<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Archiving and Interchange DTD v1.0 20120330//EN" "JATS-archivearticle1.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">
  <front>
    <journal-meta />
    <article-meta>
      <title-group>
        <article-title>Quality in Use and Software Greenability</article-title>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Coral Calero, Mª Ángeles Moraga</string-name>
          <email>MariaAngeles.Moraga}@uclm.es</email>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Manuel F. Bertoa</string-name>
          <email>bertoa@lcc.uma.es</email>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Leticia Duboc</string-name>
          <email>leticia@ime.uerj.br</email>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2">2</xref>
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff0">
          <label>0</label>
          <institution>Departamento de Lenguajes y Ciencias, de la Computación, University of Malaga</institution>
          ,
          <addr-line>Malaga</addr-line>
          ,
          <country country="ES">Spain</country>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff1">
          <label>1</label>
          <institution>Instituto de Tecnologías y Sistemas de</institution>
          ,
          <addr-line>la Información</addr-line>
          ,
          <institution>University of Castilla-La Mancha</institution>
          ,
          <addr-line>Ciudad Real, Spain, {Coral.Calero;</addr-line>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff2">
          <label>2</label>
          <institution>Universidade do Estado do Rio de</institution>
          ,
          <addr-line>Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro</addr-line>
          ,
          <country country="BR">Brasil.</country>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <abstract>
        <p>- Software sustainability has recently begun to gain importance. However, although proposals concerning what it is and how to achieve it are starting to appear, until now, there have been very few proposals on how to model it. Sustainable development consists of three dimensions: Social sustainability, Economic sustainability and Environmental sustainability; the latter being more closely related to technical aspects. There are also three environmental impact levels for ICTs: direct environmental effects of production and use of ICTs, indirect environmental impacts related to the effects of ICTs and indirect effects on the environment. In this paper, we focus on environmental sustainability and the first environmental impact level, and more concretely, on the direct environmental effect of software use. We specifically propose a greenability in use characteristic to be considered as part of the quality in use model proposed by the ISO 25010 standard. This model can be used using measures, indicators, or even Bayesian Networks in order to link it with product quality. We therefore present an example of a Bayesian Network that links product quality to greenability in use. Our eventual goal is to provide developers with indicators and guidelines on how to develop an environmentally friendly software product.</p>
      </abstract>
      <kwd-group>
        <kwd>Software quality</kwd>
        <kwd>green software</kwd>
        <kwd>greenability</kwd>
      </kwd-group>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
  <body>
    <sec id="sec-1">
      <title>I. INTRODUCTION</title>
      <p>
        Quality is currently among organizations’ main goals
because nowadays the industry made efforts to obtain the
ISO9000 or CMMI (even been mandatory in the USA if a
company want to collaborate with the government). The
SWEBOK (Software Engineering Body of Knowledge) [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref16">16</xref>
        ],
the main reference guide of software engineers includes a
specific chapter about software quality and how to apply it to
the software engineering discipline. A large number of
organizations provide similar products, thus permitting
consumers to choose from a wide variety of brands. The
survival of these organizations depends, to an increasing
extent, on the quality of the products and services provided.
      </p>
      <p>The need for quality is also present in the software industry,
which has consequently become concerned about software
quality. This has led to the appearance of the ISO/IEC 25000
series of standards, representing the evolution of the ISO/IEC
9126 and the ISO/IEC 14598 series. This family is divided
into five divisions, one of which, the ISO/IEC 2501n (and
more concretely the 25010), presents various software quality
models.</p>
      <p>However, none of these models considers sustainability or
the ecological aspects of software products. This is, from our
point of view, an important weakness of the standards, since
sustainability is gaining more and more importance in society
in general and in industry in particular. We believe this
characteristic should also be considered in the software quality
context. Our proposal is to complete the quality models of the
standard in such a manner that we will be able to take
sustainability into consideration when developing or
evaluating a software product. This will allow to create the
necessary foundation to incorporate into and assess
greenability of a software product. In this paper, we present
our progress with respect to this goal.</p>
      <p>The reminder of this paper is organized as follows: Section
two presents important aspects of sustainability in general.
Section three discusses the importance of sustainability in the
software context and presents the focus of our research.
Section four describes the relevant aspects of the ISO/IEC
25010 standard and its quality models. The product
greenability characteristic, proposed by the authors in a
previous work, is also shown in the fourth section. In Section
five, we propose the greenability in use, a new characteristic
to be added to the quality in use model of the standard. Some
examples of the levels of impact of this new characteristic are
shown in Section six. Section seven shows how to combine
the product quality and the quality in use models by means of
Bayesian networks. Finally, Section eight presents our
conclusions and future work.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-2">
      <title>II. SUSTAINABILITY One of humanity’s current challenges is to conserve the environment and attain a sustainable economic and social development.</title>
      <p>
        Sustainable development is commonly defined as
“development that meets the needs of the present without
compromising the ability of future generations to meet their
own needs” [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref9">9</xref>
        ]. According to the United Nations World
Commission on Environment and Development [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref17">17</xref>
        ],
sustainable development needs to satisfy the requirements of
the three dimensions of society, economy, and the
environment.
      </p>
      <p>
        Sustainability has recently become more and more
important to businesses. A business that fails to have a
sustainable development as one of its top priorities could
receive considerable public criticism and subsequently lose
market legitimacy [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref6">6</xref>
        ]. The authors of [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref6">6</xref>
        ] state that, according
to a global IBM survey in 2008, 47% of organizations have
started to redesign their business models on the basis of
sustainability, treating sustainable development as a new source
of innovation, an opportunity for cutting costs, and an
mechanism by which to gain competitive advantages; all of
which can be summarized under the concept of “strategic
sustainability”, introduced by [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref15">15</xref>
        ] .
      </p>
      <p>
        As noted by [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref6">6</xref>
        ], technology is doubly important to pursue
strategic sustainability. On the one hand because it helps
organizations tackle environmental issues (using web
conferences, repositories, etc.) and on the other because
technology is often responsible for major environmental
degradation (amounts of energy consumed by the engineering
processes needed to manufacture products). This mixed role
puts technology organizations under tremendous conflicting
pressures. Internally they are pressed to transform existing
engineering processes to make them more environmentally
friendly, while externally they are expected to design new
products that improve the sustainability of society.
      </p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-3">
      <title>III. SOFTWARE SUSTAINABILITY</title>
      <p>Although there have been initiatives related to Green IT,
efforts in the Green software area are still in early stages.
Software development should not remain indifferent to the
need to construct software products that contribute towards
sustainability during both their creation and use. Software is the
core of any IT technology, and the way by which it is
developed can greatly influence the activities that need this
software to be accomplished, such as the functions provided or
how the IT infrastructure is used.</p>
      <p>
        However, while sustainability is a standardized practice in a
number of engineering disciplines, efforts in software
engineering are recent and still immature [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref14">14</xref>
        ], and the way to
achieve sustainable software is mainly by improving its power
consumption [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref2">2</xref>
        ]. However, this is a very restrictive
interpretation of what software sustainability is.
      </p>
      <p>
        Sustainable software is a “software whose direct and
indirect negative impacts on economy, society, human beings
and the environment that result from the development,
deployment and usage of the software are minimal and/or have
a positive effect on sustainable development” [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref5">5</xref>
        ].
      </p>
      <p>
        This idea can be extended to cover the whole software
development process. Sustainable Software Engineering can
thus be referred as “the art of defining and developing software
products in such a way that the negative and positive impacts
on sustainability that result and/or are expected to result from
the software product over its whole lifecycle are continuously
assessed, documented, and optimized” [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref4">4</xref>
        ].
      </p>
      <p>
        The UN identifies three dimensions for sustainable
development – social sustainability, economical sustainability
and environmental sustainability [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref17">17</xref>
        ]. We relate them to
software as follows:
 Social sustainability is related to software use (by
whom, how and under what circumstances software
may be used);
 Economic sustainability is related to aspects of the
software business, but not to its development;
 Environmental sustainability deals with technical
aspects of software development.
      </p>
      <p>Software product development mainly affects the
environment via the consumption of resources that occurs
during its use and production. The most direct (and obvious)
impact of a software product is energy consumption, but other
resources may also have a negative impact on the software’s
sustainability. The use of a processor, increased needs of
memory and disk storage, network utilization and bandwidth,
the potential relocation of software production and use, among
others, are also elements to take into account.</p>
      <p>We believe that it is of prime importance to pay the
necessary attention to the environmental dimension of
sustainability in the software context, which we term as green
software or software greenability. figure 1 provides a graphic
representation of our research focus.</p>
      <p>Software Sustainability</p>
      <sec id="sec-3-1">
        <title>Software</title>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-3-2">
        <title>Social</title>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-3-3">
        <title>Sustainability</title>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-3-4">
        <title>Software</title>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-3-5">
        <title>Economic</title>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-3-6">
        <title>Sustainability</title>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-3-7">
        <title>Software</title>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-3-8">
        <title>Environmental</title>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-3-9">
        <title>Sustainability</title>
        <p>(Software</p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-3-10">
        <title>Greenability)</title>
        <p>
          Furthermore, according to [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref1">1</xref>
          ], there are three
environmental impact levels of ICTs:
 1st order: direct environmental effects of production
and use of ICTs;
 2nd order: indirect effects of using the system
(resource and energy conservation owing to
optimization or substitution of product materials);
 3rd order: indirect, long term, effects of using the
system (lifestyle changes that may impact on the
environment).
        </p>
        <p>We believe that, during development, the 1st level impact
can be taken into account more easily because it is related to
the direct effects of the software. The other levels will depend
on how the software will be used, environmental aspects, and
other external factors out of the developer’s control. Therefore,
our work focus on the 1st level impacts, which will to some
extent have an influence on the second level (figure 2).</p>
        <p>This international standard defines three quality models.
Two of them, the product quality model and the quality in use
model, are related to the product, while the third is related to
the quality of data. Our work is focused on the first two.</p>
        <p>1st level 2nd level 3rd level</p>
        <p>Impact impact impact</p>
        <p>Environmental impact levels of ICTs (Berkhout and Herin, 2001)</p>
        <p>TIC impact levels and the greenability</p>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-4">
      <title>IV. SOFTWARE QUALITY AND GREENABILITY</title>
      <p>When a software product is developed it is necessary to
specify the requirements that the product should satisfy.
Software requirements can be classified into functional and
non-functional requirements.</p>
      <p>
        The former should define the fundamental actions that must
take place in the software in accepting and processing the
inputs and in processing and generating the outputs [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref8">8</xref>
        ]. The
functional requirements are therefore related to the “What” of a
software product.
      </p>
      <p>
        Non-functional requirements can be seen as requirements
that constrain or set some quality attributes upon functionalities
[
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref7">7</xref>
        ]. This means that non-functional quality requirements can be
seen as the “How” of a software product.
      </p>
      <p>Bearing in mind that software greenability is a means to
improve a software product, we believe that it must be part of
quality and, therefore, it is related to non-functional
requirements. The first step should therefore be to include
greenability in software quality.</p>
      <p>According to ISO/IEC 25010 (figure 3), process quality
influences product quality, which in turn influences quality in
use. On the other hand, quality in use depends on the software
product, which depends on process quality.</p>
      <p>Fig. 3.</p>
      <p>
        Software quality life cycle [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref10">10</xref>
        ]
      </p>
      <p>The quality of a system is defined as the degree to which
the system satisfies the stated and implied needs of its various
stakeholders, and thus provides value. These stated and implied
needs are represented in the SQuaRE series of standards in
various models (figure 4).</p>
      <p>
        Targets of quality model [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref10">10</xref>
        ]
      </p>
      <p>The software product quality model is composed of eight
characteristics, which are further subdivided into
subcharacteristics that can be measured internally or externally.</p>
      <p>
        As is stated in the standard, “the product quality model is
useful for specifying requirements, establishing measures, and
performing quality evaluations” [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref10">10</xref>
        ]. The quality
characteristics defined can be used as a checklist in order to
ensure a comprehensive treatment of quality requirements, thus
providing a basis that can be used to estimate the consequent
effort and activities that will be needed during systems
development. The characteristics in the product quality model
are intended to be used as a set when specifying or evaluating
software product quality”.
      </p>
      <p>The system quality in use model is composed of five
characteristics, which are further subdivided into
subcharacteristics that can be measured when a product is used in a
realistic context. These characteristics are thus a starting point
for requirements, and can be used to measure the impact of the
quality of the system in use and maintenance.</p>
      <p>The software product quality characteristics can be used to
specify and evaluate detailed characteristics of the software
product that are prerequisites for achieving desired levels of
quality in use.</p>
      <sec id="sec-4-1">
        <title>A. Software Product Greenability</title>
        <p>
          In [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref3">3</xref>
          ], we have proposed the inclusion of sustainability in
the software product model of the ISO/IEC 25010 standard
[
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref10">10</xref>
          ]. However, naming the characteristic “sustainability” was
not ideal because, as explained in section III, greenability deals
with the technical aspects of the sustainability (see figure 1).
Furthermore, the proposal did not consider capacity
optimization as part of this greenability. We therefore refine
that proposal as follows:
        </p>
        <p>The proposal includes four sub-characteristics for the
product greenability characteristic (figure 5):



</p>
        <p>Energy efficiency. Degree of effectiveness and
efficiency with which a software product consumes
energy when performing its functions.</p>
        <p>Resource optimization. Degree to which the resources
expended by a software product, when performing its
functions, are used in an optimal manner. As in the
standard, the authors consider that resources can
include: other software products, the software and
hardware configuration of the system, and materials
(such as print paper, storage media).</p>
        <p>Capacity optimization. Degree to which the maximum
limits of a product or system parameter meet
requirements in an optimal manner, allocating only
those which are necessary.</p>
        <p>Perdurability. Degree to which a software product can
be used over a long period, being, therefore, easy to
modify, adapt and reuse.</p>
        <p>The next step in the process of integrating greenability into
the software quality should be to include it in the quality in use
model presented in ISO/IEC 25010.</p>
        <p>Therefore, software product greenability can be defined as:
Degree to which a product lasts over time, optimizing the
parameters, the amounts of energy and the resources used.</p>
        <p>Fig. 5.</p>
        <p>Software product greenability</p>
        <p>Greenability, however, is not only relevant to the software
product. As shown in figure 3, software product quality
influences quality in use and quality in use, depends on the
software product quality. So, it is also necessary to study the
inclusion for the greenability in the quality in use model.</p>
        <p>V. ADDING GREENABILITY TO THE QUALITY IN USE MODEL
The process of including a new characteristic in the
standard requires a set of actions:</p>
        <p>A. Working with the sub-characteristics: The
identification and definition of the sub-characteristics
is carried out.</p>
        <p>B. Defining the new characteristics: new characteristics
formally defined/refined, considering the
subcharacteristics.</p>
        <p>C. Reviewing quality in use characteristics: the model is
reviewed in order to check whether it is affected by the
inclusion of the new characteristic.</p>
        <p>D. Redefining quality in use: the quality in use definition
is reviewed in order to include the new characteristic in
it.</p>
        <p>Note that this is not a linear process, but an iterative one, as
the completion of one action may lead to the review of the
previous ones.</p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-4-2">
        <title>A. Working with the sub-characteristics</title>
        <p>We identified the sub-characteristics in two steps. First, we
studied the model characteristics in order to determine which
existing characteristics would affect greenability. Secondly, we
considered adding new sub-characteristics not derived from the
previous step. We have done this by using the definition of the
characteristics provided in the standard trying to determine its
influence on the greenability in use. We have consequently
obtained the following sub-characteristics:
 Efficiency Optimization. Optimization of resources
expended in relation to the accuracy and completeness
with which users achieve goals. Relevant resources can
include time consumption, software resources, etc.
 User’s environmental perception. Degree to which
users are satisfied with their perception of the
consequences that the use of software will have on the
environment.
 Minimization of environmental effects. Degree to
which a product or system reduces the effects on the
environment in the intended contexts of use.</p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-4-3">
        <title>B. Defining new characteristics</title>
        <p>New characteristics are formally defined and refined,
considering the sub-characteristics identified above. In this
case, only one new characteristic has been identified:</p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-4-4">
        <title>Greenability in use. Degree to which a software product can be used by optimizing its efficiency, by minimizing environmental effects and by improving the environmental user perception.</title>
        <p>Because of the two first steps, we have obtained the new
characteristic and sub-characteristics shown in figure 6.</p>
        <p>Efficiency
Optimization</p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-4-5">
        <title>C. Reviewing quality in use characteristics</title>
        <p>It is now necessary to review the definitions of the other
quality in use characteristics that could be affected by the
inclusion of the new one. The following definitions have
therefore been redefined:</p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-4-6">
        <title>Context coverage. Degree to which a product or system can be used with effectiveness, efficiency, freedom from risk,</title>
        <p>Quality in use
Usefulness
Pleasure
Comfort
Trust</p>
        <p>Economic risk
mitigation</p>
        <p>Context
completeness
Health and
safety risk
migitation
Environmental
risk mitigation</p>
        <p>Flexibility</p>
        <p>Efficiency
Optimization
greenability and satisfaction in both specified contexts of use
and in contexts beyond those initially explicitly identified</p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-4-7">
        <title>Context completeness. Degree to which a product or system can be used with effectiveness, efficiency, freedom from risk, greenability and satisfaction in all the specified contexts of use</title>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-4-8">
        <title>Flexibility. Degree to which a product or system can be used with effectiveness, efficiency, freedom from risk, greenability and satisfaction in contexts beyond those initially specified in the requirements</title>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-4-9">
        <title>D. Redefining quality in use</title>
        <p>Finally, the last step is to review the quality in use
definition in such a manner that it takes into account the new
added characteristic.</p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-4-10">
        <title>Quality in use is the degree to which a product or system can be used by specific users to meet their needs in order to achieve specific goals with efficiency, freedom from risk, greenability and satisfaction in specific contexts of use.</title>
        <p>The result of this process is the new quality in use model
shown in figure 7.</p>
        <p>As previously indicated our work is focused on minimizing
the first level impact of software, although it may also affect
the second and third levels (see Section II and figure 2). It must
be noted that effects at the third level are indirect and more
difficult to consider during the software development.</p>
        <p>In this section, we wish to provide an example of the
relationship between a greenability in use sub-characteristics
and the ICT impact levels.</p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-4-11">
        <title>A. Sub-characteristic: Efficiency Optimization</title>
        <p>Domain application: Application with which to generate
reports</p>
        <p>First level impact
 Negative. The user wishes to obtain an annual report of
the company’s total expenditure grouped by
department. However, the application does not provide
this option and it is necessary to generate an expense
report for each department. This implies that in order
for the user to perform this task, s/he must use more
resources.</p>
        <p>Positive. The application provides accurate information
about the enterprise’s light consumption expenditure.</p>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-5">
      <title>Second level impact</title>
      <p> Negative: The data recovery processes are slower
because data are scattered in several reports.
 Positive: Reports are stored in digital format,
signifying that reports on paper are not necessary
(ematerialization).</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-6">
      <title>Third level impact</title>
      <p> A growth in IT-related services supposes a structural
change and a new way of using resources at company
level.</p>
      <p>As will be noted, the development of a green software
product impacts directly on the first level but also influences
the second and may even reach the third.</p>
      <p>Having defined the product quality (PQ) and the quality in
use (QiU) models, the next step is to discover how to link them.</p>
      <p>
        VII. LINKING PRODUCT QUALITY AND QUALITY IN USE
By incorporating greenability to the software product
quality and to the quality in use models of the ISO/IEC 25010
standard, we have created the foundations for assessing and
achieving greenability in software. Therefore, we must
consider the greenability of both the software product itself and
of the software in use. However, as discussed in [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref12">12</xref>
        ], the
ISO/IEC 25010 standard (figure 3) states that there is a
relationship between the product quality and the quality in use,
but it does not say how to make this connection.
      </p>
      <p>In fact, in the software quality field, most efforts have been
made as regards product quality and it is difficult to find works
on quality in use. The emphasis has principally been placed on
assessing the quality of software products because they are
more precisely defined in literature, can be more easily
identified (and are thus easier to evaluate), and also because of
the “dependency” of QiU on product quality.</p>
      <p>This relationship between the product and the quality in-use
of the software product would appear to be based on the
assumption than having a product with high quality will
guarantee a product with a high QiU. However, this is not
necessarily true in many situations. The fact that a product has
the best quality does not necessarily guarantee that the product
will fulfill the user’s needs in its context of use, especially
when the overall quality (as perceived by the end-user) is
composed of many conflicting factors. A Ferrari is not the best
car to go to work in if you are a social worker in a deprived
suburb in the outskirts of New York.</p>
      <p>Our focus on the quality assessment is exactly the opposite:
concentrating on the quality in use as the driving factor to
consider when designing a software product, or when selecting
the product that best fits a user’s needs. There are several
reasons why we feel the need to challenge the traditional
approach used to evaluate the quality of a software product.
Firstly, not all the product quality characteristics of a software
product have the same influence on its QiU. This, together with
the false assumption regarding the direct dependency between
the product quality and the QiU mentioned above, frequently
forces some of the product aspects (which are non-critical for
the end user) to be over-specified for the sake of ensuring a
certain level of QiU. This unnecessarily increases costs,
development efforts and, resource usage, without a direct effect
on the advantages that the end-user perceives.</p>
      <p>We therefore focus on the QiU, and we analyze the
relationship between the product quality and the QiU of a
software product in the opposite direction to that which has
traditionally occurred. This means applying a ‘backward’
analysis (we start with a given level of QiU and we wish to
determine the minimum level of product quality that will
guarantee such a desired quality in use), as opposed to the
traditional “forward” analysis (by which we attempt to
determine the level of QiU of a software product, given a
measured level of product quality). In order to obtain a (good)
level of quality in use, the goal would in fact be to be able to
select the reduced set of really relevant product quality
subcharacteristics that ensure the required level of quality.
Focusing solely on them will avoid superfluous costs or
irrelevant features which may unnecessarily increase the final
impact on the environment and also the price of the product.</p>
      <sec id="sec-6-1">
        <title>A. Use of Bayesian Networks</title>
        <p>
          In order to determine the relationship between the quality in
use (QiU) and the product quality (PQ), we need statistical
methods and tools that can carry out backward analyses.
However, the commonly used linear regression (LR) or
principal component analysis (PCA) are not useful here
because they conduct forward analysis and need initial
numerical information at data level, which is in many cases
difficult to obtain. However, Bayesian Belief Networks (or,
simply, Bayesian Networks, BNs) can be very useful. A BN is
a directed acyclic graph, whose nodes are the uncertain
variables and whose edges are the casual or influential links
between variables. A Conditional Probability Table (CPT) is
associated with each node in order to denote such causal
influence [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref11">11</xref>
          ].
        </p>
        <p>To define a BN it is necessary to: (1) provide the set of
random variables (nodes) and the set of relationships (causal
influence) among those variables; (2) build a graph structure
with them; and (3) define conditional probability tables
associated with the nodes. These tables determine the weight
(strength) of the links of the graph and are used to calculate the
probability distribution of each node in the BN.</p>
        <p>The use of BNs thus allows us to model the different
relationships among the characteristics and sub-characteristics
of the product quality and the QiU, in addition to the degree of
dependence or influence among them. This signifies that it is
necessary to define the structure and conditional probability
tables in which the uncertainty relationships among the BN
nodes (characteristics) that we wish to build are reflected. Once
the network has been defined, it is necessary to train it using a
set of controlled experiments, so that it “learns”.</p>
        <p>The trained network can additionally be used to make
inferences about the values of the variables in the network.
Bayesian propagation algorithms use probability theory to
make such inferences, using the information available (usually
a set of observations or evidences). Such inferences can be
abductive, and if we wish to determine the product quality
subcharacteristics we must consider guaranteeing a required level
of QiU (the cause that best explains the evidence); or
predictive, if we wish to determine the probability of obtaining
certain results in the future. All the variables in the network can
therefore be used as either a source of information or an object
of prediction, depending on the evidence available and on the
goal of the diagnostic process.</p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-6-2">
        <title>B. Modelling the Bayesian Network</title>
        <p>In this point, we show how to prepare a Bayesian Network
in order to link product quality and quality in use. It should be
noted that this is a general example as regards how to use this
approach, and that it must be tailored to specific contexts.</p>
        <p>
          Our working hypothesis is that the PQ has an influence on
the QiU and that this influence can be modeled and studied by
using a BN, in such a way that we can conduct a backward
analysis of the required level of PQ to ensure a given level of
QiU. We have successfully applied this approach previously
[
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref12">12</xref>
          ], and other authors have also used the BN for the
assessment of software quality [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref13">13</xref>
          ].
        </p>
        <p>In order to model the Bayesian Network, it is first necessary
to identify the relationships between the PQ characteristics and
the Quality in use. The relationship between PQ and QiU can
be modeled by determining the characteristics of the former
that affect the characteristics of the latter. As our present focus
is on greenability, we shall focus the process solely on the
greenability in use characteristic (although the same process
can be applied to the other QiU characteristics).</p>
        <p>It is then necessary to identify the PQ characteristics that
have a significant influence on the greenability in use
subcharacteristics. This is done by using the definitions provided
in the standard along with those defined in this paper for the
new sub-characteristics related to greenability. This process is
made by a set of experts in quality. Firstly, they established the
relationship among the characteristics independently. Next,
they made a meeting to interchange opinions and agree on
values. Table 1 shows these relationships by employing a
matrix, in which the “X” indicates a relationship between these
characteristics.</p>
        <p>The next step is to determine the relationship between the
sub-characteristics of the QP characteristics and the
subcharacteristics of the greenability (using the information in
Table I as a starting point). This step is necessary because if it
were not taken we would be assuming that, for example, all the
reliability sub-characteristics have the same influence on the
efficiency optimization and this might not be true (it could
perhaps be more closely related to fault tolerance than to
maturity).</p>
        <p>We have chosen only one of the greenability in use
subcharacteristics in order to continue with the example. More
specifically, and based on the results shown in Table I, we
decided to work with the environmental user perception
because it is the one with most interactions and because it
appears to be the closest to the user.</p>
        <p>Greenability in Use
Efficiency
optimization</p>
        <p>User’s
environmental
perception.</p>
        <p>Minimization of
environmental
effects.
y
lit
a
u
q
t
c
u
d
o
r
P</p>
        <p>Functional</p>
        <p>Suitability
Performance</p>
        <p>Efficiency
Compatibility</p>
        <p>Usability
Reliability</p>
        <p>Security
Maintainability</p>
        <p>Portability</p>
        <p>We have therefore identified the relationships shown in
Table II. The “X” again indicates a relationship between these
characteristics.</p>
        <p>The level of influence (indicated by the relationships in Table I
and Table II) may vary between different application domains.
The relationships shown in both tables might then need to be
tailored to other domains, but the method indicated in this
paper is still valid.</p>
        <p>It is necessary to use the information provided in Table II to
model the Bayesian Network that reflects the relationships
identified, taking into account the hierarchical structure of the
models and the construction rules for Bayesian Networks.
figure 8 shows the results.</p>
        <p>As can be observed, there is a node for each characteristic
and sub-characteristic, and arcs represent the relationships
between the nodes (there is one arc for each X in Table II and
another with which to connect a PQ characteristic with its
subcharacteristics).</p>
        <p>User’s
environmental
perception.</p>
        <p>User’s
environmental
perception
Portability
Compatibility</p>
        <p>Usability
Functional
Suitability
Although this BN reflects the relationships identified, it
produces a very high number of entries on the final node (that
of the environmental user perception). The definition of the
probability tables is therefore very laborious and cumbersome.
One practice that is commonly used to simplify the
relationships in BNs is based on the introduction of synthetic
nodes. In this case, we decided to introduce a synthetic node
among the PQ characteristics that are conceptually related. The
BN obtained (figure 9) drastically reduces the number of
entries in the probability tables. The BN obtained could easily
be used to create three individual BNs (one for each of the
subtrees that comprise the BN), work independently with them and
then combine them to form the complete Bayesian Network.</p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-6-3">
        <title>C. Adapt the Bayesian Network</title>
        <p>In the previous point, we have shown an example of how to
use Bayesian Networks to determine the influence of the
greenability in use on the product quality. However, it is
necessary to define the rest of BNs and adapt them to the
specific context to which it is to be applied.</p>
        <p>In order to carry out this adaptation, we must ensure that all
the characteristics of the standard are applicable to this context
and that no further characteristics are going to be needed. In
addition, it should be determined whether to include new
characteristics of the context by studying the state of the art,
looking for other proposals, consulting experts, etc.</p>
        <p>After these actions have been taken, we will be able to
build the structure of the Bayesian network.</p>
        <p>The next step is to create the probability tables. The
influences of some given characteristics will obviously depend
on the domain. That means it is vital to create tables to reflect
the specific reality of a particular domain.</p>
        <p>To do that, we must carry out experiments or surveys that
allow us to obtain a series of data that serve as input to the
network validation process. This is part of our future work in
order to finish the Bayesian network and use it for working on
the greenability assessment of a software product.</p>
        <p>The final step in being able to use this network will be the
definition of specific measurements for the software product
we wish to measure. These measurements should be able to be
calculated for the product; this will preferably be automatic,
though that is not always possible. These measurements will be
the ones which will serve as input to the external nodes of the
network; their values should be changed into valid inputs to the
network. The values will be propagated though the BN, via the
nodes and by applying the probability tables, until the lower
node is reached (the one about quality in use, or some of its
characteristics)</p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-6-4">
        <title>D. Use of the Bayesian Networks</title>
        <p>Once the BN’s have been adapted to the specific context,
they are ready to be used. These BN’s can be used to carry out
a forward or backward analysis.</p>
        <p>In the forward analysis, we can determine the quality in use
of a product once it has been created. In order to do we should
define measurements for the external nodes that make up the
input to the network.</p>
        <p>In the backward analysis, we can determine the minimum
values of external quality that the product needs to reach a
desired level of quality in use. In that way, we can ascertain
what values (for the measurements defined for each
characteristic) the product should have for the input nodes.</p>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-7">
      <title>VIII. CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE WORK</title>
      <p>Greenability is a means to improve the software product
and should therefore be integrated into quality models, such as
the ISO/IEC25010 standard. By doing so, greenability can be
assessed and achieved during the software development
process, just like other software qualities.</p>
      <p>In this paper, we have proposed a extension of the quality
in use model of the ISO/IEC25010 standard, includes a new
characteristic: greenability. This is composed of three
subcharacteristics: Efficiency Optimization, User’s environmental
perception, and Minimization of environmental effects.</p>
      <p>Moreover, we consider that there is a direct influence
between the product quality (which includes a greenability
characteristic) and the quality in use (which already integrates
greenability). We have therefore proposed a Bayesian Network
that shows the relationships between both. As a future work we
plan to work on this Bayesian Network, apply it to a specific
domain and construct the probability tables in order to assess
the greenability level of a given software product. We also plan
to use Bayesian Networks for the greenability evaluation by
means of measures and indicators. This is therefore another of
our future works.</p>
      <p>We also wish to continue with our work by studying the
other aspects of sustainability, i.e., the economic and mainly
the social aspects to which we believe special attention should
be paid in order to indicate and mitigate some labor situations
that currently occur in the software industry and that should be
rejected immediately.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-8">
      <title>ACKNOWLEDGMENT</title>
      <p>This work has been funded by the GEODAS-BC
project (Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad and Fondo
Europeo de Desarrollo Regional FEDER,
TIN2012-37493C03-01).</p>
    </sec>
  </body>
  <back>
    <ref-list>
      <ref id="ref1">
        <mixed-citation>
          [1]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Berkhout</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>F.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
            <surname>Hertin</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <source>Impact of Information and Communication Technologies on Environmetal Sustainability: speculations and evidence</source>
          .
          <source>2001</source>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref2">
        <mixed-citation>
          [2]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Calero</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>M.F. Bertoa</surname>
            , and
            <given-names>M.A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Moraga A Systematic Literature</surname>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>Review for Software Sustainability Measures in GREENS 2013</article-title>
          : Second International Workshop on Green and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Sustainable</given-names>
            <surname>Software</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>2013</year>
          . pp.
          <fpage>46</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>53</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref3">
        <mixed-citation>
          [3]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Calero</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>M.A.</given-names>
            <surname>Moraga</surname>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>M.F.</given-names>
            <surname>Bertoa</surname>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>Towards a software product sustainability</article-title>
          model in
          <source>Workshop on Sustainable Software for Science: Practice and Experiences</source>
          <year>2013</year>
          . arXiv:
          <volume>1309</volume>
          .1640
          <year>2013</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref4">
        <mixed-citation>
          [4]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Dick</surname>
            , M. and
            <given-names>S. Naumann</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>Enhancing software engineering processes towards sustainable software product design in EnviroInfo 2010, Integration of Environmental Information in Europe</article-title>
          ,
          <source>Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Informatics for Environmental Protection</source>
          .
          <year>2010</year>
          . pp.
          <fpage>706</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>715</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref5">
        <mixed-citation>
          [5]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Dick</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
            <surname>Naumann</surname>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>N.</given-names>
            <surname>Kuhn</surname>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>A Model and Selected Instances of Green and Sustainable Software</article-title>
          .
          <source>What Kind of Information Society? Governance</source>
          , Virtuality, Surveillance, Sustainability,
          <source>Resilience in 9th IFIP TC 9 International Conference, HCC9 2010 and 1st IFIP TC 11 International Conference, CIP</source>
          <year>2010</year>
          ,
          <article-title>Held as Part of WCC</article-title>
          <year>2010</year>
          .
          <year>2010</year>
          . pp.
          <fpage>248</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>259</lpage>
          . Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-
          <fpage>642</fpage>
          -15479-9_
          <fpage>24</fpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref6">
        <mixed-citation>
          [6]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Du</surname>
            , W.D.,
            <given-names>S.L.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Pan</surname>
            , and
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Zuo</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <article-title>"How to Balance Sustainability and Profitability in Technology Organizations: An Ambidextrous Perspective."</article-title>
          .
          <source>IEEE Transactions on engineering management</source>
          . Vol.
          <volume>60</volume>
          (
          <issue>2</issue>
          ): pp.
          <fpage>366</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>385</lpage>
          10.1109/TEM.
          <year>2012</year>
          .
          <volume>2206113</volume>
          ,
          <year>2013</year>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref7">
        <mixed-citation>
          [7]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Glinz</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>On</surname>
          </string-name>
          non-functional
          <source>requirements. "International Conference on Requirements Engineering"</source>
          : pp.
          <fpage>21</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>26</lpage>
          ,
          <year>2007</year>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref8">
        <mixed-citation>
          <source>[8] IEEE 830, IEEE Recommended Practice for Software Requirements Specifications. . 1998</source>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref9">
        <mixed-citation>
          <source>[9] ISO 26000 Guidance on Social Responsibility</source>
          . 2010 Available from: https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#iso:std:iso:
          <volume>26000</volume>
          :ed1:v1:en
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref10">
        <mixed-citation>
          [10] ISO/IEC 25010,
          <article-title>Systems and software engineering - Software product Quality Requirements and Evaluation (SQuaRE) - Software product quality and system quality in use models</article-title>
          .
          <source>2010</source>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref11">
        <mixed-citation>
          [11]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Jensen</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>F.V.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Bayesian</given-names>
            <surname>Networks</surname>
          </string-name>
          and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Decisions</given-names>
            <surname>Graphs</surname>
          </string-name>
          .: Springer-Verlag,
          <year>2001</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref12">
        <mixed-citation>
          [12]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Moraga</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>M.F.</given-names>
            <surname>Bertoa</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
            <surname>Morcillo</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
            <surname>Calero</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <article-title>and</article-title>
          <string-name>
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
            <surname>Vallecillo</surname>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>Evaluating Quality-in-Use Using Bayesian Networks</article-title>
          .
          <source>in 12th ECOOP Workshop Quantitative Approaches on Object Oriented Software Engineering (QAOOSE</source>
          <year>2008</year>
          ).
          <year>2008</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref13">
        <mixed-citation>
          [13]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Neil</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>P.</given-names>
            <surname>Krause</surname>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>N.E.</given-names>
            <surname>Fenton</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <source>Software Quality Prediction Using Bayesian Networks: Software Engineering with Computational Intelligence, Chapter</source>
          <volume>6</volume>
          , Kluwer,
          <year>2003</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref14">
        <mixed-citation>
          [14]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Penzenstadler</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>B.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
            <surname>Raturi</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>D.</given-names>
            <surname>Richardson</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
            <surname>Calero</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>H.</given-names>
            <surname>Femmer</surname>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <surname>X.</surname>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>Franch Systematic Mapping Study on Software Engineering for Sustainability (SE4S) in 18th Intl. Conf on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering</article-title>
          .
          <year>2014</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref15">
        <mixed-citation>
          [15]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Sroufe</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>R.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
            <surname>Sarkis</surname>
          </string-name>
          , Strategic Sustainability:
          <article-title>The State of theArt in Corporate Environmental Management Systems: Sheffield</article-title>
          , UK: Greenleef Publishing,
          <year>2007</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref16">
        <mixed-citation>
          [16]
          <string-name>
            <surname>SWEBOK</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <article-title>"</article-title>
          <source>SWEBOK V3</source>
          .
          <article-title>0. Guide to the Software Engineering Body of Knowledge"</article-title>
          . Bourque,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>P.</given-names>
            and
            <surname>Fairley</surname>
          </string-name>
          , R.E. (eds.), NJ. IEEE Computer Society. . Vol.,
          <year>2014</year>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref17">
        <mixed-citation>
          <source>[17] United Nations World Commission on Environment and Development, Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our Common Future. In United Nations Conference on Environment and Development</source>
          ,.
          <year>1987</year>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
    </ref-list>
  </back>
</article>