Date post: | 19-Dec-2015 |
Category: |
Documents |
View: | 214 times |
Download: | 0 times |
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering C S EUSC
MBASE Essentials
SuccessModels
ProcessModels
PropertyModels
ProductModels
Domain Models
Describeenterprisecontext in
Identify andprioritize
Contsrain
Provideparameters for
Guidedevelopmentof
Providemeasuresfor
Setcontext for
Provideparameters for
Stakeholders
Enablesatisficing
Constrain
Serve and Satisfy
Planning and control
Milestone contentProcess models
Life cycle Anchor Points;
Risk managementKey practices
Success models
Business caseIKIWISI
Stakeholder win-win
Product models
Evaluation and analysis
Processentry/exit
criteria
ProductEvaluation
criteria
Domain models;Requirements;Architecture;
Code;Documentation
Property modelsCost
SchedulePerformanceReliability …
1b. Stakeholders IdentifySystem Objectives,Constrains, & Priorities(OC & P’s) AlternativesSolutions Elements
1a. IdentifySuccess-CriticalStakeholders
2a. Evaluate Alternativesw ith respect to OC & P’s
2b. Assess,Address Risks
3. ElaborateProduct andProcessDefinition
4. Verify andValidate Product andProcess Definitions
Stakeholders’Commitment
ProgressThrough Steps
4
5
6
8
2
1
Stakeholders’Review
7
Stylized WinWin Spiral with Activities Mappedto Original Spiral
3
LCOLCACCDIOC
4/30/01 ©USC-CSE 2
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering C S EUSC
Waterfall Misconceptions
4/30/01 ©USC-CSE 3
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering C S EUSC
Outline
• Spiral Model• Life Cycle Anchor Points• MBASE/RUP Activity/Process ModelMBASE/RUP Activity/Process Model• COCOTS: Development ModelCOCOTS: Development Model• MBASE Integration Framework & ProcessMBASE Integration Framework & Process• MBASE ModelsMBASE Models
a lecture on the philosophy behind MBASE,
the types of things MBASE does and why, and an overview of OCD and SSRD
4/30/01 ©USC-CSE 4
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering C S EUSC
Spiral Model
• Original spiral and common misinterpretations
• Six spiral essentials
– Examples and counterexamples
– Relation to CMMI
• Hazardous spiral lookalikes to avoid
4/30/01 ©USC-CSE 5
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering C S EUSC
Original Spiral and Misinterpretations?
• Common Misinterpretations
– Hack some prototypes– Fit spiral into waterfall– Incremental waterfalls– Suppress risk analysis– No concurrency, feedback– One-size-fits-all model
4/30/01 ©USC-CSE 6
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering C S EUSC
“Spiral Development” Definition
• A risk-driven process model generator
• Used to guide concurrent engineering
• Two distinguishing features:– Cyclic approach for growing system definition– Anchor point stakeholder-commitment milestones
RQTS PLANLIFE CYCLE PLAN
CONCEPT OFOPERATION
EMULATIONSMODELS
BENCHMARKS
REVIEW
COMMITMENT,PARTITION
RISK ANALYSIS
RISKANAL.
RISK ANALYSIS
RISK ANALYSIS
PROTO-TYPE1
PROTOTYPE3
OPERATIONALPROTOTYPE
EVALUATEALTERNATIVESIDENTIFY,RESOLVE RISKS
PROGRESSTHROUGHSTEPS
CUMULATIVECOST
DETERMINEOBJECTIVES,ALTERNATIVES,CONSTRAINTS
DEVELOP-MENT PLAN
INTEGRATIONAND TEST
PLAN
DESIGN VALIDATIONAND VERIFICATION
REQUIREMENTSVALIDATION
SOFTWAREPRODUCTDESIGN
DEVELOP, VERIFYNEXT LEVEL PRODUCT
SOFTWARERQTS
IMPLEMEN-TATION
ACCEPT-ANCE TEST
INTEGRA-TION AND
TEST
UNITTEST
CODE
DETAILEDDESIGN
PROTOTYPE2
PLAN NEXTPHASES
4/30/01 ©USC-CSE 7
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering C S EUSC
Six Spiral Model Essentials1. Concurrent determination of artifacts in each
cycle
2. Each cycle addresses objectives, constraints, alternatives, risks, artifact elaboration, stakeholders’ commitment
3. Risk-driven activity level of effort
4. Risk-driven artifact degree of detail
5. Managing stakeholder commitments via anchor-point milestones
6. Emphasis on system and life-cycle issues
- vs. software and development issues
4/30/01 ©USC-CSE 8
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering C S EUSC
Life Cycle Anchor Points• Common System/Software stakeholder commitment
points– Defined in concert with Government, industry affiliates– Coordinated with the Rational Unified Process
• Life Cycle Objectives (LCO) – Stakeholders’ commitment to support architecting – Like getting engaged
• Life Cycle Architecture (LCA)– Stakeholders’ commitment to support full life cycle– Like getting married
• Initial Operational Capability (IOC)– Stakeholders’ commitment to support operations– Like having first child
4/30/01 ©USC-CSE 9
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering C S EUSC
MBASE/RUP Activity/Process ModelMBASE/RUP Activity/Process Model
4/30/01 ©USC-CSE 10
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering C S EUSC
2. COTSTailoring1. COTS
Assessment
3. Glue CodeDevelopment
4. System Effort due to COTS Volatility
New System DevelopmentNot Involving COTS Components
Time
Sta
ffin
gLCO
(Requirements Review)
LCA
(PDR)
IOC
(SAR)
LCO – Lifecycle ObjectivesLCA – Lifecycle ArchitectureIOC – Initial Operational Capability COCOMO II Effort Estimate
COCOTS Effort Estimate
Elaboration
(RR)
Construction
COCOTS: Development ModelCOCOTS: Development Model
4/30/01 ©USC-CSE 11
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering C S EUSC
(Risk-driven level of detail for each element)
*WWWWWHH: Why, What, When, Who, Where, How, How Much
Milestone Element Life Cycle Objectives (LCO) Life Cycle Architecture (LCA)
Definition of OperationalConcept
• Top-level system objectives and scope - System boundary - Environment parameters and assumptions - Evolution parameters• Operational concept - Operations and maintenance scenarios and parameters - Organizational life-cycle responsibilities (stakeholders)
• Elaboration of system objectives and scope of increment• Elaboration of operational concept by increment
• Top-level functions, interfaces, quality attribute levels, including: - Growth vectors and priorities - Prototypes• Stakeholders’ concurrence on essentials
• Elaboration of functions, interfaces, quality attributes, and prototypes by increment - Identification of TBD’s( (to-be-determined items)• Stakeholders’ concurrence on their priority concerns
• Top-level definition of at least one feasible architecture - Physical and logical elements and relationships - Choices of COTS and reusable software elements• Identification of infeasible architecture options
• Choice of architecture and elaboration by increment - Physical and logical components, connectors, configurations, constraints - COTS, reuse choices - Domain-architecture and architectural style choices• Architecture evolution parameters
• Elaboration of WWWWWHH* for Initial Operational Capability (IOC) - Partial elaboration, identification of key TBD’s for later increments
• Assurance of consistency among elements above• All major risks resolved or covered by risk management plan
• Identification of life-cycle stakeholders - Users, customers, developers, maintainers, interoperators, general public, others• Identification of life-cycle process model - Top-level stages, increments• Top-level WWWWWHH* by stage
• Assurance of consistency among elements above - via analysis, measurement, prototyping, simulation, etc. - Business case analysis for requirements, feasible architectures
Definition of SystemRequirements
Definition of Systemand SoftwareArchitecture
Definition of Life-Cycle Plan
FeasibilityRationale
System Prototype(s) • Exercise key usage scenarios• Resolve critical risks
• Exercise range of usage scenarios• Resolve major outstanding risks
Win Win Spiral Anchor Points
4/30/01 ©USC-CSE 12
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering C S EUSC
•Where do objectives, constraints, alternatives come from?
–Win Win extensions
•Lack of intermediate milestones
–Anchor Points: LCO, LCA, IOC
–Concurrent-engineering spirals between anchor points
•Need to avoid model clashes, provide more specific guidance
–MBASE
Spiral Model Refinements
4/30/01 ©USC-CSE 13
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering C S EUSC
MBASE Model Integration Framework
Process models
Life cycle anchorpoints
Risk managementKey practices
Success models
Business caseIKIWISI
Stakeholder win-win
Property modelsCost
SchedulePerformance
Reliability
Product models
Domain modelRequirementsArchitecture
CodeDocumentation
Planning and control
Milestone content
Evaluation andanalysis
Processentry/exitcriteria
Productevaluation
criteria
4/30/01 ©USC-CSE 14
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering C S EUSC
MBASE Invariants and Variants
1. Use of particular success, process, product, or property models.
2. Choice of process or product representation.
3. Degree of detail of process, product, property, or success modeling.
4. Number of spiral cycles or builds between anchor points.
5. Mapping of activities onto Inception-Elaboration-Construction-Transition phases.
6. Mapping of staff levels onto activities.
1. Defining and sustaining a stakeholder win-win relationship through the system's life-cycle.
2. Using the MBASE Model Integration Framework.
3. Using the MBASE Process Integration Framework.
4. Using the LCO, LCA, and IOC Anchor Point milestones.
5. Ensuring that the content of MBASE artifacts and activities is risk-driven.
VariantsInvariants
4/30/01 ©USC-CSE 15
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering C S EUSC
MBASE Model Integration Process
SuccessModels
ProcessModels
PropertyModels
ProductModels
Domain Models
Describeenterprisecontext in
Identify andprioritize
Contsrain
Provideparameters for
Guidedevelopmentof
Providemeasuresfor
Setcontext for
Provideparameters for
Stakeholders
Enablesatisficing
Constrain
Serve and Satisfy
4/30/01 ©USC-CSE 16
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering C S EUSC
IPM1
guideprogress in
selecting, and
serve andsatisfy
… reify …
… intermediate…Product Models
are refinements of
imposeconstraints
on
provideparameters
for
set context for
identify,prioritize
Stakeholders
Success Models
PropertyModels
ProcessModels
Domain/EnvironmentModels
ConceptualProduct Models
Reified ProductModels
IPMn
enable satisficing among
determine therelevance of
provideparameters
for
Provide evaluations for
reifying
WinWinSpiral
Process
Life Cycle
ArchitecturePackage
Plan inLCA
Package
MBASE Process Framework
4/30/01 ©USC-CSE 17
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering C S EUSC
MBASE Model Integration: LCO Stage
Domain Model
WinWin Taxonomy
Basic Conceptof Operation
FrequentRisks
Stakeholders,Primary win conditions
WinWin Negotiation
Model
IKIWISI Model,Prototypes,
Properties Models
EnvironmentModels
WinWin Agreements, Shared Vision
ViableArchitecture
Options
Updated Conceptof Operation
Life Cycle Planelements
Outstanding LCO risks
RequirementsDescription
LCO Rationale
Life Cycle Objectives (LCO) Package
Anchor PointModel
determinesidentifiesidentifiesdetermines
situates exercise exercise focususe of
focus use of determines
guidesdetermination of validate
inputs for
provides
initialize adopt identify identify
update update
achieveiterate to feasibility, consistency determines exit
criteria for validates readiness of
initializes
4/30/01 ©USC-CSE 18
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering C S EUSC
MBASE Models*
IterationsRelease DescriptionTest PlanTest ResultsPeer Review ReportUsers Manual
CTS
OCD
Shared VisionSystem CapabilitiesKey StakeholdersSystem Boundary & EnvironmentTop-Level Business Case
Domain & OrganizationDescription
Proposed SystemPrototyping
Proj. Reqts.Capability Reqts.System InterfaceLevel of Service Reqts.Evolution Reqts.
SSRD
SSAD
System AnalysisArchitecture Design & AnalysisImplementation Design
LCPMilestones and ProductsResponsibilitiesApproach, Resources
FRD/CTSBusiness CaseReqts. SatisfactionProcess RationaleRisk AssessmentIteration PlanQuality Plan
* Not exhaustive
4/30/01 ©USC-CSE 19
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering C S EUSC
Operations Model`
Object Model
Capability Requirements
System Definition
Class Model
Project Requirements
Statement of Purpose
Project Goals
Organization Goals
System Capabilities
Component ModelOrganization Entities
Behavior Model
Enterprise model
Domain Description System Analysis System Design
Operational Concept Description (OCD)
System and Software Requirements Definition (SSRD)
System and Software Architecture Description (SSAD)
Organization Background
Organization Activities
Interaction Model
Levels of Service Goals LOS Requirements
Coverage/Traceability of MBASE Product Models*
* Does not include all MBASE models
Release Description
Reqts. Satisfaction
Capability Tests
Data Structures
Methods/functions
LOS Tests
Implementation
Construction,Transition,Support (CTS)
External to MBASE
4/30/01 ©USC-CSE 20
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering C S EUSC
477 Project Activities
A1
Analysis andDesignOCD
Rose/Visio
Life Cycle Plan
Ax [where ximplies level]
[Activity][Input] [Output]
[Mechanism]
[Control]
Key
A1
ImplementationCode
Rose/Visio
477 Students
477 Students
SSRD
Documents