Ranking guidance actions to support engineers in fulfilling process constraints

IF 1.7 4区 计算机科学 Q3 COMPUTER SCIENCE, SOFTWARE ENGINEERING
Anmol Bilal, Christoph Mayr-Dorn, Alexander Egyed
{"title":"Ranking guidance actions to support engineers in fulfilling process constraints","authors":"Anmol Bilal,&nbsp;Christoph Mayr-Dorn,&nbsp;Alexander Egyed","doi":"10.1002/smr.2729","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>In safety-critical systems engineering, regulations such as Automotive SPICE, ISO26262, or ED-109A mandate software quality assurance measures to provide evidence that the developed system is high quality. The constraints that define quality assurance conditions during the engineering life cycle are often non-trivial. This paper addresses the challenges, engineers face who are unfamiliar with the precise constraints of various projects (e.g., when newly joining a company or switching between departments). Understanding how to fulfill a constraint is a time-consuming and challenging task as an engineer needs to determine the most suitable option (out of potentially many) to fulfill a constraint violation. To this end, we propose a guidance action ranking framework to provide engineers with the most relevant guidance actions. Our primary ranking algorithm analyzes in the background the actions that engineers have made in the past to resolve a constraint violation without requiring explicit feedback from them. We evaluated our framework on two real-world data sets: an open-source drone management and an industrial air traffic control software system. Concretely, we replay past engineering activities and measured whether, in the case of a constraint violation, our suggested guidance actions were indeed selected by the engineer. The evaluation results revealed that learning from prior guidance actions effectively identifies the most appropriate guidance actions (ranked top 1 or 2) when compared to ranking algorithms based on action simplicity and artifact property change frequency. Specifically, we achieve a median MRR of 0.95 for the first case study and 0.94 for the second case study: an improvement of 80% and 100% over the baseline. Additionally, we observed that the simplicity of a guidance action does not reliably indicate its suitability for fulfilling a constraint, whereas learning from prior change operation property out-performed simplicity-based ranking but did not surpass guidance frequency-based ranking.</p>","PeriodicalId":48898,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Software-Evolution and Process","volume":"37 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/smr.2729","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Software-Evolution and Process","FirstCategoryId":"94","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/smr.2729","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"计算机科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, SOFTWARE ENGINEERING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In safety-critical systems engineering, regulations such as Automotive SPICE, ISO26262, or ED-109A mandate software quality assurance measures to provide evidence that the developed system is high quality. The constraints that define quality assurance conditions during the engineering life cycle are often non-trivial. This paper addresses the challenges, engineers face who are unfamiliar with the precise constraints of various projects (e.g., when newly joining a company or switching between departments). Understanding how to fulfill a constraint is a time-consuming and challenging task as an engineer needs to determine the most suitable option (out of potentially many) to fulfill a constraint violation. To this end, we propose a guidance action ranking framework to provide engineers with the most relevant guidance actions. Our primary ranking algorithm analyzes in the background the actions that engineers have made in the past to resolve a constraint violation without requiring explicit feedback from them. We evaluated our framework on two real-world data sets: an open-source drone management and an industrial air traffic control software system. Concretely, we replay past engineering activities and measured whether, in the case of a constraint violation, our suggested guidance actions were indeed selected by the engineer. The evaluation results revealed that learning from prior guidance actions effectively identifies the most appropriate guidance actions (ranked top 1 or 2) when compared to ranking algorithms based on action simplicity and artifact property change frequency. Specifically, we achieve a median MRR of 0.95 for the first case study and 0.94 for the second case study: an improvement of 80% and 100% over the baseline. Additionally, we observed that the simplicity of a guidance action does not reliably indicate its suitability for fulfilling a constraint, whereas learning from prior change operation property out-performed simplicity-based ranking but did not surpass guidance frequency-based ranking.

Abstract Image

对指导行动进行排序,以支持工程师完成过程约束
在安全关键系统工程中,诸如Automotive SPICE、ISO26262或ED-109A之类的法规要求软件质量保证措施,以提供开发的系统是高质量的证据。在工程生命周期中定义质量保证条件的约束通常是重要的。本文解决了工程师面临的挑战,他们不熟悉各种项目的精确约束(例如,当新加入公司或在部门之间切换时)。了解如何实现约束是一项耗时且具有挑战性的任务,因为工程师需要确定最合适的选项(从潜在的许多选项中)来实现约束违反。为此,我们提出了一个指导行动排序框架,为工程师提供最相关的指导行动。我们的主要排序算法在后台分析工程师过去为解决约束违规而采取的行动,而不需要他们提供明确的反馈。我们在两个真实世界的数据集上评估了我们的框架:一个开源的无人机管理和一个工业空中交通管制软件系统。具体地说,我们重播过去的工程活动,并测量在违反约束的情况下,我们建议的指导行动是否确实被工程师所选择。评估结果显示,与基于动作简单性和工件属性变化频率的排序算法相比,从先前的指导动作中学习有效地识别出最合适的指导动作(排名前1或前2)。具体来说,我们实现了第一个案例研究的中位MRR为0.95,第二个案例研究的中位MRR为0.94:比基线提高了80%和100%。此外,我们观察到,指导行动的简单性并不能可靠地表明它对满足约束的适用性,而从先前的变更操作属性中学习优于基于简单性的排名,但没有超过基于指导频率的排名。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Software-Evolution and Process
Journal of Software-Evolution and Process COMPUTER SCIENCE, SOFTWARE ENGINEERING-
自引率
10.00%
发文量
109
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信