SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Mühendislik Fakültesi Fen ve Mühendislik Dergisi / 2017 / Cilt: 19 - Sayı: 55

An Enterprise Architecture for Software Re-Engineering: A Model-Driven and Ontology-Based Approach

Yazılım Yeniden Yapılamaya Yönelik Bir Kurumsal Mimari: Model Güdümlü ve Ontoloji Tabanlı Bir Yaklaşım

MURAT PAŞA UYSAL
A. Erhan MERGEN
Pages
24–42
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Our first impression is as it can provide different views to SRE issues at various abstraction levels while it can represent the requirements of various stakeholders in a SRE project.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Reusability, semantic communication, interoperability may be the major problems during Software Re-engineering (SRE) projects.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In this study, therefore, we design and develop a SRE Enterprise Architecture (EA) and evaluate it using ontological methods and techniques.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Our first impression is as it can provide different views to SRE issues at various abstraction levels while it can represent the requirements of various stakeholders in a SRE project.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Reusability, semantic communication, interoperability may be the major problems during Software Re-engineering (SRE) projects. In this study, therefore, we design and develop a SRE Enterprise Architecture (EA) and evaluate it using ontological methods and techniques. The study is conducted according to the guidelines and principles of Design Science Research Method. The SRE, Model-Driven Architecture and Ontology knowledge domains formed the theoretical foundations of our research. The contributions of the study to Software Engineering Research Domain could be (a) the holistic and enterprise architectural approach adopted for SRE and (b) improving the sematic architecture of SRE processes using ontological evaluation methods and techniques. Our first impression is as it can provide different views to SRE issues at various abstraction levels while it can represent the requirements of various stakeholders in a SRE project.

Özet

Tekrar kullanılabilirlik, bütünleştirme, anlamsal iletişim ve birlikte çalışabilirlik Yazılım Yeniden Yapılama (YYY) projelerinde karşılaşılabilen ana sorunlar arasındadır. Bu kapsamda çalışmamızda, YYY yönelik bir Kurumsal Mimari (KM) geliştirilmiş, ontolojik yöntemlerle test ve değerlendirilmiştir. Tasarım Bilimi Araştırma Yöntemi doğrultusunda yürütülen araştırmanın ana bileşenleri ve teorik temellerini YYY, Model Güdümlü Mimari, Kurumsal Mimari ve Ontoloji bilgi alanları oluşturmuştur. Çalışmanın yazılım mühendisliği alanına olan katkılarını, (a) YYY sürecine KM ile bütüncül yaklaşılması ile (b) KM ve YYY süreçlerinin anlamsal yapılarının ontolojik yöntemlerle iyileştirilmesi olarak göstermek mümkündür. İlk izlenimlerimiz, düzeylerindeki YYY problemlerine farklı bakış açılarını kazandırarak yazılımla ilgili paydaşların görüş ve ihtiyaçlarını karşılayabileceği yönündedir

🔖

Cite This Article

UYSAL, M. P., MERGEN, A. E. (2017). An Enterprise Architecture for Software Re-Engineering: A Model-Driven and Ontology-Based Approach. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Mühendislik Fakültesi Fen ve Mühendislik Dergisi, Cilt: 19 - Sayı: 55, 24–42. https://ajindex.com/articles/202146

References (4)

  1. Editorial, 2011. A retrospective view of software maintenance and reengineering research-a selection of papers from 2010 European Conference on Software Maintenance and Reengineering. Journal of Software Maintenance and Evolution, DOI: 10.1002/smr.548. [2]Tahvildari, L., Kontogiannis, K. & Mylopoulos J.2003.Quality-driven software reengineering, The Journal of Systems and Software, 66, s.225-239. [3]Uysal, M.P. ve Mergen, 2013. E. A Quality-oriented approach to software reengineering, The Northeast Decision Sciences 2013
  2. Annual Conference, Brooklyn, NY, USA, April 5-7, s.971-979. [4]Wagner C. 2014. Model-driven software migration: a methodology, reengineering, recovery and modernization of legacy system, USA, Springer Vieweg. [5]Swithinbank, P., Chessell, M., Gardner, T., Griffin,C., Man, J., Wylie, H. & Yusuf, L. 2005. Patterns: Model-driven development using ıbm rational software architect, USA, Redbooks. [6]Beydeda, S.,·Book M., Gruhn, V. 2004.
  3. Model-driven software development, USA, Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg. [7]Hevner, A.& Chatterjee S. 2010.Design Research in information systems, Integrated Series in Information Systems, 22, DOI 10.1007/978-1. [8]Vaishnavi, V.K. & Kuechler W.J. 2008. Design Science Research methods and patterns: innovating ınformationand communication technology, USA, Auerbach Publications, Taylor & Francis Group. [9]Elliot, J. Chikofsky and James H. C. 1990. Reverse engineering and design recovery: a taxonomy, IEEE Software, Cilt. 7, No.1, s.13-17. [10]Object Management Group2003. MDA Guide Version 1.0.1. Technical Reportomg/2003-06-01, OMG. [11]McCall, J. A., Richards, P. K., Walters, G. F. 1977.
  4. Factors in software quality, Nat'l Tech. Information Service, Cilt. 1, No.2 ve 3. [12]Lankhorst, M. 2009.Enterprise architecture at work: modelling, communication, and analysis,Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg. [13]TOGAF2011.TOGAF Version 9.1, Open Group Standard,The Open Group. [14]Uysal, M.P, Mergen E.A. 2015. Yazılım yeniden yapılamaya yönelik model güdümlü ve kaliteye yönelimli süreç modeli, 9. UlusalYazılım Mühendisliği Sempozyumu. [15]Boehm, B. W., Brown, J. R., Kaspar, H., Lipow, M., McLeod, G., Merritt2016. M.ISO/IEC 2501n. Quality model division.http://www.iso.org.Erişim Tarihi: 28.05.2016. [16]Antunes, G., Bakhshandeh, M., Mayer, Rudolf, Borbinha, J. Caetano,.A.2013.Using ontologies for enterprise architecture analysis, 17th IEEE International EDOCW, Vancouver, BC. [17]Green, P., Rosemann M. 2005.Business systems ana