<!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>A Quality Based Approach for the Analysis and Design of Information Systems</article-title>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Kashif Mehmood</string-name>
          <email>Kashif.Mehmood@essec.fr</email>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Thesis Supervisors: Samira Si-Said Cherfi</string-name>
          <email>Samira.Cherfi@cnam.fr</email>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Isabelle Comyn-Wattiau</string-name>
          <email>Isabelle.Wattiau@cnam.fr</email>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>. Introduction to Research Topic</string-name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff0">
          <label>0</label>
          <institution>CEDRIC-CNAM</institution>
          ,
          <addr-line>292 Rue Saint Martin, F-75141 Paris Cedex 03</addr-line>
          ,
          <country country="FR">France</country>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff1">
          <label>1</label>
          <institution>ESSEC Business School</institution>
          ,
          <addr-line>Av. B. Hirsch BP 50105, 95021 Cergy Cedex</addr-line>
          ,
          <country country="FR">FRANCE</country>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff2">
          <label>2</label>
          <institution>Samira.Cherfi</institution>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <abstract>
        <p>Information Systems (IS) require high cost for their maintenance activities. The relative cost for maintaining software and managing its evolution represents more than 90% of the total project cost [1]. The underlying assumption for this PhD work is that the earlier we can measure the quality of future software, the more we can improve it by being able to correct errors at the specifications level and the less will be the cost of these corrections. We propose to measure software quality using conceptual representations of the information system for both static and dynamic aspects.</p>
      </abstract>
      <kwd-group>
        <kwd>Conceptual Models</kwd>
        <kwd>Conceptual Modeling Quality</kwd>
        <kwd>Quality Criteria</kwd>
        <kwd>Quality Patterns</kwd>
        <kwd>Quality Attributes</kwd>
        <kwd>Quality Metrics</kwd>
      </kwd-group>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
  <body>
    <sec id="sec-1">
      <title>-</title>
      <p>
        Conceptual Models (CM) are the abstraction of the universe of discourse under
consideration [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref2">2</xref>
        ]. They are designed as part of the analysis phase and serve as a
communicating mediator between the users and the development team. Generally the
following three objectives are associated with the CMs: Meet the users’ requirements,
provide a formal representation of the observed reality, and be a basis for the
implementation and evolution of the future information system. Although a CM may
be consistent with the universe of discourse but it might not necessarily be correct [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref2">2</xref>
        ].
This suggests that there is a strong urge for a quality oriented approach that can help
in ensuring the consistency and correctness of the CMs. Studies show that defect
detection in the early stages of the application development can be 33 times more cost
effective than testing done at the end of development [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref3">3</xref>
        ]. It is shown that the
improvements in the quality of the CMs lead towards the improvements in the overall
quality of the delivered systems [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref4">4</xref>
        ].
      </p>
      <p>
        Unlike the software engineering discipline where there is a proliferation of the
methods and metrics for evaluating the quality of the software product, there is
significantly little literature devoted towards the quality of the CMs [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref2">2</xref>
        ]. Despite the
growing interest in the discipline of quality of conceptual models, as of today there
doesn’t exist any known standards such as the ones existing for software engineering.
Moreover, there are no generally accepted guidelines for evaluating the quality of the
CMs and little agreement exists among the experts as to what makes a “good” CM
[
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref4">4</xref>
        ].
      </p>
      <p>
        In [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref4">4</xref>
        ], the author shows that the researchers have not converged towards one
quality framework and that the practitioners are not actively involved in evaluating
the quality of the CMs.
      </p>
      <p>
        Furthermore there does not exist any framework, other than that of Lindland et al.
[
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref6">6</xref>
        ] that has both a theoretical basis and an empirical validation [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref7">7</xref>
        ]. Similarly most of
the existing frameworks provide ways for quality evaluation but only a handful of
them provide suggestions for defect correction.
3. Proposed Approach and its Expected Contributions
Our propositions rely on [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref4">4</xref>
        ] and thus we considered synthesizing (existing concepts
proposed by researchers) and adding the new concepts to formulate a comprehensive
quality approach for conceptual modeling.
      </p>
      <p>This approach is dedicated to the evaluation and improvement of CMs quality. The
main contributions include:
- The identification of a set of quality attributes relevant to both researchers and
practitioners (see Section 3.1).
- The definition of “quality pattern” concept similar to design pattern. Sixteen
quality patterns, based on validated quality attributes, are already identified
(see Section 3.2).
- The development of a software utility implementing the proposed approach.
- A validation process implying both researchers and practitioners.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-2">
      <title>3.1. Initial Survey to validate quality attributes</title>
      <p>Our approach relies on practitioners’ viewpoint for validation. We first identified an
initial set of quality attributes resulting from a literature review. A web-based survey
was then formulated for validation. The purpose of this survey was twofold:
i. To serve as a validation exercise and collect the feedback from professionals
including practitioners over the efficacy of the selected quality attributes.
ii. To study the general practices and views of the professionals over the quality
of CMs.</p>
      <p>Survey comprises of 42 questions. Respondents were asked to mark each of our
quality attributes on four categories (Please see Table-1). In total 179 professionals
(including IS managers, IS developers, researchers etc.) were contacted to complete
the survey. However, 57 professionals completed the survey that resulted in the
response rate of 31.8%. Table-1 summarizes the responses. Due to space constraints,
we are listing the survey results of only some of the quality attributes.</p>
      <sec id="sec-2-1">
        <title>Maintainability</title>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-2-2">
        <title>Clarity</title>
        <p>Documentation Degree
Completeness
Relevancy
Reliability
Practicability
Syntactic Correctness
Semantic Correctness
Simplicity
Structural complexity
Modifiability
Understandability
Extendibility</p>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-3">
      <title>3.2. Quality pattern and quality oriented development process</title>
      <p>Our proposed approach capitalizes some practices in the domain of quality evaluation
and improvement. These practices are identified from a thorough literature review.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-4">
      <title>3.2.1. The quality pattern meta-model</title>
      <p>
        Our quality meta-model follows a Goal Question Metric (GQM) [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref8">8</xref>
        ] approach. It is
based on the notion of quality patterns and manages the model quality with respect to
user’s needs. The meta-model in Figure-1 is generic and simple. A “quality goal”
expresses a need to improve the quality of a CM. A quality goal could be related to
several quality attributes.
      </p>
      <p>QualityGoals
0..n</p>
      <p>Realized by</p>
      <p>Uses
QualityAttributes</p>
      <p>1..n</p>
      <p>Measures
QualityMetrics</p>
      <p>Calculated on</p>
      <p>ModelElement</p>
      <p>TransformationsRules
Is applied on</p>
      <p>Related patterns
0..n
Suggests</p>
      <p>QualityPattern</p>
      <p>0..n</p>
      <p>Suggests
DesignPatterns
0..n
+Related Patterns</p>
      <p>For example, the quality goal “make my CM more extendible” is related to
“modularity” and “complexity” quality attributes. Quality attributes are contained in
quality patterns that guide their measurement and improvement. Quality attribute are
quantifiable through quality metrics. Based on the results of the quality metrics,
corresponding predefined transformations and/or appropriate design patterns are
proposed for improvement. The strength of our model lies in the relationship between
the quality patterns and design patterns.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-5">
      <title>3.2.2. An instantiation of the quality pattern meta-model</title>
      <p>Currently we have identified sixteen quality patterns based on the above mentioned
meta-model. Each of the quality patterns respects the following outline that has
become fairly standard within the software community to structure patterns.</p>
      <p>Name: a significant name summarizing the pattern objective.</p>
      <p>Context: characterization of the situation in which the pattern applies.
Problem: description of the problem to solve or the challenge to be addressed.
Solution: the recommendation to solve the problem.</p>
      <p>Keywords: a list of keywords related to the pattern content
Related patterns: patterns that are closely related to the one described.</p>
      <p>Table-2 sketches an example of a quality pattern dedicated to the evaluation and
improvement of the simplicity of a conceptual model.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-6">
      <title>Model Simplicity</title>
      <p>There is a need to maintain model simplicity
Complex models are difficult to understand, implement and
maintain. The complexity could be difficult to manage as it
could be related to several sources (domain, structure,
modeling notation etc.).</p>
      <p>Design patterns: High cohesion, indirection and polymorphism
GRASP patterns.</p>
      <p>Transformation rules: divide a model, merge classes/entities,
use factorization mechanism etc.</p>
      <p>Complexity, Simplicity, Structural Complexity, Size
Model Modifiability; Model Reusability</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-7">
      <title>3.2.3. Quality-Pattern driven evaluation process</title>
      <p>Our proposed quality aware methodology aims at helping the achievement of a
quality goal formulated by an IS designer. The process starts with the formulation of a
quality goal (by the IS designer). The approach helps in the achievement of this goal
by identifying and proposing a set of applicable quality patterns. The interpretation of
a quality patterns proposes either a set of transformation rules or a set of suitable
design patterns leading to the improvement of the CM according to the formulated
quality goal.
We propose to design and develop a prototype implementing the proposed approach.
This implementation has two core objectives. It will first help in demonstrating the
feasibility of the approach. The second objective is related to the validation of the
approach as we plan to make the prototype available to students, researchers, and
practitioners to collect their feedbacks.
The proposed approach will be validated on the basis of the feedback received from
different populations (researchers, professionals, students etc.) who have either used
the proposed utility for evaluating and improving the quality of their models or have
either been interviewed or surveyed over the efficacy of the proposed quality
concepts.</p>
      <p>We propose the following research methods for validation. However, other suitable
methodologies can also be used or employed for validation.</p>
      <p> Quantitative Methods; such as surveys that are used to gather data from
different IS stake holders. For example, we used an online survey to gather
data from different IS stake holders over the selected quality attributes.
 Qualitative Methods such as ethnography, action research, use case study etc.</p>
    </sec>
  </body>
  <back>
    <ref-list>
      <ref id="ref1">
        <mixed-citation>
          1.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Erlikh</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>L.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Leveraging legacy system dollars for E-business</article-title>
          . IEEE IT Pro, May/June 2000, pp.
          <fpage>17</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>23</lpage>
          (
          <year>2000</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref2">
        <mixed-citation>
          2.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Cherfi</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S.S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Akoka</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Comyn-Wattiau</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>I.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Conceptual Modeling Quality from EER to UML Schemas Evaluation</article-title>
          .
          <source>In: The Proceedings of the ER-2002</source>
          , (
          <year>2002</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref3">
        <mixed-citation>
          3.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Walrad</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Moss</surname>
          </string-name>
          , E.:
          <article-title>Measurement: The Key to Application Development Quality</article-title>
          .
          <source>IBM Systems Journal</source>
          , vol.
          <volume>32</volume>
          , No.
          <issue>3</issue>
          , pp.
          <fpage>445</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>460</lpage>
          (
          <year>1993</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref4">
        <mixed-citation>
          4. Moody, D.L.:
          <article-title>Theoretical and Practical Issues in Evaluating the Quality of Conceptual Models</article-title>
          .
          <source>Data &amp; Knowledge Engineering</source>
          , vol.
          <volume>55</volume>
          , pp.
          <fpage>243</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>276</lpage>
          (
          <year>2005</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref5">
        <mixed-citation>
          5.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Nelson</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>R.R.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Todd</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>P.A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Antecedents of Information and System Quality: An Empirical Examination Within the Context of Data Warehousing</article-title>
          .
          <source>J. Manage. Inf. Syst</source>
          . Vol.
          <volume>21</volume>
          , (
          <year>2005</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref6">
        <mixed-citation>
          6.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Lindland</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>O.I.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Sindre</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>G.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Sølvberg</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Understanding Quality in Conceptual Modeling</article-title>
          .
          <source>IEEE Software</source>
          , vol.
          <volume>11</volume>
          , No.
          <issue>2</issue>
          , pp.
          <fpage>42</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>49</lpage>
          (
          <year>1994</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref7">
        <mixed-citation>
          7.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Maes</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Poels</surname>
          </string-name>
          , G.:
          <article-title>Evaluating Quality of Conceptual Modeling Scripts Based on User Perceptions</article-title>
          .
          <source>Data &amp; Knowledge Engineering</source>
          , vol.
          <volume>63</volume>
          , No.
          <issue>3</issue>
          , pp.
          <fpage>701</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>724</lpage>
          (
          <year>2007</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref8">
        <mixed-citation>
          8.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Basili</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>V.R.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Gianluigi</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Rombach</surname>
          </string-name>
          , H.D.:
          <article-title>The Goal Question Metric Approach</article-title>
          . In: Encyclopedia of Software Engineering, Wiley (
          <year>1994</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
    </ref-list>
  </back>
</article>