis, comprehensive summary (Other scientific)
  • 15.
    Land, Rikard
    Mälardalen University, Department of Computer Science and Electronics.
    Interviews on Software Systems Merge2006Report (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    As a follow-up to previous research on software in-house integration, we have studied a case where integration has been achieved by means of developing and reusing components of the system from previously two separate systems. As an important part of this research, a number of interviews with people from an industrial project have been carried out. The present report describes the methodology used to set up these interviews and contains the full notes made during the interviews. No analysis of the results is made.

  • 16.
    Land, Rikard
    Mälardalen University, Department of Computer Science and Electronics.
    Software Systems In-House Integration: Observations and Guidelines Concerning Architecture and Process2006Doctoral thesis, comprehensive summary (Other scientific)
    Abstract [en]

    Software evolution is a crucial activity for software organizations. A specifc type of software evolution is the integration of previously isolated systems. The need for integration is often a consequence of different organizational changes, including merging of previously separate organizations. One goal of software integration is to increase the value to users of several systems by combining their functionality, another is to reduce functionality overlap. If the systems are completely owned and controlled in-house, there is an additional advantage in rationalizing the use of internal resources by decreasing the amount of software with essentially the same purpose. Despite in-house integration being common, this topic has received little attention from researchers. This thesis contributes to an increasing understanding of the problems associated with in-house integration and provides guidelines to the more efficient utilization of the existing systems and the personnel.

    In the thesis, we combine two perspectives: software architecture and processes. The perspective of software architecture is used to show how compatibility analysis and development of integration alternatives can be performed rapidly at a high level of abstraction. The software process perspective has led to the identification of important characteristics and practices of the integration process. The guidelines provided in the thesis will help those performing future in-house integration to make well-founded decisions timely and efficiently.

    The contributions are based on several integration projects in industry, which have been studied systematically in order to collect, evaluate and generalize their experiences.

  • 17.
    Land, Rikard
    et al.
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Alvaro, Alexandre
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Crnkovic, Ivica
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Towards Efficient Software Component Evaluation: An Examination of Component Selection and Certification2008In: PROCEEDINGS OF THE 34TH EUROMICRO CONFERENCE ON SOFTWARE ENGINEERING AND ADVANCED APPLICATIONS, 2008, 274-281 p.Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    When software systems incorporate existing software components, there is a need to evaluate these components. Component evaluation is of two kinds according to literature: component certification is performed by an independent actor to provide a trustworthy assessment of the component's properties in general, and component selection is performed by a system development organization. While this principle is in general understood, in practice the certification process is neither established nor well defined. This paper outlines the relationship between the evaluations performed during certification and selection. We start from the current state of practice and research and a) propose a component-based life cycle for COTS-based development and software product line development, b) identify a number of differences in process characteristics between the two types of evaluation, and c) classify concrete quality properties based on their suitability to be evaluated during certification (when there is no system context) and/or during system development.

  • 18.
    Land, Rikard
    et al.
    Mälardalen University, Department of Computer Science and Electronics.
    Blankers, Laurens
    Mälardalen University, Department of Computer Science and Electronics.
    Classifying and Consolidating Software Component Selection Methods2007Report (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    Virtually all software systems built today include pre-existing components developed by others (OTS, Off-the-Shelf or COTS, Commercial ditto). This trend has been accompanied by research into, among others, methods for evaluating and selecting components to use in a system. This paper presents a literature survey of the software component selection methods published to date. Based on this survey, a meta-model is presented, which allows for easy comparison of the methods. For each part of the meta-model, we present the best practices collected from all the existing models, thus presenting the collected experience of many research efforts in a checklist-like way. The model and practices presented are useful when choosing a method for a particular project.

  • 19.
    Land, Rikard
    et al.
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Blankers, Laurens
    Chaudron, Michel
    Crnkovic, Ivica
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    COTS Selection Best Practices in Literature and in Industry2008In: LECTURE NOTES IN COMPUTER SCIENCE, vol. 5030, Springer, 2008, 100-111 p.Chapter in book (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    This paper presents an extensive literature survey of the software COTS component selection methods published to date, followed by a meta-model consolidating the activities and practices of these methods. Together with data collected from practitioners and researchers in the embedded systems domain, we provide concrete recommendations which will enable organizations to identify suitable practices when designing a customized selection processes.

  • 20.
    Land, Rikard
    et al.
    Mälardalen University, Department of Computer Science and Electronics.
    Carlson, Jan
    Larsson, Stig
    Crnkovic, Ivica
    Merging In-House Developed Software Systems: A Method for Exploring Alternatives2006In: Perspectives in Software Architecture Quality: Short papers of the 2nd International Conference on the Quality of Software Architectures (QoSA 2006), June 27-29, 2006, Västeras, Sweden, Universität Karlsruhe , 2006, 13-23 p.Chapter in book (Other academic)
  • 21.
    Land, Rikard
    et al.
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Carlson, Jan
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Larsson, Stig
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Crnkovic, Ivica
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Project Monitoring and Control In Model-Driven and Component-Based Development of Embedded Systems : The CARMA Principle and Preliminary Results2010In: ENASE 2010 - Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Evaluation of Novel Approaches to Software Engineering, 2010, 253-258 p.Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    This position paper describes how the combination of the Model-Driven Development (MDD) and Component-Based Software Engineering (CBSE) paradigms can support project monitoring and control, and project risk reduction. The core principle for this is articulated and named CARMA, and our research agenda and preliminary results are described. Through interviews, industry input, process simulation, tool implementation and pilot projects, and describing an extension of CMMI, we are exploring the CARMA principle in order to provide guidelines for MDD/CBSE projects.

  • 22.
    Land, Rikard
    et al.
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Carlson, Jan
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Larsson, Stig
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Crnkovic, Ivica
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    The Progress Process Guidelines (PPG)2010Report (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    This report proposes how the emerging model-driven and component-based paradigms can be utilized in embedded systems development to achieve a potentially high level of project monitoring and control, and thus reduce project risks. The guidelines are formulated as an extension of CMMI.

  • 23.
    Land, Rikard
    et al.
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Carlson, Jan
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Larsson, Stig
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Crnkovic, Ivica
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Towards Guidelines for a Development Process for Component-Based Embedded Systems2009In: COMPUTATIONAL SCIENCE AND ITS APPLICATIONS - ICCSA 2009, Springer, 2009, 43-58 p.Chapter in book (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Software is more and more built from pre-existing components. This is true also for the embedded software domain, and there is a need to consider how development processes need to be changed to best utilize the component-based paradigm, and how processes and technologies must be designed to support each other. To facilitate this change towards component-based embedded software, this paper presents a set of process guidelines, named the Progress Process Guidelines (PPG), which is based on the structure of CMMI. This paper presents the structure of the PPG, and presents and analyzes the PPG parts which most closely relate to system verification, which is typically an important and difficult activity for embedded software.

  • 24.
    Land, Rikard
    et al.
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Crnkovic, Ivica
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Oh Dear, We Bought Our Competitor: Integrating Similar Software Systems2011In: IEEE Software, ISSN 0740-7459, E-ISSN 1937-4194, Vol. 28, no 2, 75-82 p.Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    How do you transition from several functionally overlapping systems to just one? A look at 10 case studies addresses the technological, personnel, and organizational challenges.

  • 25.
    Land, Rikard
    et al.
    Mälardalen University, Department of Computer Science and Electronics.
    Crnkovic, Ivica
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Software Systems In-House Integration: Architecture, Process Practices and Strategy Selection2007In: Information and Software Technology, ISSN 0950-5849, Vol. 49, no 5, 419-444 p.Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    As organizations merge or collaborate closely, an important question is how their existing software assets should be handled. If these previously separate organizations are in the same business domain - they might even have been competitors - it is likely that they have developed similarsoftware systems. To rationalize, these existing software assets should be integrated, in the sense that similar features should be implemented only once. The integration can be achieved in different ways. Success of it involves properly managing challenges such as making as well founded decisions as early as possible, maintaining commitment within the organization, managing the complexities of distributed teams, and synchronizing theintegration efforts with concurrent evolution of the existing systems. This paper presents a multiple case study involving nine cases of such in-houseintegration processes. Based both on positive and negative experiences of the cases, we pinpoint crucial issues to consider early in the process, and suggest a number of process practices.

  • 26.
    Land, Rikard
    et al.
    Mälardalen University, Department of Computer Science and Electronics.
    Crnkovic, Ivica
    Mälardalen University, Department of Computer Science and Electronics.
    Software Systems Integration and Architectural Analysis: A Case Study2003In: IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance, ICSM2003, 2003, 338-347 p.Conference paper (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    Software systems no longer evolve as separate entities but are also integrated with each other. The purpose of integrating software systems can be to increase user-value or to decrease maintenance costs. Different approaches, one of which is software architectural analysis, can be used in the process of integration planning and design. This paper presents a case study in which three software systems were to be integrated. We show how architectural reasoning was used to design and compare integration alternatives. In particular, four different levels of the integration were discussed (interoperation, a so-called Enterprise Application Integration, an integration based on a common data model, and a full integration). We also show how cost, time to delivery and maintainability of the integrated solution were estimated. On the basis of the case study, we analyze the advantages and limits of the architectural approach as such and conclude by outlining directions for future research: how to incorporate analysis of cost, time to delivery, and risk in architectural analysis, and how to make architectural analysis more suitable for comparing many aspects of many alternatives during development. Finally we outline the limitations of architectural analysis.

  • 27.
    Land, Rikard
    et al.
    Mälardalen University, Department of Computer Science and Electronics.
    Crnkovic, Ivica
    Mälardalen University, Department of Computer Science and Electronics.
    Wallin, Christina
    Mälardalen University, Department of Computer Science and Electronics.
    Integration of Software Systems: Process Challenges2003In: Conference Proceedings of the EUROMICRO2003, 2003, 413-416 p.Conference paper (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    The assumptions, requirements, and goals of integrating existing software systems are different compared to other software activities such as maintenance and development, implying that the integration processes should be different. But where there are similarities, proven processes should be used. We analyze the process used by a recently merged company, with the goal of deciding on an integration approach for three systems. We point out observations that illustrate key elements of such a process, as well as challenges for the future.

  • 28.
    Land, Rikard
    et al.
    Mälardalen University, Department of Computer Science and Electronics.
    Lakotic, Miroslav
    A Tool for Exploring Software Systems Merge Alternatives2006In: International ERCIM Workshop on Software Evolution, 2006, 113-118 p.Conference paper (Other academic)
  • 29.
    Land, Rikard
    et al.
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Sundmark, Daniel
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Lüders, Frank
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Krasteva, Iva
    Sofia University.
    Causevic, Adnan
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Reuse with Software Components – A Survey of Industrial State of Practice2009In: FORMAL FOUNDATIONS OF REUSE AND DOMAIN ENGINEERING, PROCEEDINGS, Springer, 2009, 150-159 p.Chapter in book (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Software is often built from pre-existing, reusable components, but there is a lack of knowledge regarding how efficient this is in practice. In this paper we therefore present qualitative results from an industrial survey on current practices and preferences, highlighting differences and similarities between development with reusable components, development without reusable components, and development of components for reuse. Component reuse does happen, but the findings are still partly disappointing: currently, many potential benefits are not achieved. Still, the findings are encouraging: there are indeed good, reusable components properly verified and documented, and mature organizations who manage to reuse these components efficiently, e.g. by leveraging the previous component verification. We also find that replacing one component for another is not necessarily complicated and costly.

  • 30.
    Land, Rikard
    et al.
    Mälardalen University, Department of Computer Science and Electronics.
    Thilenius, Peter
    Mälardalen University, Department of Computer Science and Electronics.
    Larsson, Stig
    Mälardalen University, Department of Computer Science and Electronics.
    Crnkovic, Ivica
    Mälardalen University, Department of Computer Science and Electronics.
    A Quantitative Survey on Software In-house Integration2006Report (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    As organizations merge or collaborate closely, an important question is how their existing software assets should be handled. If these previously separate organizations are in the same business domain - they might even have been competitors - it is likely that they have developed similar software systems. To rationalize, these existing software assets should be integrated, in the sense that similar features should be implemented only once.

    We have previously made qualitative observations on this topic. This report describes the follow-up study, which was performed in the form of a questionnaire aimed at validating and quantifying the previous observations. This report describes the research design, present the questionnaire together with all responses, and make some statistical analyses. This will form a basis for further publications with deeper analyses.

  • 31.
    Land, Rikard
    et al.
    Mälardalen University, Department of Computer Science and Electronics.
    Thilenius, Peter
    Mälardalen University, Department of Computer Science and Electronics.
    Larsson, Stig
    Mälardalen University, Department of Computer Science and Electronics.
    Crnkovic, Ivica
    Mälardalen University, Department of Computer Science and Electronics.
    Software In-House Integration: Quantified Experiences from Industry2006In: Proceedings 32nd Euromicro Conference onSoftware Engineering and Advanced Applications (SEAA), 2006, 198-205 p.Conference paper (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    When an organization faces new types of collaboration, for example after a company merger, there is a need to consolidate the existing in-house developed software. There are many high-level strategic decisions to be made, which should be based on as good foundation as possible, while these decisions must be made rapidly. Also, one must employ feasible processes and practices in order to get the two previously separate organizations to work towards a common goal. In order to study this topic, we previously performed an explorative and qualitative multiple case study, where we identified a number of suggested practices as well as other concerns to take into account. This paper presents a follow-up study, which aims at validating and quantifying these previous findings. This study includes a questionnaire distributed to in-house integration projects, aiming at validation of earlier findings. We compare the data to our previous conclusions, present observations on retirement of the existing systems and on the technical similarities of the existing systems. We also present some practices considered important but often neglected.

  • 32.
    Land, Rikard
    et al.
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Åkerholm, Mikael
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Carlson, Jan
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Efficient Software Component Reuse in Safety-Critical Systems – An Empirical Study2012In: Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 7612, Springer, 2012, 388-399 p.Chapter in book (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    The development of software components to be reused in safety-critical systems involves a number of challenges. These are related to both the goals of using the component in several systems, with different definitions of system-specific hazards, and on the high demands of today’s safety standards, which assume a top-down system and software development process. A large part of the safety-related activities is therefore left for integrator, and there is a risk that a pre-existing component will neither be feasible nor more efficient to use than internal development of the same functionality. In this paper we address five important challenges, based on an empirical study consisting of interviews with experts in the field, and a case study. The result is twelve concrete practices found to improve the overall efficiency of such component development, and their subsequent reuse. These are related to the component architecture and configuration interface, component and system testing and verification, and the information to be provided with the component.

  • 33.
    Lindgren, Markus
    et al.
    ABB Force Measurement.
    Land, Rikard
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Norström, Christer
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Wall, Anders
    ABB Corporate Research.
    Key Aspects of Software Release Planning in Industry2008In: Proceedings of the Australian Software Engineering Conference, ASWEC, IEEE Computer Society , 2008, 320-329 p.Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Software release planning is the process of deciding what to include in future release(s) of a product. Basically the problem can be seen as a company-wide optimization problem involving many stakeholders where the goal is to maximize utilization of the often limited resources of a company and turn them into business benefit. Saliu and Ruhe have proposed a set of key aspects for release planning methods, of which only a subset have been validated in industry. In this paper we use the Saliu and Ruhe key aspects as a starting point for identifying key aspects of release planning. To do this we have performed a multiple case study involving 7 international industrial companies, all producers of software intensive products. Our contribution is (1) a more strict meaning of a release planning key aspect, (2) validation of some of the aspects proposed by Saliu and Ruhe, and (3) an extension of the key aspects. We also capture state-of-the-practice for release planning in industry.

  • 34.
    Lindgren, Markus
    et al.
    ABB Force Measurement, Sweden.
    Land, Rikard
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Norström, Christer
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Wall, Anders
    ABB Corporate Research, Sweden.
    Towards a Capability Model for the Software Release Planning Process — Based on a Multiple Industrial Case Study2008In: In Proc. 9th International Conference on Product Focused Software Process Improvement, Berlin / Heidelberg: Springer , 2008, 117-132 p.Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Software release planning is an important activity for effectively identifying the customer needs generating best business, especially for incremental software development. In this paper we propose a capability model for improving the release planning process of an organization. Using this model it is possible to 1) determine the capabilities of an organization’s release planning process, and 2) identify areas for improvement. The model is based on empirical data from a multiple case study involving 7 industrial companies, all being producers of software intensive systems. We also provide examples of how the proposed capability model can be applied using the companies from the study.

  • 35.
    Lindgren, Markus
    et al.
    ABB Force Measurement.
    Norström, Christer
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Wall, Anders
    ABB Corporate Research.
    Land, Rikard
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Importance of Software Architecture during Release Planning2008In: 7th IEEE/IFIP Working Conference on Software Architecture, WICSA 2008, IEEE Computer Society , 2008, 253-256 p.Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Release planning is the process of deciding what to include in future release(s) of a product. In this paper we look at how software architects are involved during release planning in industry today, and how architectural issues are considered during this phase.

  • 36.
    Lindgren, Markus
    et al.
    ABB Force Measurement.
    Wall, Anders
    ABB Corporate Research.
    Land, Rikard
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Norström, Christer
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    A Method for Balancing Short- and Long-Term Investments: Quality vs. Features2008In: EUROMICRO 2008 - Proceedings of the 34th EUROMICRO Conference on Software Engineering and Advanced Applications, SEAA 2008, IEEE Computer Society , 2008, 175-182 p.Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    There are a number of conflicting forces between shortand long-term considerations for software release planning in industry. For example, from a business perspective it is usually desired with a short time-to-market. However, from software quality perspective it is usually desired to have a longer time-to-market such that the proper architectural mechanisms can be put in place, which in the long-term reduce development cost and addresses quality aspects. In this paper we outline some of these conflicting forces, with a focus on long-lived systems, and examplify how they impact product quality and time-to-market. In this paper we propose a simple, but useful, extensionof the release planning process that addresses these conflicting forces. The method is inspired from empirical data captured in a multiple case study involving 7 companies.

  • 37.
    Paveti, B.
    et al.
    Infodom D.o.o, Zagreb, Croatia .
    Land, Rikard
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Leverage simulation for analyzing CBSE/MDD development process of embedded systems2010In: SoftCOM 2010 - International Conference on Software, Telecommunications and Computer Networks, 2010, 375-379 p.Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Distributed embedded systems usually have strict quality requirements which need to be verified, and the allocation of software to hardware needs to be considered throughout the whole development process. In this paper, we present usage of simulation in analyzing development process of embedded systems using CARMA principle which combines two paradigms - Component-Based Software Engineering and Model Driven Development. In development process two types of parallel modeling of hardware are distinguished: modeling of a virtual hardware structure and of the physical structure. Two kinds of verification activities are introduced: milestone verification, which integrates the product requirements into the process through frequent analyses and measurements of the development artifacts, and exploratory analysis, which is informal and carried out by individual developers, similar to debugging. Based on the process model, we have constructed a queuing network model, used for simulations to further explore the characteristics of the development model. Initial simulations give by hand that by increasing the amount of analysis and verification in a project, more errors are found with the same amount of effort and time. There are also dependencies on project risks and the strength of the analysis tool support.

  • 38.
    Pei Breivold, Hongyu
    et al.
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Crnkovic, Ivica
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Land, Rikard
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Larsson, Stig
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Using Dependency Model to Support Software Architecture Evolution2008In: Automated Software Engineering - Workshops, 2008. ASE Workshops 2008. 23rd IEEE/ACM International Conference on, 2008, 82-91 p.Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Evolution of software systems is characterized by inevitable changes of software and increasing software complexity, which in turn may lead to huge maintenance and development costs.  For long-lived systems, there is a need to address and maintain evolvability (i.e. a system’s ability to easily accommodate changes) during the entire lifecycle. As designing software for ease of extension and contraction depends on how well the software structure is organized, this paper explores the relationships between evolvability, modularity and inter-module dependency. Through a case study of an industrial power control and protection system, we describe our work in managing its software architecture evolution, guided by the dependency analysis at the architectural level.  The paper includes also the main analysis results, our experiences and reflections during the dependency analysis process in the case study.

  • 39.
    Pei Breivold, Hongyu
    et al.
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering. ABB Corporate Research.
    Larsson, Stig
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering. ABB Corporate Research.
    Land, Rikard
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Migrating Industrial Systems towards Software Product Lines: Experiences and Observations through Case Studies2008In: EUROMICRO 2008 - Proceedings of the 34th EUROMICRO Conference on Software Engineering and Advanced Applications, SEAA 2008, 2008, 232-239 p.Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Software product line engineering has emerged as one of the dominant paradigms for developing variety of software products based on a shared platform and shared software artifacts. An important and challenging type of software maintenance and evolution is how to cost-effectively manage the migration of legacy systems towards product lines. This paper presents a structured migration method and describes our experiences in migrating industrial legacy systems into product lines. In addition, we present a number of specific recommendations for the transition process which will be of value to organizations that are considering a product line approach to their business. The recommendations cover four perspectives: business, organization, product development processes and technology.

  • 40.
    Pei-Breivold, Hongyu
    et al.
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Crnkovic, Ivica
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Land, Rikard
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Larsson, Magnus
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Analyzing Software Evolvability of an Industrial Automation Control System: A Case Study2008In: Proceedings - The 3rd International Conference on Software Engineering Advances, ICSEA 2008, 2008, 205-213 p.Conference paper (Refereed)
  • 41.
    Sajeev, A.
    et al.
    School of Science & Technology, University of New England, Armidale, NSW 2351, Australia.
    Land, Rikard
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Krasteva, Iva
    Sofia University.
    Punnekkat, Sasikumar
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Software Process Practices and Preferences: A Pilot StudyIn: Journal of Software Maintenance& Evolution: Research& PracticeArticle in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    This paper reports the findings of a pilot study into process practices among industry professionals. The aim of the study is twofold: (a) to gather empirical evidence regarding the practices that distinguish different process models and (b) to study the significant differences between current process practices and personal preferences of software professionals. The research method used is to develop a process differentiation model, use the model to conduct a survey of practices and preferences, and perform a quantitative analysis of the responses. Forty two professionals, mainly European software engineers, participated in the study. The main results are the following: Among agile developers, the two strongest practices are frequent progress meetings, and incremental design and coding, however, there is no statistically significant agreement on customer involvement, test-driven development and welcoming requirements change. The average waterfall developer works within a significantly more hierarchical organizational structure compared to their adaptive process counterparts. For agile practitioners, refactoring and test driven development are areas where there needs to be improvement over current practices. Preferences of adaptive software developers include: improving processes and procedures, regular interaction between developers and customers, and incremental development. Surprisingly, users of the waterfall process indicated a preference for a number of agile practices such as test driven development, regular interaction between customers and developers, and flexible team formation.

  • 42.
    Åkerholm, Mikael
    et al.
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Land, Rikard
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Towards Systematic Software Reuse in Certifiable Safety-Critical Systems2009In: International Workshop on Software Reuse and Safety, Falls Church, VA, 2009Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]
    Safety-critical systems and subsystems are often developed as a new generation of a previous system, or as a variant of a system already developed and put into operation. However, in our experience, even in such cases, where large parts of the systems are actually reused, organizations implement very much the same heavy processes as for new development. This is partly because during a safety assessment the evidence needed to motivate the desired level of system safety calls for coherent documentation of the complete system development project. We believe the reuse process can be adapted to be more efficient, while still being compatible with safety standards, by adopting a state-of-the-art structured component-based reuse approach incorporating the specific safety activities that the standards mandate. This position paper outlines our planned research, which will consist of two parts: the first part is an interview study of industrial cases, in order to identify good practices to employ and pitfalls to avoid. In the second part we will implement the most promising practices in suitable industrial projects for evaluation.
  • 43.
    Åkerholm, Mikael
    et al.
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Land, Rikard
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Strzyz, Christian
    CC Systems.
    Can you afford not to certify your control system?2009Other (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    Industrial vehicles typically contain heavy moving parts which obviously may harm people if they do not behave as intended, or if they do not properly protect people. At the same time electronic control systems are responsible for more and more of the core functionality in the vehicles, e.g., engine control, braking, and steering; and the functions performed by the vehicles, e.g., buckets, cranes, or drills. Thus, it should be no surprise that legislative and standardization authorities around the world currently increase the pressure on vehicle manufacturers to comply with safety standards for their electronic systems, e.g., the updated EU machinery directive, (EU Directive 2006/42/EC) planned to take legal effect at the end of 2009, the safety standard for earth moving machinery (ISO15998) from 2008, the safety standard for the safety-related parts of machinery (ISO13849) from 2006, the safety standard for programmable electronic control systems in machinery (IEC62061) from 2005, the general standard for safety related electronics (IEC61508) from 2005, and the upcoming safety standard for road vehicles (ISO26262). The whole safety area for electronic control systems may at first seem an insurmountable number of additional requirements to comply with. Nevertheless, there is not really any other choice than to work according to these standards. Even when there are no strict legislative requirements, the market will most certain gradually increase expectations on products to be certified according to the relevant safety standards, and it will be a competitive advantage to do so. Furthermore, among other advantages, following established safety standards may be the lifesaver in case of a lawsuit. And, in the end, it must not be forgotten that these requirements have been formulated in order to protect the safety of machine operators and the public. Thus, although these safety standards will imply extra development activities, one must have the attitude that these are not a burden which can be compromised in order to meet budgets and delivery deadlines.

  • 44.
    Åkerholm, Mikael
    et al.
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Land, Rikard
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Törngren, Martin
    Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.
    Seminar report: Functional safety - emerging, changing and integrating standards and applications2010Report (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    The seminar on Functional Safety, jointly organized by CC Systems, KTH/ICES and MDH/MRTC, was a great success with 39 participants from 14 organizations. The background and motivation for the seminar was the increasing attention placed on functional safety. Machines with embedded electronic systems are performing more and more advanced functions, vehicles are becoming autonomous and robots can work unshielded in the factories. While new functionalities promise enhanced safety and improved performance, they are also associated with new faults, failure modes and risks. Also for this reason, safety engineering has to evolve. This evolution is reflected in changed legislation and new and updated international standards. These updates reflect both an increasing attention from the public, as well as advances in research and industry. The seminar had the purpose to shed light on evolving and emerging laws and safety standards for vehicles and machines including robots. The seminar included presentations on the Machinery directive and its relations to standards, the ISO DIS 26262 Automotive standard, the ISO-15998 (earth moving machinery), the IEC61508 as well as scientific challenges for functional safety. The afternoon concluded with a panel debate: "Are we entering a safety era?".

1 - 44 of 44
CiteExportLink to result list
Permanent link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf