Main Article Content
Introduction: This publication is the product of research: “SPEM 2.0 Process Model Metrics in the Reliability of its Visual Analysis” throughout 2019, which supports the work of a master’s degree in Systems Engineering at the University of Cauca.
Objective: Rebase a process model metrics set in order to increase AVISPA reliability to support the visual analysis of SPEM 2.0 software process models.
Methodology: In order to improve AVISPA, a systematic literature review had been performed to find software process model metrics that are potentially apt to be represented in AVISPA. Next, a set of assessments were performed in order to enhance visual analysis tool. Finally, an ANOVA statistical assessment was realized in order to find a variance differential between AVISPA versions by comparing their F1-Score process model elements classification values.
Results: AVISPA significantly improved its general classification algorithm. Most of errors were found in SPEM 2.0 variability resolution feature and collections with duplicated elements. Multiple misclassifications still persists.
Conclusion: General AVISPA process model elements classification is improved. However, some process model samples remain scattered according to ANOVA results.
Originality: AVISPA is a recent solution for SPEM 2.0 software process model assessment. It's recent emergence carried to a lack of articles about software process model metrics and few works about AVISPA improvements. These are the main contributions of this paper.
Limitations: The project has been widely expensive in terms of execution time, traceability with all software process model elements, and mainly to find experts in software process that can meet the research requirements
As the author of the article, I declare that is an original unpublished work exclusively created by me, that it has not been submitted for simultaneous evaluation by another publication and that there is no impediment of any kind for concession of the rights provided for in this contract.
In this sense, I am committed to await the result of the evaluation by the journal Ingeniería Solidaría before considering its submission to another medium; in case the response by that publication is positive, additionally, I am committed to respond for any action involving claims, plagiarism or any other kind of claim that could be made by third parties.
At the same time, as the author or co-author, I declare that I am completely in agreement with the conditions presented in this work and that I cede all patrimonial rights, in other words, regarding reproduction, public communication, distribution, dissemination, transformation, making it available and all forms of exploitation of the work using any medium or procedure, during the term of the legal protection of the work and in every country in the world, to the Universidad Cooperativa de Colombia Press.
 W. Humphrey, Managing the Software Process. Ed. Boston: Addison-Wesley Professional, 1989. Accessed on: Nov. 26, 2019. [Online]. Available: https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=64795.
 “Software & systems process engineering metamodel (SPEM) 2.0,”2008, version 2.0. Accessed on: Nov. 26, 2019. [Online]. Available: https://www.omg.org/spec/SPEM/2.0/PDF.
 J. A. Hurtado Alegría, M. C. Bastarrica, and A. Bergel, “Analyzing software process models with AVISPA,” in Proceedings of the 2011 International Conference on Software and Systems Process, ser. ICSSP’11. New York, NY, USA: ACM, 2011, pp. 23–32. [Online]. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1987875.1987882
 J. A. H. Alegría, A. Lagos, A. Bergel, and M. C. Bastarrica, “Software process model blueprints,” in New Modeling Concepts for Today’s Software Processes, J. Münch, Y. Yang, and W. Schäfer, Eds. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2010, pp. 273–284. [Online]. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-14347-2_24
 J. A. H. Alegría, M. C. Bastarrica, and A. Bergel, “AVISPA: a tool for analyzing software process models” Journal of Software: Evolution and Process, vol. 26, pp. 434–450, 2014. [Online]. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1987875.1987882
 J. Salgado, J. Alvarez, and J. Alegría, “Análisis visual de la variabilidad de modelos de procesos de software,” in Colombian Conference on Computing, vol. 11, 2016. Accessed on: Nov. 26, 2019. [Online]. Available: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/337547656_Analisis_Visual_de_la_Variabilidad_en_Modelos_de_Procesos_Software.
 J. Simmonds, M. Bastarrica, L. Silvestre, and A. Quispe, “Analyzing methodologies and tools for specifying variability in software processes” Universidad de Chile, 2011. pp. 3–5. Accessed on: Nov. 26, 2019. [Online]. Available: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/31f9/6465e0a55d57a97e7b4c0aa2e41d50617788.pdf
 M. C. Bastarrica, G. Matturro, R. Robbes, L. Silvestre, and R. Vidal, “How does quality of formalized software processes affect adoption?” in Advanced Information Systems Engineering, M. Jarke, J. Mylopoulos,C. Quix, C. Rolland, Y. Manolopoulos, H. Mouratidis, and J. Horkoff,Eds.Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2014, pp. 226–240.[Online]. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-07881-6_16
 F. B. Cardenas, J. S. Martinez, M. C. Camacho, and J. A. Hurtado, “Análisis visual de la modularidad de modelos de procesos de software avimo-ps,” in Computing Colombian Conference, vol. 8, 2013. pp. 2–43. Accessed on: Nov. 26, 2019. [Online]. Available: https://www.slideserve.com/cathal/an-lisis-visual-de-la-modularidad-de-modelos-de-procesos-de-software-avimo-ps
 G. Canfora, F. García, M. Piattini, F. Ruiz, and C. Visaggio, “A family of experiments to validate metrics for software process models,” Journal of Systems and Software, vol. 77, no. 2, pp. 113–129, aug 2005. [Online]. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2004.11.007
 E. Rolón, F. Ruiz, F. O. G. Rubio, and M. G. P. Velthuis, “Applying software process metrics in business process models.” Revista de Procesos y Métricas de las Tecnologías de la Información, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 45–61, 2006. Accessed on: Nov. 26, 2019. [Online]. Available: https://www.aemes.org/biblioteca/revistas-de-procesos-y-metricas/numeros-publicados/category/25-numero-8.html?download=32:applying-software-process-metrics-in-business-process-models
 M. Nørgaard and K. Hornbæk, “What do usability evaluators do in practice?: An explorative study of think-aloud testing,” in Proceedings of the 6th Conference on Designing Interactive Systems, ser. DIS ’06. New York, NY, USA: ACM, 2006, pp. 209–218. [Online]. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1142405.1142439
 M. E. Khan, F. Khan et al., “A comparative study of white box, black box and grey box testing techniques,” Int. J. Adv. Comput. Sci. Appl, vol. 3, no. 6, 2012. Accessed on: Nov. 26, 2019. [Online]. Available: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.261.1758&rep=rep1&type=pdf
 R. C. Martin and M. Martin, Agile principles, patterns, and practices in C# (Robert C. Martin). Prentice Hall PTR, 2006. Accessed on: Nov. 26, 2019. [Online]. Available: https://ivanderevianko.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Agile-Principles-Patterns-and-Practices-in-C.pdf
 S. C. Allala, J. P. Sotomayor, D. Santiago, T. M. King, and P. J. Clarke, “Towards transforming user requirements to test cases using MDE and NPL,” in 2019 IEEE 43rd Annual Computer Software and Applications Conference (COMPSAC), vol. 2. IEEE, 2019, pp. 350–355. [Online]. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/COMPSAC.2019.10231
 A. Cockburn, Writing Effective Use Cases, 1st ed. Boston, MA, USA: Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc., 2000. pp. 133–192. Accessed on: Nov. 26, 2019. [Online]. Available: https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=517669
 S. L. Pfleeger, “Experimental design and analysis in software engineering,” Annals of Software Engineering, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 219–253, Dec 1995. [Online]. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02249052
 “AVISPA wiki”. [Online]. Avaliable: https://bit.ly/2OVO3yd, accessed: 2019-08-13.
 J. Alvarez and J. Hurtado, “UP-VSE: A unified process - based lifecycle model for very small entities,” in Advances in Computing, J. E. Serrano C. and J. C. Martínez-Santos, Eds. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2018, pp. 260–275. [Online]. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-98998-3_21
 M. I. Kellner, P. H. Feiler, A. Finkelstein, T. Katayama, L. J. Osterweil, M. H. Penedo, and H. D. Rombach, “Ispw-6 software process example,” in Proceedings. First International Conference on the Software Process, Oct 1991, pp. 176–186. [Online]. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ICSP.1991.664348
 “Proceso de Desarrollo Industrial del Grupo de Ingeniería Automática (PRODIGIA).”. [Online]. Avaliable: http://artemisa.unicauca.edu.co/~jjalvarezl/PRODIGIA/
 K. Kluza, G. J. Nalepa, and J. Lisiecki, Square Complexity Metrics for Business Process Models. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2014, pp. 89–107. [Online]. doi: http://dx.doi.org/978-3-319-03677-9_6
 A. Burattin, V. Bernstein, M. Neurauter, P. Soffer, and B. Weber, “Detection and quantification of flow consistency in business process models,” Software & Systems Modeling, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 633–654, May 2018. [Online]. doi: 10.1007/s10270-017-0576-y
 K. Kluza, “Measuring complexity of business process models integrated with rules” in Artificial Intelligence and Soft Computing, L. Rutkowski, M. Korytkowski, R. Scherer, R. Tadeusiewicz, L. A. Zadeh, and J. M. Zurada, Eds. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2015, pp. 649–659. [Online]. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-19369-4_57
 K. Figl, “Comprehension of procedural visual business process models,” Business & Information Systems Engineering, vol. 59, no. 1, pp. 41–67, Feb 2017. [Online]. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12599-016-0460-2
 J. Pavlicek, R. Hronza, P. Pavlickova, and K. Jelinkova, “The business process model quality metrics,” in Enterprise and Organizational Modeling and Simulation, R. Pergl, R. Lock, E. Babkin, and M. Molhanec, Eds. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2017, pp. 134–148. [Online]. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-68185-6_10
 J. Pflug and S. Rinderle-Ma, “Process instance similarity: Potentials, metrics, applications,” in On the Move to Meaningful Internet Systems: OTM 2016 Conferences, C. Debruyne, H. Panetto, R. Meersman, T. Dillon, e. Kühn, D. O’Sullivan, and C. A. Ardagna, Eds. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2016, pp. 136–154. [Online]. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-48472-3_8
 A. del Río-Ortega, M. Resinas, A. Durán, B. Bernárdez, A. Ruiz-Cortés, and M. Toro, “Visual ppinot: A graphical notation for process performance indicators,” Business & Information Systems Engineering, Jun 2017. [Online]. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12599-017-0483-3
 J. Geisel, B. Hamid, D. Gonzales, and J.-M. Bruel, “Towards a methodological tool support for modeling security-oriented processes,” in Model and Data Engineering, L. Bellatreche, Ó. Pastor, J. M. Almendros Jiménez, and Y. Aït-Ameur, Eds. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2016, pp. 31–41. [Online]. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-45547-1_3
 M. Smatti, M. Oussalah, and M. Ahmed Nacer, “Supporting deviations on software processes: A literature overview,” in Software Technologies, P. Lorenz, J. Cardoso, L. A. Maciaszek, and M. van Sinderen, Eds. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2016, pp. 191–209. [Online]. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-30142-6_11
 G. Kaur and K. B. Bahl, “Software reliability, metrics, reliability improvement using agile process,” 2014. Accessed on: Nov. 26, 2019. [Online]. Available: http://ijiset.com/v1s3/IJISET_V1_I3_24.pdf
 M. Marques, J. Simmonds, P. O. Rossel and M. Bastarrica, “Software product line evolution: A systematic literature review”, in Information and Software Technology, 2019, pp. 190–208. [Online]. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2018.08.014.
 J. Alvarez and J. Hurtado, “UP-VSE: A Unified Process - Based Lifecycle Model for Very Small Entities” in Software Technologies, C. Serrano, E. Jairo and J. Martínez-Santos, Eds. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2018, pp. 260–275. [Online]. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-98998-3_21
 J. Kim, “Execution Environment for Process Defined in EPF” in Big Data, Cloud Computing, Data Science & Engineering, R. Lee, 2019, pp. 117–129. [Online]. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-96803-2_10
 E. Nogueira, F. Araújo, F. Dione, E. Oliveira Jr, U. Kulesza and C. Werner, “Software process line as an approach to support software process reuse: A systematic literature review”, in Information and Software Technology, vol 116, 2019. [Online]. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2019.08.007.
 T. Mens, A. Decan, and N. Spanoudakis, “A method for testing and validating executable statechart models”, in Software & Systems Modeling, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 837–863, Apr. 2019, [Online]. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10270-018-0676-3