Change search
Refine search result
1 - 25 of 25
CiteExportLink to result list
Permanent link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • 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)
  • Disputation date (earliest first)
  • Disputation date (latest 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)
  • Disputation date (earliest first)
  • Disputation date (latest 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. Bosch, Jan
    et al.
    Molin, Peter
    Mattsson, Michael
    Bengtsson, PerOlof
    Object-oriented framework-based software development: problems and experi­ences2000In: ACM Computing Surveys, ISSN 0360-0300 , Vol. 32, no 1, p. 3-8Article in journal (Refereed)
  • 2. Bosch, Jan
    et al.
    Molin, Peter
    Mattsson, Michael
    Bengtsson, PerOlof
    Fayad, Mohamed E.
    Framework Problems and Experiences1999In: Building Applica­tion Frameworks: Object Oriented Foundations of Framework Design / [ed] Fayad, M. E.; Schmidt, D. C.; Johnson, R. E., Wiley & Sons , 1999, p. 55-82Chapter in book (Other academic)
  • 3. Gorschek, Tony
    et al.
    Fricker, Samuel
    Feldt, Robert
    Wohlin, Claes
    Mattsson, Michael
    1st International Global Requirements Engineering Worskshop: GREW´072008In: Software Engineering Notes, ISSN 0163-5948 , Vol. 33, no 2, p. 29-32Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    GREW´07 was held in conjunction with the International Conference on Global Software Engineering in Munich Germany. The aim was to bring researchers and industry practitioners together to discuss the area of global product development from a requirements engineering and product management perspective. The workshop aimed to analyze selected challenges put forward by accepted papers from both industry and academia. The session discussions then focused on identifying future needs for research, the relevance of which was assured by good industry presence at the workshop. The workshop resulted in a number of findings that can play an important role to further develop the field of global product management and requirements engineering.

  • 4. Lundberg, Christer
    et al.
    Mattsson, Michael
    Using Legacy Components with Object-Oriented Frameworks1996Conference paper (Refereed)
  • 5.
    Mattsson, Michael
    Blekinge Institute of Technology, Department of Telecommunications and Mathematics.
    A Comparative Study of Three New Object-Oriented Methods1995Report (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    In this paper we will compare and contrast some of the newer methods with some of the established methods in the field of object-oriented software engineering. The methods re-viewed are Solution-Based Modelling, Business Object Notation and Object Behaviour Analysis. The new methods offer new solutions and ideas to issues such as object identi-fication from scenarios, traceability supporting techniques, criteria for phase completion and method support for reliability. Although all these contributions, we identified some issues, particular design for dynamic binding, that still have to be taken into account in an object-oriented method.

  • 6. Mattsson, Michael
    Comparison of Three Evaluation Methods for Object-Oriented Framework Evolution2006In: Software Evolution and Feedback / [ed] Madhavji, Nazim H.; Fernandez-Ramil, Juan; , Dewayne Perry, John Wiley & Sons , 2006, p. 281-311Chapter in book (Refereed)
  • 7. Mattsson, Michael
    Comparison of Three Evaluation Methods for Object-Oriented Framework Evolution2006In: Software Evolution and Feedback: Theory and Practice / [ed] Madhavji, Nazim H.; Lehmann, M.M.; Ramil, J.; Perry, Dewayne, John Wiley & Sons , 2006, p. 281-312Chapter in book (Other academic)
  • 8. Mattsson, Michael
    Evolution and Composition of Object-Oriented Frameworks2000Doctoral thesis, comprehensive summary (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    This thesis comprises studies of evolution and composition of object-oriented frameworks, a certain kind of reusable asset. An object-oriented framework is a set of classes that embodies an abstract design for solutions to a family of related problems. The work presented is based on and has its origin in industrial contexts where object-oriented frameworks have been developed, used, evolved and managed. Thus, the results are based on empirical observations. Both qualitative and quantitative approaches have been used in the studies performed which cover both technical and managerial aspects of object-oriented framework technology. Historically, object-oriented frameworks are large monolithic assets which require several design iterations and are therefore costly to develop. With the requirement of building larger applications, software engineers have started to compose multiple frameworks, thereby encountering a number of problems. Five common framework composition problems, together with existing solution approaches and the underlying causes for the problems are presented in this thesis. Adopting a reuse technology, such as object-oriented frameworks, in a software development organization causes changes and additions of practices and procedures. We present problems and possible solutions related to these issues. Examples of topics addressed are; domain scoping, business models, verification of the framework’s abstract behavior, and when to release a framework. Object-oriented frameworks, as all software, evolve due to changed and new requirements. The evolution of object-oriented framework can be more costly than conventional software since there generally exist several applications based on and forced to evolve with the framework. In our studies, we characterize different views of framework evolution. Aspects investigated are structural and behavioral stability, change and growth rates using historical information and effort distribution of framework development and customization. We also provide an assessment of the methods used for characterizing the evolution against the following management issues; identification of evolution-prone modules, framework deployment, change impact analysis, benchmarking and requirements management. As part of these studies, we have extended and validated two proposed methods for software evolution; one for quantitatively assessing stability of a framework, which has been extended with a set of framework stability indicators, and one for identifying evolution-prone modules based on historical information (adapted for object-orientation). Our studies have validated that these methods are feasible and possible to apply on industrial object-oriented frameworks. In addition, we provide quantitative evidence that the use of framework technology reduces application development effort.

  • 9. Mattsson, Michael
    Object-Oriented Frameworks: A Survey of Methodological Issues1996Licentiate thesis, comprehensive summary (Other academic)
  • 10. Mattsson, Michael
    et al.
    Bosch, Jan
    Assessing Object-Oriented Application Framework Maturity: A Replicated Case Study1999Report (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    Object-oriented application frameworks present one of the most successful approaches to developing reusable assets in industry, but developing frameworks is both difficult and expensive. Framework generally evolve to maturity through a number of iterations due to the incorporation of new requirements and better domain understanding. Since changes to frameworks have a large impact due to the effects on the applications build based on the asset, it is important to assess the maturity of a framework. Bansiya [3, 4] presents an approach to assessing framework maturity based on a set of design metrics and formulates four statements. In this paper, we present the results of a replicated case study of the framework maturity assessment approach. Our study subject consists of four successive versions of a proprietary black-box application framework. Our findings partly support the statements formulated in the original study, but differ in some places. The differences are discussed and explanations and argumentation provided.

  • 11. Mattsson, Michael
    et al.
    Bosch, Jan
    Assessment of Three Evaluation Methods for Object-Oriented Framework Evolution1999Report (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    Object-oriented framework technology has become a common reuse technology in object-oriented software development. As with all software, frameworks tend to evolve. Once the framework has been deployed, new versions of a framework cause high maintenance cost for the products built with the framework. This fact in combination with the high costs of developing and evolving an object-oriented framework make it important to have controlled and predictable evolution of the framework?s functionality and costs. We present three methods 1) Evolution Identification Using Historical Information, 2) Stability Assessment and 3) Distribution of Development Effort which have been applied to between one to three different frameworks, both in the proprietary and commercial domain. The methods provide management with information which will make it possible to make well-informed decisions about the framework?s evolution, especially with respect to the following issues; identification of evolution-prone modules, framework deployment, change impact analysis, benchmarking and requirements management. Finally, the methods are compared to each other with respect to costs and benefits.

  • 12. Mattsson, Michael
    et al.
    Bosch, Jan
    Characterizing Stability in Evolving Frameworks1999Conference paper (Refereed)
  • 13. Mattsson, Michael
    et al.
    Bosch, Jan
    Characterizing Stability in Evolving Frameworks1999Report (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    Object-oriented application frameworks present one of the most successful approaches to developing reusable assets in industry, but developing frameworks is both difficult and expensive. Framework generally evolve through a number of iterations due to the incorporation of new requirements and better domain understanding. Since changes to frameworks have a large impact on the applications build based on the asset, it is important to assess the stability of a framework. Recently, an approach for assessing framework stability has been proposed [3]. We have extended and applied the assessment approach on one proprietary telecommunication framework and two commercial GUI application frameworks. Based on our findings we formulate a set of hypotheses, which characterize the stability of an object-oriented application framework. We believe these hypotheses to be the most promising ones for further studies of framework stability.

  • 14. Mattsson, Michael
    et al.
    Bosch, Jan
    Framework Composition: Problems, Causes and Solutions1998Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Reuse of software has been one of the main goals of software engineering for decades. With the emergence of the object-oriented paradigm, an important enabling technology for reuse of larger components became available and resulted in the definition of object-oriented frameworks. Our and others experiences with frameworks have shown that frameworks indeed provide considerable reuse in framework-based application development. However, whereas framework-based application development initially included a single framework, increasingly often multi-ple frameworks are used in application development. These frameworks have to be composed, but the software engineer may experience a number of problems while doing this, related to (1) composition of framework control, composition with legacy components, (3) framework gap, (4) overlap of framework entities and (5) composition of entity functionality. The primary causes for these composition problems are related to (1) the cohesion between classes inside each framework, (2) the domain coverage of the frameworks, (3) the design intentions of the frame-work designers and (4) the potential lack of access to the source code of the frameworks. Based on the identified problems and causes, we analyse the existing solutions and their limitations.

  • 15. Mattsson, Michael
    et al.
    Bosch, Jan
    Observations on the Evolution of an Industrial OO Framework1999Report (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    Recently an approach for identifying potential modules for restructuring in large software systems using product release history was presented[4]. In this study we have adapted the original approach to better suit object-oriented frameworks and applied it to an industrial black-box framework product in the telecommunication domain. Our study shows that using historical information as a way of identifying structural shortcomings in an object-oriented system is viable and useful. The study thereby strengthens the suggested approach in [4] and demonstrates that the approach is adaptable and useful for object-oriented systems. The usefulness of the original approach has been validated through this study too.

  • 16. Mattsson, Michael
    et al.
    Bosch, Jan
    Fayad, Mohamed E.
    Framework Integration: Problems, Causes and Solutions1999In: Communications of the ACM, ISSN 0001-0782, E-ISSN 1557-7317, Vol. 42, no 10, p. 80-87Article in journal (Refereed)
  • 17. Mattsson, Michael
    et al.
    Grahn, Håkan
    Mårtensson, Frans
    Software Architecture Evaluation Methods for Performance, Maintainability, Testability, and Portability2006Conference paper (Refereed)
  • 18. Mårtensson, Frans
    et al.
    Grahn, Håkan
    Mattsson, Michael
    An Approach for Performance Evaluation of Software Architectures using Prototyping2003Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    The fundamental structure of a software system is referred to as the software architecture. Researchers have identified that the quality attributes of a software system, e.g., performance and maintainability, often are restricted by the architecture. Therefore, it is important to evaluate the quality properties of a system already during architectural design. In this paper we propose an approach for evaluating the performance of a software architecture using architectural prototyping. As a part of the approach we have developed an evaluation support framework. We also show the applicability of the approach and evaluate it using a case study of a distributed software system for automated guided vehicles.

  • 19. Mårtensson, Frans
    et al.
    Grahn, Håkan
    Mattsson, Michael
    Evaluating Software Quality Attributes of Communication Components in an Automated Guided Vehicle System2005Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    The architecture of a large complex software system, i.e., the division of the system into components and modules, is crucial since it often affects and limits the quality attributes of the system, e.g., performance and maintainability. In this paper we evaluate three software components for intra- and inter process communication in a distributed real-time system, i.e., an automated guided vehicle system. We evaluate three quality attributes: performance, maintainability, and portability. The performance and maintainability are evaluated quantitatively using prototype-based evaluation, while the portability is evaluated qualitatively. Our findings indicate that it might be possible to use one third-party component for both intra- and inter process communication, thus replacing two inhouse developed components.

  • 20. Mårtensson, Frans
    et al.
    Jönsson, Per
    Bengtsson, PerOlof
    Grahn, Håkan
    Mattsson, Michael
    A Case Against Continous Simulation for Software Architecture Evaluation2003Conference paper (Refereed)
  • 21. Petersen, Kai
    et al.
    Feldt, Robert
    Mujtaba, Shahid
    Mattsson, Michael
    Systematic Mapping Studies in Software engineering2008Conference paper (Refereed)
  • 22. Svahnberg, Mikael
    et al.
    Mattsson, Michael
    Conditions and Restrictions for Product Line Generation Migration.2002Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    In this paper, we describe a case study of a company in the domain of automatic guided vehicles (AGVs) that is in the process of migrating from a previous generation of a software product line, which has mainly been centered around hardware, into a new product-line generation which is software-centered. We describe the issues motivating this transition and the factors that complicate it. Moreover, we present a three-stage process for migrating to a new software product line. This process is currently being initiated in collaboration with the aforementioned company.

  • 23. Svahnberg, Mikael
    et al.
    Wohlin, Claes
    Lundberg, Lars
    Mattsson, Michael
    A Method for Understanding Quality Attributes in Software Architecture Structures.2002Conference paper (Refereed)
  • 24. Svahnberg, Mikael
    et al.
    Wohlin, Claes
    Lundberg, Lars
    Mattsson, Michael
    A Quality-Driven Decision Support Method for Identifying Software Architecture Candidates2003In: International journal of software engineering and knowledge engineering, ISSN 0218-1940, Vol. 13, no 5, p. 547-573Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    To sustain the qualities of a software system during evolution, and to adapt the quality attributes as the requirements evolve, it is necessary to have a clear software architecture that is understood by all developers and to which all changes to the system adheres. This software architecture can be created beforehand, but must also be updated as the domain of the software, and hence the requirements on the software system evolve. Creating a software architecture for a system or part of a system so that the architecture fulfils the desired quality requirements is often hard. We propose a decision-support method to aid in the understanding of different architecture candidates for a software system. We propose a method that is adaptable with respect to both the set of potential architecture candidates and quality attributes relevant for the system's domain to help in this task. The method creates a support framework, using a multicriteria decision method, supporting comparison of different software architecture candidates for a specific software quality attribute and vice versa, and then uses this support framework to reach a consensus on the benefits and liabilities of the different software architecture candidates and to increase the confidence in the resulting architecture decision.

  • 25. Wohlin, Claes
    et al.
    Lundberg, Lars
    Mattsson, Michael
    Special Issue: Trade-off Analysis of Software Quality Attributes2005In: Software quality journal, ISSN 0963-9314, E-ISSN 1573-1367, Vol. 13, no 4, p. 327-328Article in journal (Refereed)
1 - 25 of 25
CiteExportLink to result list
Permanent link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • 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