This document describes a proposed software development life cycle (SDLC) model to improve student communication and collaboration. The model uses a spiral development process simulated using Simphony.NET. This allows the project manager to determine the optimal number of team members needed for each phase. The goal is to increase productivity by keeping all members busy at all times. Key aspects of the model include using Edmodo to create an online student learning network for communication and collaboration, dividing projects into small, medium, and large scales, and specifying time distributions for phases and resource needs.
Comparing Various SDLC Models On The Basis Of Available MethodologyIJMER
There are various SDLC models widely accepted and employed for developing software.
SDLC models give a theoretical guide line regarding development of the software. Employing proper
SDLC allows the managers to regulate whole development strategy of the software. Each SDLC has its
advantages and disadvantages making it suitable for use under specific condition and constraints for
specified type of software only. We need to understand which SDLC would generate most successful
result when employed for software development. For this we need some method to compare SDLC
models. Various methods have been suggested which allows comparing SDLC models. Comparing SLDC
models is a complex task as there is no mathematical theorem or physical device available. The essence
of this paper is to analyse some methodologies that could result in successful comparison of the SDLC
models. For this we have studied various available tools, techniques and methodologies and have tried
to extract most simple, easy and highly understandable method for comparing SDLC models.
A MAPPING MODEL FOR TRANSFORMING TRADITIONAL SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT METHODS TO ...ijseajournal
Agility is bringing in responsibility and ownership in individuals, which will eventually bring out effectiveness and efficiency in deliverables. Agile model is growing in the market at very good pace.Companies are drifting from traditional Software Development Life Cycle models to Agile Environment for the purpose of attaining quality and for the sake of saving cost and time. Nimbleness nature of Agile is helpful in frequent releases so as to satisfy the customer by providing frequent dual feedback. In Traditional models, life cycle is properly defined and also phases are elaborated by specifying needed input
and output parameters. On the other hand, in Agile environment, phases are specific to methodologies of Agile - Extreme Programming etc. In this paper a common life cycle approach is proposed that is applicable for different kinds of teams. The paper aims to describe a mapping function for mapping of traditional methods to Agile method.
Comparison between waterfall model and spiral modelGalaxyy Pandey
The document compares the waterfall and spiral models of software development. It describes the phases and characteristics of each model. The waterfall model progresses through phases sequentially with no going back, while the spiral model iterates through phases and allows revisiting previous work. The key difference is that the spiral model supports changes more easily and involves customers throughout, while the waterfall model does not support changes as well and involves customers less. Choosing a model depends on factors like project size, resources, and urgency.
A software Process model is a standardised format for planning, organising, and runninga new software development project. The need to complete and deliver software projects faster require using a suitable model.
There are several different kind of models being used which have evolved over the years, in this paper we carried out survey on the following main types of model; waterfall model, V-model, Component assembly model, Chaos model, Incremental model, Prototyping model, Spiral model, Rapid application development (RAD) model, Agile model, rational unified process (RUP), Iconix process and Software ecosystem (SECO) model by describing their characteristic features.
We concluded the study by listing the strengths and weaknesses of each of this models.
A PROPOSED HYBRID AGILE FRAMEWORK MODEL FOR MOBILE APPLICATIONS DEVELOPMENT ijseajournal
With the increasing in mobile application systems and a high competition between companies, that led to
increase in the number of mobile application projects.
Mobile software development is a group of process for creating software for mobile devices with limited
resources like small screen, low-power. The development of mobile applications is a big challenging
because of rapidly changing business requirements and technical constraints for mobile systems. So,
developers faced the challenge of a dynamic environment and the Changing of mobile application
requirements. Moreover, Mobile applications should adapt appropriate software development methods that
act in response efficiently to these challenges.
However, at the moment, there is limited knowledge about the suitability of different software practices for
the development of mobile applications. According to many researchers ,Agile methodologies was found to
be most suitable for mobile development projects as they are short time, require flexibility, reduces waste
and time to market.
Finally, in this research we are looking for a suitable process model that conforms to the requirement of
mobile application, we are going to investigate agile development methods to find a way, making the
development of mobile application easy and compatible with mobile device features.
Majority of agile projects currently involve interactive user interface designs, which can only be possible by following UCD in agile software model. But the integration of UCD is not clear in the current agile models. Both Agile models and UCD have iterative nature but agile models focus on coding and development of software; whereas, UCD focuses on user interface of the software. Similarly, both of them have testing features where the agile model involves automated tested code while UCD involves an expert or a user to test the user interface. In this paper, a new agile usability model is presented and tested in companies and are presented. Key results from these projects clearly shows: the proposed agile model incorporates usability evaluation methods, improve the relationship between usability experts to work with agile software experts; in addition, allows agile developers to incorporate the result from UCD into subsequent interactions.
Review of the myths on original softwareijseajournal
This document summarizes some common myths about the original software development life cycle (SDLC) model proposed by Winston Royce in 1970. It dispels the myths that the original SDLC model was a strictly linear "waterfall" process, required complete upfront requirements gathering, and did not involve customers until after development. In reality, Royce proposed an iterative process with feedback loops. He emphasized the importance of design preceding detailed analysis and ongoing customer involvement. The document aims to clear up misunderstandings about the original SDLC model that have arisen over time.
This document discusses different software life cycle models, including the classical waterfall model, iterative waterfall model, evolutionary model, prototyping model, and spiral model. It describes the phases and advantages and disadvantages of each. The classical waterfall model is considered theoretical while the iterative model is more practical but rigid. The evolutionary and prototyping models are useful when requirements are unclear. The spiral model subsumes other models but is complex. The appropriate model depends on the project's risks and understanding. Adhering to a model helps produce quality software systematically.
Comparing Various SDLC Models On The Basis Of Available MethodologyIJMER
There are various SDLC models widely accepted and employed for developing software.
SDLC models give a theoretical guide line regarding development of the software. Employing proper
SDLC allows the managers to regulate whole development strategy of the software. Each SDLC has its
advantages and disadvantages making it suitable for use under specific condition and constraints for
specified type of software only. We need to understand which SDLC would generate most successful
result when employed for software development. For this we need some method to compare SDLC
models. Various methods have been suggested which allows comparing SDLC models. Comparing SLDC
models is a complex task as there is no mathematical theorem or physical device available. The essence
of this paper is to analyse some methodologies that could result in successful comparison of the SDLC
models. For this we have studied various available tools, techniques and methodologies and have tried
to extract most simple, easy and highly understandable method for comparing SDLC models.
A MAPPING MODEL FOR TRANSFORMING TRADITIONAL SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT METHODS TO ...ijseajournal
Agility is bringing in responsibility and ownership in individuals, which will eventually bring out effectiveness and efficiency in deliverables. Agile model is growing in the market at very good pace.Companies are drifting from traditional Software Development Life Cycle models to Agile Environment for the purpose of attaining quality and for the sake of saving cost and time. Nimbleness nature of Agile is helpful in frequent releases so as to satisfy the customer by providing frequent dual feedback. In Traditional models, life cycle is properly defined and also phases are elaborated by specifying needed input
and output parameters. On the other hand, in Agile environment, phases are specific to methodologies of Agile - Extreme Programming etc. In this paper a common life cycle approach is proposed that is applicable for different kinds of teams. The paper aims to describe a mapping function for mapping of traditional methods to Agile method.
Comparison between waterfall model and spiral modelGalaxyy Pandey
The document compares the waterfall and spiral models of software development. It describes the phases and characteristics of each model. The waterfall model progresses through phases sequentially with no going back, while the spiral model iterates through phases and allows revisiting previous work. The key difference is that the spiral model supports changes more easily and involves customers throughout, while the waterfall model does not support changes as well and involves customers less. Choosing a model depends on factors like project size, resources, and urgency.
A software Process model is a standardised format for planning, organising, and runninga new software development project. The need to complete and deliver software projects faster require using a suitable model.
There are several different kind of models being used which have evolved over the years, in this paper we carried out survey on the following main types of model; waterfall model, V-model, Component assembly model, Chaos model, Incremental model, Prototyping model, Spiral model, Rapid application development (RAD) model, Agile model, rational unified process (RUP), Iconix process and Software ecosystem (SECO) model by describing their characteristic features.
We concluded the study by listing the strengths and weaknesses of each of this models.
A PROPOSED HYBRID AGILE FRAMEWORK MODEL FOR MOBILE APPLICATIONS DEVELOPMENT ijseajournal
With the increasing in mobile application systems and a high competition between companies, that led to
increase in the number of mobile application projects.
Mobile software development is a group of process for creating software for mobile devices with limited
resources like small screen, low-power. The development of mobile applications is a big challenging
because of rapidly changing business requirements and technical constraints for mobile systems. So,
developers faced the challenge of a dynamic environment and the Changing of mobile application
requirements. Moreover, Mobile applications should adapt appropriate software development methods that
act in response efficiently to these challenges.
However, at the moment, there is limited knowledge about the suitability of different software practices for
the development of mobile applications. According to many researchers ,Agile methodologies was found to
be most suitable for mobile development projects as they are short time, require flexibility, reduces waste
and time to market.
Finally, in this research we are looking for a suitable process model that conforms to the requirement of
mobile application, we are going to investigate agile development methods to find a way, making the
development of mobile application easy and compatible with mobile device features.
Majority of agile projects currently involve interactive user interface designs, which can only be possible by following UCD in agile software model. But the integration of UCD is not clear in the current agile models. Both Agile models and UCD have iterative nature but agile models focus on coding and development of software; whereas, UCD focuses on user interface of the software. Similarly, both of them have testing features where the agile model involves automated tested code while UCD involves an expert or a user to test the user interface. In this paper, a new agile usability model is presented and tested in companies and are presented. Key results from these projects clearly shows: the proposed agile model incorporates usability evaluation methods, improve the relationship between usability experts to work with agile software experts; in addition, allows agile developers to incorporate the result from UCD into subsequent interactions.
Review of the myths on original softwareijseajournal
This document summarizes some common myths about the original software development life cycle (SDLC) model proposed by Winston Royce in 1970. It dispels the myths that the original SDLC model was a strictly linear "waterfall" process, required complete upfront requirements gathering, and did not involve customers until after development. In reality, Royce proposed an iterative process with feedback loops. He emphasized the importance of design preceding detailed analysis and ongoing customer involvement. The document aims to clear up misunderstandings about the original SDLC model that have arisen over time.
This document discusses different software life cycle models, including the classical waterfall model, iterative waterfall model, evolutionary model, prototyping model, and spiral model. It describes the phases and advantages and disadvantages of each. The classical waterfall model is considered theoretical while the iterative model is more practical but rigid. The evolutionary and prototyping models are useful when requirements are unclear. The spiral model subsumes other models but is complex. The appropriate model depends on the project's risks and understanding. Adhering to a model helps produce quality software systematically.
Software development field is becoming more
productive day by day with the wonderful model name Agile. Agile
is the main focus of research now a days. It is because of its
abilities of handling changes in efficient way through iterative and
incremental practices. Although it became famous because of its
capabilities still there are some issues in it, which is ignorance of
usability engineering in different phases of agile that is an
important aspect to understand the software. Usability has deep
roots in software quality and is a core construct of HCI. To develop
interactive and usable systems there is a need of such a model
which can integrate HCI with Agile. To address this issue. To solve
this issue we have proposed a model which will work with both
User Centered (main focus of HCI) and Agile by assembling
different practices from both fields which will result useable
products. It will enhance software life with user satisfaction by
giving them running software with usability.
This document discusses the transition from traditional waterfall software development models to more agile approaches like Scrum and Kanban. It outlines some key limitations of the waterfall model, including unrealistic assumptions about requirements stability and integration challenges. Many software projects adopting waterfall experienced late delivery, changing requirements issues, and customer dissatisfaction. More iterative agile methods like Scrum and Kanban address these issues by emphasizing working software over documentation, incremental delivery, and flexibility. Studies show higher success rates for agile projects compared to waterfall. Large organizations are increasingly adopting agile practices across many teams and projects.
IJRET : International Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology is an international peer reviewed, online journal published by eSAT Publishing House for the enhancement of research in various disciplines of Engineering and Technology. The aim and scope of the journal is to provide an academic medium and an important reference for the advancement and dissemination of research results that support high-level learning, teaching and research in the fields of Engineering and Technology. We bring together Scientists, Academician, Field Engineers, Scholars and Students of related fields of Engineering and Technology.
An Innovative Research on Software Development Life Cycle ModelSucharita Bansal
This document discusses the software development life cycle (SDLC) and various SDLC models. It begins by defining software and distinguishing programs from software products. It then describes the importance of SDLC models in structuring the software development process. Several common SDLC models are discussed, including waterfall, spiral, iterative/incremental, agile, and code and fix. The document proposes using a hybrid SDLC model incorporating both project management and development processes. It then discusses each stage of the SDLC in detail, including analysis, design, implementation, testing, documentation, evaluation, and maintenance.
‘O’ Model for Component-Based Software Development Processijceronline
The technology advancement has forced the user to become more dependent on information technology, and so on software. Software provides the platform for implementation of information technology. Component Based Software Engineering (CBSE) is adopted by software community to counter challenges thrown by fast growing demand of heavy and complex software systems. One of the essential reasons behind adopting CBSE for software development is the fast development of complicated software systems within well-defined boundaries of time and budget. CBSE provides the mechanical facilities by assembling already existing reusable components out of autonomously developed pieces of the software. The paper proposes a novel CBSE model named as O model, keeping an eye on the available CBSE lifecycle.
Human Computer Interaction Chapter 3 HCI in the Software Process and Design ...VijiPriya Jeyamani
The document discusses various aspects of the software development life cycle and human-computer interaction design rules. It describes the typical phases of software development like requirements specification, architectural design, detailed design, coding, testing, and maintenance. It also discusses design principles, standards, guidelines, heuristics and patterns that can improve usability. Iterative design and prototyping approaches are presented as methods to refine requirements and designs. The importance of documenting design rationale is highlighted.
This document provides an overview of how human-computer interaction (HCI) affects the software development process. It discusses how usability engineering promotes interactive system design and the software life cycle. The software life cycle involves requirements specification, design, implementation, testing, and maintenance. Iterative design and prototyping are important to overcome the limitations of traditional software development models. Usability metrics and standards help specify and test usability requirements. While iterative design has benefits, initial design decisions and a lack of understanding problems can limit its effectiveness.
ITERATIVE AND INCREMENTAL DEVELOPMENT ANALYSIS STUDY OF VOCATIONAL CAREER INF...ijseajournal
Software development process presents various types of models with their corresponding phases required to be accordingly followed in delivery of quality products and projects. Despite the various expertise and skills of systems analysts, designers, and programmers, systems failure is inevitable when a suitable development process model is not followed. This paper focuses on the Iterative and Incremental Development (IID)model and justified its role in the analysis and design software systems. The paper adopted the qualitative research approach that justified and harnessed the relevance of IID in the context of systems analysis and design using the Vocational
Career Information System (VCIS) as a case study. The paper viewed the IID as a change-driven software development process model. The results showed some system specification, functional specification of system and design specifications that can be used in implementing the VCIS using the IID model. Thus, the paper concluded that in systems analysis and design, it is imperative to consider a suitable development process that reflects the engineering mind-set, with heavy emphasis on good analysis and design for quality assurance.
The document discusses interaction design and human-computer interaction (HCI) in the software development process. It covers several key topics:
1. Interaction design principles like understanding users and reducing errors. The design process involves requirements gathering, analysis, design, and iterative prototyping.
2. HCI aspects are relevant at all stages of the software life cycle from requirements to maintenance. User research and iterative design are important given that requirements cannot be fully determined upfront.
3. Usability engineering specifies usability metrics early on but these are difficult to set without user testing prototypes. Iterative design overcomes this through incremental prototyping and testing with users.
BEST PRACTICES FOR IMPROVING USER INTERFACE DESIGN ijseajournal
A rich and effective computational system must have a friendly user interface with appealing usability features that provides excellent user experience. In order to develop interactive systems with the best user experience, an innovative iterative approach to user interface engineering is required because it is one of the most challenging areas given the diversity of knowledge, ideas, skills and creativity needed for building smart interfaces in order to succeed in today’s rapidly paced and tough, competitive marketplace. Many modeling aspects including analytical, intuitive, artistic, technical, graphical, mathematical, psychological and programming models need to be considered in the development process of an effective user interface. This research examines some of the past practices and recommends a set of guidelines for designing effective user interfaces. It also demonstrates how UML use case diagrams can be enhanced by relating user interface elements to use cases.
THE UNIFIED APPROACH FOR ORGANIZATIONAL NETWORK VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENTijseajournal
The present business network infrastructure is quickly varying with latest servers, services, connections,
and ports added often, at times day by day, and with a uncontrollably inflow of laptops, storage media and
wireless networks. With the increasing amount of vulnerabilities and exploits coupled with the recurrent
evolution of IT infrastructure, organizations at present require more numerous vulnerability assessments.
In this paper new approach the Unified process for Network vulnerability Assessments hereafter called as
a unified NVA is proposed for network vulnerability assessment derived from Unified Software
Development Process or Unified Process, it is a popular iterative and incremental software development
process framework.
This document compares five models of software engineering: the waterfall model, iteration model, V-shaped model, spiral model, and extreme programming model. It first provides background on software process models and development life cycles in general. It then describes each of the five models in more detail, highlighting their key stages and features, as well as advantages and disadvantages of each approach. The goal is to represent different software development models and compare their characteristics to understand their various features and limitations.
Today in era of software industry there is no perfect software framework available for
analysis and software development. Currently there are enormous number of software development
process exists which can be implemented to stabilize the process of developing a software system. But no
perfect system is recognized till yet which can help software developers for opting of best software
development process. This paper present the framework of skillful system combined with Likert scale. With
the help of Likert scale we define a rule based model and delegate some mass score to every process and
develop one tool name as MuxSet which will help the software developers to select an appropriate
development process that may enhance the probability of system success.
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS FOR PERFORMANCE COMPARISONijseajournal
Performance responsiveness and scalability is a make-or-break quality for software. Nearly everyone runs into performance problems at one time or another. This paper discusses about performance issues faced during Pre Examination Process Automation System (PEPAS) implemented in java technology. The challenges faced during the life cycle of the project and the mitigation actions performed. It compares 3 java technologies and shows how improvements are made through statistical analysis in response time of the application. The paper concludes with result analysis.
The document discusses and compares several software development life cycle (SDLC) models:
1) The waterfall model is a linear sequential flow where progress flows steadily through phases without backtracking. It is best for projects with clearly defined requirements.
2) The V-shaped model extends the waterfall model with early testing. It works well when requirements are easily understood.
3) The spiral model combines prototyping and risk assessment in cycles. It is favored for large, expensive projects built in phases.
4) The iterative model develops a system through repeated cycles and smaller portions, allowing learning from earlier versions. It produces value early and accommodates some changes.
5) The concurrent model develops tasks and states concurrently through framework
Integrated Analysis of Traditional Requirements Engineering Process with Agil...zillesubhan
In the past few years, agile software development approach has emerged as a most attractive software development approach. A typical CASE environment consists of a number of CASE tools operating on a common hardware and software platform and note that there are a number of different classes of users of a CASE environment. In fact, some users such as software developers and managers wish to make use of CASE tools to support them in developing application systems and monitoring the progress of a project. This development approach has quickly caught the attention of a large number of software development firms. However, this approach particularly pays attention to development side of software development project while neglects critical aspects of requirements engineering process. In fact, there is no standard requirement engineering process in this approach and requirements engineering activities vary from situation to situation. As a result, there emerge a large number of problems which can lead the software development projects to failure. One of major drawbacks of agile approach is that it is suitable for small size projects with limited team size. Hence, it cannot be adopted for large size projects. We claim that this approach can be used for large size projects if traditional requirements engineering approach is combined with agile manifesto. In fact, the combination of traditional requirements engineering process and agile manifesto can also help resolve a large number of problems exist in agile development methodologies. As in software development the most important thing is to know the clear customer’s requirements and also through modeling (data modeling, functional modeling, behavior modeling). Using UML we are able to build efficient system starting from scratch towards the desired goal. Through UML we start from abstract model and develop the required system through going in details with different UML diagrams. Each UML diagram serves different goal towards implementing a whole project.
Integrating profiling into mde compilersijseajournal
Scientific computation requires more and more performance in its algorithms. New massively parallel
architectures suit well to these algorithms. They are known for offering high performance and power
efficiency. Unfortunately, as parallel programming for these architectures requires a complex distribution
of tasks and data, developers find difficult to implement their applications effectively. Although approaches
based on source-to-source intends to provide a low learning curve for parallel programming and take
advantage of architecture features to create optimized applications, programming remains difficult for
neophytes. This work aims at improving performance by returning to the high-level models, specific
execution data from a profiling tool enhanced by smart advices computed by an analysis engine. In order to
keep the link between execution and model, the process is based on a traceability mechanism. Once the
model is automatically annotated, it can be re-factored aiming better performances on the re-generated
code. Hence, this work allows keeping coherence between model and code without forgetting to harness the
power of parallel architectures. To illustrate and clarify key points of this approach, we provide an
experimental example in GPUs context. The example uses a transformation chain from UML-MARTE
models to OpenCL code.
This document provides an overview and comparison of five software engineering models: waterfall, iteration, V-shaped, spiral, and extreme programming. It first defines what a software process model is and discusses some general models. It then focuses on describing the key aspects of each of the five models in more detail, including the waterfall model which consists of sequential phases from requirements to maintenance. The document highlights advantages and disadvantages of each model.
This document compares five models of software engineering: waterfall, iterative, V-shaped, spiral, and extreme programming. It provides descriptions and comparisons of each model. The waterfall model is described as one of the oldest and most widely used models, with distinct phases from requirements to maintenance. However, it lacks flexibility. The iterative model allows for overlapping phases and faster results. The V-shaped model emphasizes testing and has deliverables at each phase but lacks flexibility. The spiral model focuses on risk analysis through iterations called spirals. It is useful for large projects but costly. Extreme programming emphasizes teamwork, customer involvement, and frequent small releases but may not work for all projects. In summary, the document examines the features, advantages, and
The spiral model is a software development process that combines elements of both design and prototyping-centric models. It involves iterating through four phases - planning, risk analysis, engineering, and evaluation - with each iteration intended to incrementally approach completion of the project. The spiral model aims to reduce risk at each phase by gathering user feedback and requirements and addressing risks before proceeding. It is suited for large, complex projects where requirements are not fully known. An example is a project creating a video mail system for illiterate users through iterative user testing and feedback.
The Software Development Life Cycle (SDLC) is a methodology or framework used in project management to guide the stages involved in developing an information system or software application. It encompasses the entire process from the initial feasibility study to the maintenance of the completed application.
This document provides an overview of software development life cycle (SDLC) models and their comparison. It discusses several SDLC models including waterfall, V-shaped, iterative, prototyping, RAD, spiral and agile. Each model is described in terms of its phases, advantages and disadvantages. The document also presents related work from other scholars and states that while agile was not fully extreme programming, using Scrum principles resulted in return on investment and lower costs. It proposes future work to identify knowledge sharing procedures and user-centered SDLC models that overcome limitations of existing approaches.
Software development field is becoming more
productive day by day with the wonderful model name Agile. Agile
is the main focus of research now a days. It is because of its
abilities of handling changes in efficient way through iterative and
incremental practices. Although it became famous because of its
capabilities still there are some issues in it, which is ignorance of
usability engineering in different phases of agile that is an
important aspect to understand the software. Usability has deep
roots in software quality and is a core construct of HCI. To develop
interactive and usable systems there is a need of such a model
which can integrate HCI with Agile. To address this issue. To solve
this issue we have proposed a model which will work with both
User Centered (main focus of HCI) and Agile by assembling
different practices from both fields which will result useable
products. It will enhance software life with user satisfaction by
giving them running software with usability.
This document discusses the transition from traditional waterfall software development models to more agile approaches like Scrum and Kanban. It outlines some key limitations of the waterfall model, including unrealistic assumptions about requirements stability and integration challenges. Many software projects adopting waterfall experienced late delivery, changing requirements issues, and customer dissatisfaction. More iterative agile methods like Scrum and Kanban address these issues by emphasizing working software over documentation, incremental delivery, and flexibility. Studies show higher success rates for agile projects compared to waterfall. Large organizations are increasingly adopting agile practices across many teams and projects.
IJRET : International Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology is an international peer reviewed, online journal published by eSAT Publishing House for the enhancement of research in various disciplines of Engineering and Technology. The aim and scope of the journal is to provide an academic medium and an important reference for the advancement and dissemination of research results that support high-level learning, teaching and research in the fields of Engineering and Technology. We bring together Scientists, Academician, Field Engineers, Scholars and Students of related fields of Engineering and Technology.
An Innovative Research on Software Development Life Cycle ModelSucharita Bansal
This document discusses the software development life cycle (SDLC) and various SDLC models. It begins by defining software and distinguishing programs from software products. It then describes the importance of SDLC models in structuring the software development process. Several common SDLC models are discussed, including waterfall, spiral, iterative/incremental, agile, and code and fix. The document proposes using a hybrid SDLC model incorporating both project management and development processes. It then discusses each stage of the SDLC in detail, including analysis, design, implementation, testing, documentation, evaluation, and maintenance.
‘O’ Model for Component-Based Software Development Processijceronline
The technology advancement has forced the user to become more dependent on information technology, and so on software. Software provides the platform for implementation of information technology. Component Based Software Engineering (CBSE) is adopted by software community to counter challenges thrown by fast growing demand of heavy and complex software systems. One of the essential reasons behind adopting CBSE for software development is the fast development of complicated software systems within well-defined boundaries of time and budget. CBSE provides the mechanical facilities by assembling already existing reusable components out of autonomously developed pieces of the software. The paper proposes a novel CBSE model named as O model, keeping an eye on the available CBSE lifecycle.
Human Computer Interaction Chapter 3 HCI in the Software Process and Design ...VijiPriya Jeyamani
The document discusses various aspects of the software development life cycle and human-computer interaction design rules. It describes the typical phases of software development like requirements specification, architectural design, detailed design, coding, testing, and maintenance. It also discusses design principles, standards, guidelines, heuristics and patterns that can improve usability. Iterative design and prototyping approaches are presented as methods to refine requirements and designs. The importance of documenting design rationale is highlighted.
This document provides an overview of how human-computer interaction (HCI) affects the software development process. It discusses how usability engineering promotes interactive system design and the software life cycle. The software life cycle involves requirements specification, design, implementation, testing, and maintenance. Iterative design and prototyping are important to overcome the limitations of traditional software development models. Usability metrics and standards help specify and test usability requirements. While iterative design has benefits, initial design decisions and a lack of understanding problems can limit its effectiveness.
ITERATIVE AND INCREMENTAL DEVELOPMENT ANALYSIS STUDY OF VOCATIONAL CAREER INF...ijseajournal
Software development process presents various types of models with their corresponding phases required to be accordingly followed in delivery of quality products and projects. Despite the various expertise and skills of systems analysts, designers, and programmers, systems failure is inevitable when a suitable development process model is not followed. This paper focuses on the Iterative and Incremental Development (IID)model and justified its role in the analysis and design software systems. The paper adopted the qualitative research approach that justified and harnessed the relevance of IID in the context of systems analysis and design using the Vocational
Career Information System (VCIS) as a case study. The paper viewed the IID as a change-driven software development process model. The results showed some system specification, functional specification of system and design specifications that can be used in implementing the VCIS using the IID model. Thus, the paper concluded that in systems analysis and design, it is imperative to consider a suitable development process that reflects the engineering mind-set, with heavy emphasis on good analysis and design for quality assurance.
The document discusses interaction design and human-computer interaction (HCI) in the software development process. It covers several key topics:
1. Interaction design principles like understanding users and reducing errors. The design process involves requirements gathering, analysis, design, and iterative prototyping.
2. HCI aspects are relevant at all stages of the software life cycle from requirements to maintenance. User research and iterative design are important given that requirements cannot be fully determined upfront.
3. Usability engineering specifies usability metrics early on but these are difficult to set without user testing prototypes. Iterative design overcomes this through incremental prototyping and testing with users.
BEST PRACTICES FOR IMPROVING USER INTERFACE DESIGN ijseajournal
A rich and effective computational system must have a friendly user interface with appealing usability features that provides excellent user experience. In order to develop interactive systems with the best user experience, an innovative iterative approach to user interface engineering is required because it is one of the most challenging areas given the diversity of knowledge, ideas, skills and creativity needed for building smart interfaces in order to succeed in today’s rapidly paced and tough, competitive marketplace. Many modeling aspects including analytical, intuitive, artistic, technical, graphical, mathematical, psychological and programming models need to be considered in the development process of an effective user interface. This research examines some of the past practices and recommends a set of guidelines for designing effective user interfaces. It also demonstrates how UML use case diagrams can be enhanced by relating user interface elements to use cases.
THE UNIFIED APPROACH FOR ORGANIZATIONAL NETWORK VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENTijseajournal
The present business network infrastructure is quickly varying with latest servers, services, connections,
and ports added often, at times day by day, and with a uncontrollably inflow of laptops, storage media and
wireless networks. With the increasing amount of vulnerabilities and exploits coupled with the recurrent
evolution of IT infrastructure, organizations at present require more numerous vulnerability assessments.
In this paper new approach the Unified process for Network vulnerability Assessments hereafter called as
a unified NVA is proposed for network vulnerability assessment derived from Unified Software
Development Process or Unified Process, it is a popular iterative and incremental software development
process framework.
This document compares five models of software engineering: the waterfall model, iteration model, V-shaped model, spiral model, and extreme programming model. It first provides background on software process models and development life cycles in general. It then describes each of the five models in more detail, highlighting their key stages and features, as well as advantages and disadvantages of each approach. The goal is to represent different software development models and compare their characteristics to understand their various features and limitations.
Today in era of software industry there is no perfect software framework available for
analysis and software development. Currently there are enormous number of software development
process exists which can be implemented to stabilize the process of developing a software system. But no
perfect system is recognized till yet which can help software developers for opting of best software
development process. This paper present the framework of skillful system combined with Likert scale. With
the help of Likert scale we define a rule based model and delegate some mass score to every process and
develop one tool name as MuxSet which will help the software developers to select an appropriate
development process that may enhance the probability of system success.
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS FOR PERFORMANCE COMPARISONijseajournal
Performance responsiveness and scalability is a make-or-break quality for software. Nearly everyone runs into performance problems at one time or another. This paper discusses about performance issues faced during Pre Examination Process Automation System (PEPAS) implemented in java technology. The challenges faced during the life cycle of the project and the mitigation actions performed. It compares 3 java technologies and shows how improvements are made through statistical analysis in response time of the application. The paper concludes with result analysis.
The document discusses and compares several software development life cycle (SDLC) models:
1) The waterfall model is a linear sequential flow where progress flows steadily through phases without backtracking. It is best for projects with clearly defined requirements.
2) The V-shaped model extends the waterfall model with early testing. It works well when requirements are easily understood.
3) The spiral model combines prototyping and risk assessment in cycles. It is favored for large, expensive projects built in phases.
4) The iterative model develops a system through repeated cycles and smaller portions, allowing learning from earlier versions. It produces value early and accommodates some changes.
5) The concurrent model develops tasks and states concurrently through framework
Integrated Analysis of Traditional Requirements Engineering Process with Agil...zillesubhan
In the past few years, agile software development approach has emerged as a most attractive software development approach. A typical CASE environment consists of a number of CASE tools operating on a common hardware and software platform and note that there are a number of different classes of users of a CASE environment. In fact, some users such as software developers and managers wish to make use of CASE tools to support them in developing application systems and monitoring the progress of a project. This development approach has quickly caught the attention of a large number of software development firms. However, this approach particularly pays attention to development side of software development project while neglects critical aspects of requirements engineering process. In fact, there is no standard requirement engineering process in this approach and requirements engineering activities vary from situation to situation. As a result, there emerge a large number of problems which can lead the software development projects to failure. One of major drawbacks of agile approach is that it is suitable for small size projects with limited team size. Hence, it cannot be adopted for large size projects. We claim that this approach can be used for large size projects if traditional requirements engineering approach is combined with agile manifesto. In fact, the combination of traditional requirements engineering process and agile manifesto can also help resolve a large number of problems exist in agile development methodologies. As in software development the most important thing is to know the clear customer’s requirements and also through modeling (data modeling, functional modeling, behavior modeling). Using UML we are able to build efficient system starting from scratch towards the desired goal. Through UML we start from abstract model and develop the required system through going in details with different UML diagrams. Each UML diagram serves different goal towards implementing a whole project.
Integrating profiling into mde compilersijseajournal
Scientific computation requires more and more performance in its algorithms. New massively parallel
architectures suit well to these algorithms. They are known for offering high performance and power
efficiency. Unfortunately, as parallel programming for these architectures requires a complex distribution
of tasks and data, developers find difficult to implement their applications effectively. Although approaches
based on source-to-source intends to provide a low learning curve for parallel programming and take
advantage of architecture features to create optimized applications, programming remains difficult for
neophytes. This work aims at improving performance by returning to the high-level models, specific
execution data from a profiling tool enhanced by smart advices computed by an analysis engine. In order to
keep the link between execution and model, the process is based on a traceability mechanism. Once the
model is automatically annotated, it can be re-factored aiming better performances on the re-generated
code. Hence, this work allows keeping coherence between model and code without forgetting to harness the
power of parallel architectures. To illustrate and clarify key points of this approach, we provide an
experimental example in GPUs context. The example uses a transformation chain from UML-MARTE
models to OpenCL code.
This document provides an overview and comparison of five software engineering models: waterfall, iteration, V-shaped, spiral, and extreme programming. It first defines what a software process model is and discusses some general models. It then focuses on describing the key aspects of each of the five models in more detail, including the waterfall model which consists of sequential phases from requirements to maintenance. The document highlights advantages and disadvantages of each model.
This document compares five models of software engineering: waterfall, iterative, V-shaped, spiral, and extreme programming. It provides descriptions and comparisons of each model. The waterfall model is described as one of the oldest and most widely used models, with distinct phases from requirements to maintenance. However, it lacks flexibility. The iterative model allows for overlapping phases and faster results. The V-shaped model emphasizes testing and has deliverables at each phase but lacks flexibility. The spiral model focuses on risk analysis through iterations called spirals. It is useful for large projects but costly. Extreme programming emphasizes teamwork, customer involvement, and frequent small releases but may not work for all projects. In summary, the document examines the features, advantages, and
The spiral model is a software development process that combines elements of both design and prototyping-centric models. It involves iterating through four phases - planning, risk analysis, engineering, and evaluation - with each iteration intended to incrementally approach completion of the project. The spiral model aims to reduce risk at each phase by gathering user feedback and requirements and addressing risks before proceeding. It is suited for large, complex projects where requirements are not fully known. An example is a project creating a video mail system for illiterate users through iterative user testing and feedback.
The Software Development Life Cycle (SDLC) is a methodology or framework used in project management to guide the stages involved in developing an information system or software application. It encompasses the entire process from the initial feasibility study to the maintenance of the completed application.
This document provides an overview of software development life cycle (SDLC) models and their comparison. It discusses several SDLC models including waterfall, V-shaped, iterative, prototyping, RAD, spiral and agile. Each model is described in terms of its phases, advantages and disadvantages. The document also presents related work from other scholars and states that while agile was not fully extreme programming, using Scrum principles resulted in return on investment and lower costs. It proposes future work to identify knowledge sharing procedures and user-centered SDLC models that overcome limitations of existing approaches.
The document compares and contrasts the waterfall and agile methods of software development. It defines the waterfall method as a sequential approach where each stage must be completed before moving to the next, while the agile method uses collaborative teams and iterative development. The document discusses how both methods are still used, but that hybrid approaches combining the two methods may be the best solution, as confirmed by studies showing hybrid methods are commonly used in practice.
This document discusses various software development life cycle models including the V-Model, Prototyping Model, Extreme Programming, Synchronize-and-Stabilize Model, Fountain Model, and Spiral Model. It provides an overview and description of each model, outlining their key characteristics, advantages, and disadvantages. The models are classified based on features of software projects to determine the most appropriate life cycle approach.
The document discusses different software process models used in software development. It describes the waterfall model as a linear sequential process moving from requirements to design to development and so on. The iterative model develops software incrementally in iterations to add more features. The V model maps each development phase to a testing phase. Other models discussed include RAD, spiral and agile models.
Project Management System Evaluation PaperJill Lyons
The document discusses and evaluates different software development methodologies and models. It describes the project of developing a computer system for a real estate company to monitor assets. The authors conclude that an agile methodology like Scrum is most suitable for their project due to its flexibility and ability to incorporate changes. They found trial-and-error and frequent testing beneficial to refine the design without overcomplicating it.
Discussion Post 1A software process model is a streamlined port.docxmadlynplamondon
Discussion Post 1:
A software process model is a streamlined portrayal of a product procedure. Each model speaks to a procedure from a particular point of view. The straightforward reason for these methods is to offer an altered programming advancement according to the prerequisites. Now and then they are otherwise called software improvement life cycle (SDLC) approaches. There are different sorts of models:
1. Waterfall model: When we have an organized procedure and when our necessities are clear as in basic frameworks that need itemized, exact, and precise archives to portray the framework to be delivered. It isn't acceptable when prerequisites are not satisfactory and on the off chance that they continually change and not defenseless for client communication. The periods of the cascade model are: Requirements, Design, Implementation, Testing, and Maintenance.
2. Prototype model: This model is utilized for the advancement of an early example, or the arrival of an item worked to test an idea. This is helpful when prerequisites aren't clear. In spite of the fact that it needs great apparatuses, brisk turn of events, and significant expenses. The periods of a model are: Establish goals, Define model usefulness, Develop the model, Evaluate the model.
3. Incremental and Iterative: They are appropriate for huge tasks and are more affordable to the difference in prerequisites since they bolster client associations with every addition. They don't fit into little ventures or very much organized tasks. The periods of iterative advancement are Inception, Elaboration, Construction, Transition.
4. Spiral: It is useful for highly hazardous or enormous ventures where the necessities are questionable. The venture's prosperity is exceptionally reliant on the hazard examination stage. It doesn't function admirably for littler ventures. Each circle in the winding speaks to a stage. Each circle is part of four areas: Objective setting, Risk appraisal, and decrease, Development, and approval, Planning.
5. Agile: It suits little medium size undertaking, with quick changes in the necessities as a client is included during each stage. Exceptionally constrained arranging is required to begin with the undertaking. There are a few distinctive dexterous techniques accessible, for example, Scrum, Crystal, Agile Modeling (AM), Extreme Programming (XP), and so on.
Discussion Post -2
Rapid Prototyping Model
It follows an iterative model of software development. This model is certainly found to be focusing on implementing the simple and initial phase but finds it difficult and complex when setting the broader feature when it is completed. Reduction of cost and time wastage along with improvement of model user-friendliness serves as its major strengths while inadequate analysis and high cost of prototype implementation give its limitation (Scacchi, W. 2002).
Advantages:
- Absolutely unacceptable for ...
MODEL DRIVEN WEB APPLICATION DEVELOPMENT WITH AGILE PRACTICESijseajournal
Model driven development is an effective method due to its benefits such as code transformation, increasing
productivity and reducing human based error possibilities. Meanwhile, agile software development
increases the software flexibility and customer satisfaction by using iterative method. Can these two
development approaches be combined to develop web applications efficiently? What are the challenges and
what are the benefits of this approach? In this paper, we answer these two crucial problems; combining
model driven development and agile software development results in not only fast development and
easiness of the user interface design but also efficient job tracking. We also defined an agile model based
approach for web applications whose implementation study has been carried out to support the answers we
gave these two crucial problems.
Discussion postsDiscussion post1Discussing three tradi.docxmadlynplamondon
Discussion posts:
Discussion post1:
Discussing three traditional software processing models
In an organization, the developers certainly have the role to play for creating a successful system, and for that reason, they are seen to be utilizing some of the important processing models that deal with the traditional software (Dasoriya, 2017). The development of these models always helps the developers to do their work in a proper way as the contribution of these models directly connects to provide support in building the system successfully. Further discussion would be done on the three models that are usually utilized by the developers. There are not only three models that have been utilized by the developers but from my point, they are the important ones along with their benefits and some of their drawbacks.
Waterfall model
A sequential model through which development of the software could be divided into phases that are pre-defined. The phases are seen to be designed for providing performance on some particular activities with the phase of SDLC starts its work (Kaushik, Bharadwaj, Awasthi & Sharma, 2017). It is seen that before starting the next phase, the other phases would be completed so that there is no overlap between any of the phases. Different phases have a different function during the time of their utilization by the developers. The waterfall model could be utilized when the requirements are clear and the length of the project work is seen to be short.
Advantages
Each phase is certainly seen to be completed before starting the next one. The model is seen to be best when the project is small with well-defined requirements. It has the ability to perform a quality assurance test before proceeding to the next stage.
Disadvantages
One of the main drawbacks of this model is that only the errors could be reduced during the time of doing work within the phase. The period of testing is seen to be coming late during the time of the developing process. Developers waste their maximum time on doing the documentation.
Iterative model
This model is certainly found to be focusing on implementing the simple and initial phase but finds it difficult and complex when setting the broader feature when it gets completed. It is also a part of SDLC and the concept could be interchanged with the incremental model technique at some point of time (Arora & Arora, 2016). It is actually seen to be describing the alterations which relate to the incremental procedure that happens during the implementation and design of the latest iteration process. The utilization of this model is seen to be done during the time of analysis and doing some planning in the system.
Advantages
The model is seen to be productive and best for the agile organizations and the version is found to be inherent. Planning of parallel development is certainly found to be possible with the help of this model technique. It is found to be cost-effective during the time of changing the requiremen ...
Software Engineering in a Quick and Easy way - v1.pdfKAJAL MANDAL
The Most Common must know Software Development life cycle Models. As we discussed in our earlier article on Software Engineering, we have learned about the aspects of Software Engineering and the qualities that it should possess. Now let us move ahead and learn about the models of the software development life cycle. What is a software development life cycle? A software development life cycle, sometimes also called the SDLC life cycle, represents and describes the various activities that are to be performed to build a software product. These activities are grouped into several phases and sequentially linked in order. Hence we can also say, that a software development life cycle is a structured list of activities that are followed to develop software, from the inception to the delivery of the final product. During any phase of the life cycle of development, one or more activities might have to be carried out to start or finish that phase. For example, in the inception phase of actual coding, it is expected that the architectural designing phase is completed. Why software development life cycle model is required? In every model of SDLC, every phase may have its own child life cycle, for every team of a specific skill set. So in an environment of complicated projects and a variety of skill-based teams, it is vital to follow a pre-defined structured process. This creates discipline and maintains decorum in the working culture. All team members are interdependent. Failure of any one team will affect the deliverables of other teams. And all together it might lead to project failures. SDLC also defines entry and exit criteria for every phase. For example, say, if a team member starts coding, assuming that pro-activeness will help finish the project much earlier. This would be the perfect recipe for disaster and project failure. Why? Because, after putting down a month of effort they might realize that the project needs a roving vehicle on Mars to collect data. Unfortunately, the team doesn’t have that with them. So they can not proceed further. That means a feasibility study was not performed before the team started working on deliverables. Which in technical terms, is a breach of SDLC, and hence the loss of effort, or project failure. The team should have done a feasibility study before jumping straight into deliverables. Then they would have realized that the project is not doable, many days in advance. As so, they could have saved some unnecessary effort. Hence it is strongly suggested to follow a methodology, or process while working on complex and team-based projects. It becomes easier for the entire team to work together, support each other, manage, and track the progress of the development. Regardless of the model you follow, SDLC models always ensure smooth delivery, reporting, and chaos-free delivery of the project. Classic Waterfall Model. Prototyping Model. Iterative Waterfall Model. Rapid Action Development. Spiral Model.
This document discusses several software development models and practices. It describes the waterfall model which involves sequential stages of requirement analysis, design, implementation, testing, and maintenance. It also covers prototyping, rapid application development (RAD), and component assembly models which are more iterative in nature. The prototyping model involves creating prototypes to help define requirements, RAD emphasizes reuse and short development cycles, and component assembly focuses on reusing existing software components.
Software Development Lifecycle interactive powerpointThendo Tshikota
The document discusses the Software Development Life Cycle (SDLC) and different types of SDLC methodologies. It describes the Waterfall, Agile, Iterative, and DevOps methodologies. The Waterfall model follows each phase sequentially from planning to deployment and maintenance. Agile prioritizes customer needs and feedback through iterative cycles. Iterative development creates initial versions and improves them through small iterations. DevOps integrates operations into the development cycle to improve usability.
This document provides an overview of scrum as an agile framework for IT projects. It first defines what a project is and discusses different software development life cycles (SDLC) models like waterfall, V-shaped, prototyping, spiral, iterative, and agile. It then focuses on agile development, describing the agile manifesto, principles, and iron triangle. Finally, it introduces scrum as a common agile method and notes that scrum will be discussed in more detail in part 2 of the document.
Difference Between Agile And Waterfall ModelTammy Moncrief
The document discusses different software development methodologies used by programming teams, including the system development life cycle (SDLC), agile methodology, and extreme programming. SDLC is used for large projects with many developers, following a structured process from requirements to maintenance. Agile methodology is designed for smaller projects and favors rapid, iterative development. Extreme programming emphasizes close communication between developers and customers to adapt quickly to changing needs. While different, agile methodologies provide advantages for developing software faster and adapting more easily to customer requirements compared to SDLC and extreme programming.
Different Methodologies Used By Programming TeamsNicole Gomez
The document discusses different programming team methodologies including:
- System development life cycle (SDLC), which is used for large projects and includes waterfall models. It takes time but ensures high quality.
- Agile methodology, designed for small projects, combines methods for faster development that changes with customer needs.
- Extreme programming allows close communication between developers and customers so the software can change rapidly based on customer feedback.
Overall agile methodologies seem to have advantages over SDLC and extreme programming by allowing faster development that can change with customer desires.
Software Engineering, Software Consulting, Tech Lead, Spring Boot, Spring Cloud, Spring Core, Spring JDBC, Spring Transaction, Spring MVC, OpenShift Cloud Platform, Kafka, REST, SOAP, LLD & HLD.
Graspan: A Big Data System for Big Code AnalysisAftab Hussain
We built a disk-based parallel graph system, Graspan, that uses a novel edge-pair centric computation model to compute dynamic transitive closures on very large program graphs.
We implement context-sensitive pointer/alias and dataflow analyses on Graspan. An evaluation of these analyses on large codebases such as Linux shows that their Graspan implementations scale to millions of lines of code and are much simpler than their original implementations.
These analyses were used to augment the existing checkers; these augmented checkers found 132 new NULL pointer bugs and 1308 unnecessary NULL tests in Linux 4.4.0-rc5, PostgreSQL 8.3.9, and Apache httpd 2.2.18.
- Accepted in ASPLOS ‘17, Xi’an, China.
- Featured in the tutorial, Systemized Program Analyses: A Big Data Perspective on Static Analysis Scalability, ASPLOS ‘17.
- Invited for presentation at SoCal PLS ‘16.
- Invited for poster presentation at PLDI SRC ‘16.
Artificia Intellicence and XPath Extension FunctionsOctavian Nadolu
The purpose of this presentation is to provide an overview of how you can use AI from XSLT, XQuery, Schematron, or XML Refactoring operations, the potential benefits of using AI, and some of the challenges we face.
Microservice Teams - How the cloud changes the way we workSven Peters
A lot of technical challenges and complexity come with building a cloud-native and distributed architecture. The way we develop backend software has fundamentally changed in the last ten years. Managing a microservices architecture demands a lot of us to ensure observability and operational resiliency. But did you also change the way you run your development teams?
Sven will talk about Atlassian’s journey from a monolith to a multi-tenanted architecture and how it affected the way the engineering teams work. You will learn how we shifted to service ownership, moved to more autonomous teams (and its challenges), and established platform and enablement teams.
A Study of Variable-Role-based Feature Enrichment in Neural Models of CodeAftab Hussain
Understanding variable roles in code has been found to be helpful by students
in learning programming -- could variable roles help deep neural models in
performing coding tasks? We do an exploratory study.
- These are slides of the talk given at InteNSE'23: The 1st International Workshop on Interpretability and Robustness in Neural Software Engineering, co-located with the 45th International Conference on Software Engineering, ICSE 2023, Melbourne Australia
E-commerce Development Services- Hornet DynamicsHornet Dynamics
For any business hoping to succeed in the digital age, having a strong online presence is crucial. We offer Ecommerce Development Services that are customized according to your business requirements and client preferences, enabling you to create a dynamic, safe, and user-friendly online store.
Hand Rolled Applicative User ValidationCode KataPhilip Schwarz
Could you use a simple piece of Scala validation code (granted, a very simplistic one too!) that you can rewrite, now and again, to refresh your basic understanding of Applicative operators <*>, <*, *>?
The goal is not to write perfect code showcasing validation, but rather, to provide a small, rough-and ready exercise to reinforce your muscle-memory.
Despite its grandiose-sounding title, this deck consists of just three slides showing the Scala 3 code to be rewritten whenever the details of the operators begin to fade away.
The code is my rough and ready translation of a Haskell user-validation program found in a book called Finding Success (and Failure) in Haskell - Fall in love with applicative functors.
Top Features to Include in Your Winzo Clone App for Business Growth (4).pptxrickgrimesss22
Discover the essential features to incorporate in your Winzo clone app to boost business growth, enhance user engagement, and drive revenue. Learn how to create a compelling gaming experience that stands out in the competitive market.
What is Augmented Reality Image Trackingpavan998932
Augmented Reality (AR) Image Tracking is a technology that enables AR applications to recognize and track images in the real world, overlaying digital content onto them. This enhances the user's interaction with their environment by providing additional information and interactive elements directly tied to physical images.
Introducing Crescat - Event Management Software for Venues, Festivals and Eve...Crescat
Crescat is industry-trusted event management software, built by event professionals for event professionals. Founded in 2017, we have three key products tailored for the live event industry.
Crescat Event for concert promoters and event agencies. Crescat Venue for music venues, conference centers, wedding venues, concert halls and more. And Crescat Festival for festivals, conferences and complex events.
With a wide range of popular features such as event scheduling, shift management, volunteer and crew coordination, artist booking and much more, Crescat is designed for customisation and ease-of-use.
Over 125,000 events have been planned in Crescat and with hundreds of customers of all shapes and sizes, from boutique event agencies through to international concert promoters, Crescat is rigged for success. What's more, we highly value feedback from our users and we are constantly improving our software with updates, new features and improvements.
If you plan events, run a venue or produce festivals and you're looking for ways to make your life easier, then we have a solution for you. Try our software for free or schedule a no-obligation demo with one of our product specialists today at crescat.io
OpenMetadata Community Meeting - 5th June 2024OpenMetadata
The OpenMetadata Community Meeting was held on June 5th, 2024. In this meeting, we discussed about the data quality capabilities that are integrated with the Incident Manager, providing a complete solution to handle your data observability needs. Watch the end-to-end demo of the data quality features.
* How to run your own data quality framework
* What is the performance impact of running data quality frameworks
* How to run the test cases in your own ETL pipelines
* How the Incident Manager is integrated
* Get notified with alerts when test cases fail
Watch the meeting recording here - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UbNOje0kf6E
Neo4j - Product Vision and Knowledge Graphs - GraphSummit ParisNeo4j
Dr. Jesús Barrasa, Head of Solutions Architecture for EMEA, Neo4j
Découvrez les dernières innovations de Neo4j, et notamment les dernières intégrations cloud et les améliorations produits qui font de Neo4j un choix essentiel pour les développeurs qui créent des applications avec des données interconnectées et de l’IA générative.
A Software System Development Life Cycle Model for Improved Students Communication and Collaboration
1. International Journal of Computer Science & Engineering Survey (IJCSES) Vol.8, No.4, August 2017
DOI:10.5121/ijcses.2017.8401 1
A SOFTWARE SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT LIFE CYCLE
MODEL FOR IMPROVED STUDENTS’
COMMUNICATION AND COLLABORATION
Abdullahi Yusuf Egwoh1
,Ogwueleka Francisca Nonyelum2
1,2
Computer science Department, Nigerian Defence Academy, Kaduna.
ABSTRACT
Software engineering provides methodologies, concepts and practices, which are used for analyzing,
designing, building and maintaining the information in a software industry. Software Development Life
Cycle (SDLC) model is an approach used in the software industry for the development of various size
projects: small scale projects, medium scale projects and large scale projects. A software project of any
size is developed with the co-ordination of development team. It is therefore important to assign resources
intelligently to the different phases of the software project by the project manager. This study proposes a
model for the spiral development process with the use of a simulator (Simphony.NET), which helps the
project manager in determining how to increase the productivity of a software firm with the use of
minimum resources (expert team members). This model increase the utilization of different development
processes by keeping all development team members busy all the time, which helps in decreasing idle and
waste time.
KEYWORDS:
Software System Development Life Cycle, Students, communication, collaboration, Software Engineering.
1. INTRODUCTION
In a software industry, software projects of various sizes are developed by using many
development principles and approaches. Similarly, SDLC models are such type of methodologies
which are used for the development of software project with their different development phases
like analysis phase, designing phase, programming phase, testing phase and maintenance phase.
In effect, many SDLC models are deeply investigated and studied by many practitioners in the
world. The waterfall model, spiral model, incremental model, rapid prototyping model and agile
model are few most successful SDLC models. Many software development industries adopted
Spiral model as their prime development approach for the maintaining, designing, planning and
programming of the software projects (Munassar, 2010). Each Spiral model’s phase is handled by
the team of expert employees, for example, business analysis department; software coding and
programming department and software maintenance department. However, assigning the
appropriate and exact number of expert team members (resources) for each phase of the spiral
model is a very confusing work for the project manager of a software firm. In order to increase or
maximize the productivity, it is very important to find the optimal number of resources that
should be assigned to each phase of the spiral model and completes a particular phase or task.
This is the reason why simulation for the SDLC model is required in order to determine the
appropriate number of expert team members which are necessary to fulfil a certain project of a
certain scale. Relatedly, a simulation of a system is the operation of a model of the system
(Osman et al, 1990). The model can be reconfigured, studied, experimented and analyzed
properly. Simulation is used before an existing system is altered or a new system built to reduce
2. International Journal of Computer Science & Engineering Survey (IJCSES) Vol.8, No.4, August 2017
2
the chances of failure, to eliminate unforeseen bottlenecks, to prevent over-utilization of
resources, and to optimize the performance.
Software development life cycle (SDLC) is important for the software project success, the good
software engineer should have experience and knowledge to prefer one model than another based
on the project context. In order to choose the right SDLC model according to the specific
concerns and requirements of the project.
In this paper, we will explore the different types of models, merits and demerits and when to use
them.
2. TYPES OF SOFTWARE DEVELOPING LIFE CYCLES (SDLC)
2.1 WATERFALL MODEL
The waterfall model is a linear sequential flow in which progress is seen as flowing steadily
downwards (like a waterfall) through the phases of software implementation. This means that any
phase in the development process begins only if the previous phase is complete. The waterfall
approach does not define the process to go back to the previous phase to handle changes in
requirement. The waterfall approach is the earliest approach and most widely known that was
used for software development. Projects which not focus on changing the needed requirements.
For example, projects initiated from request for proposals (RFPs), the customer has a very clear
documented requirements (Melsatar, 2012).
2.2 V-SHAPED MODE
It is an extension of the waterfall model. Instead of moving down in a linear way, the process
steps are bent upwards after the implementation and coding phase, to form the typical V shape.
The major difference between v-shaped model and waterfall model is the early test planning in
the v-shaped model. Software requirements clearly defined and known, Software development
technologies and tools is well-known (Melsatar, 2012).
2.3 PROTOTYPING MODEL
It refers to the activity of creating prototypes of software applications, for example, incomplete
versions of the software program being developed. It is an activity that can occur in software
development. It is used to visualize some component of the software to limit the gap of
misunderstanding the customer requirements by the development team. This also will reduce the
iterations which may occur in waterfall approach and hard to be implemented due to the
inflexibility of the waterfall approach. So, when the final prototype is developed, the requirement
is considered to be frozen. It has some types, such as throwaway prototyping.
Prototypes that are eventually discarded rather than becoming a part of the finally delivered
software
Evolutionary prototyping: Prototypes that evolve into the final system through an
iterative incorporation of user feedback.
Incremental prototyping: The final product is built as separate prototypes. At the end, the
separate prototypes are merged in an overall design.
3. International Journal of Computer Science & Engineering Survey (IJCSES) Vol.8, No.4, August 2017
3
Extreme prototyping: Mainly used at web applications. Basically, it breaks down web
development into three phases, each one based on the preceding one. The first phase is a
static prototype that consists mainly of HTML pages. In the second phase, the screens are
programmed and fully functional using a simulated services layer. In the third phase, the
services are implemented. This process can be used with any software developing life
cycle model. This shall be chosen when you are developing a system of user interactions.
So, if the system does not have user interactions, such a system does some calculations
which have no prototypes (Melsatar, 2012).
2.4 SPIRAL MODEL (SDM)
It is combining elements of both design and prototyping-in-stages, in an effort to combine
advantages of top-down and bottom-up concepts. This model of development combines the
features of the prototyping model and the waterfall model. The spiral model is favoured for large,
expensive and complicated projects. This model uses many of the same phases as the waterfall
model, in essentially the same order, separated by planning, risk assessment, and the building of
prototypes and simulations. It is used in the large applications and systems which built-in small
phases or segments (Melsatar, 2012).
2.5 ITERATIVE AND INCREMENTAL MODEL
It is developed to overcome the weaknesses of the waterfall model. It starts with an initial
planning and ends with deployment with the cyclic interactions in between. The basic idea behind
this method is to develop a system through repeated cycles (iterative) and in smaller portions at a
time (incremental), allowing software developers to take advantage of what was learned during
the development of earlier parts or versions of the system. It consists of mini waterfalls. It is used
in shrink-wrap application and large system which built-in small phases or segments. Also, can be
used in a system has separated components. We can start with the budget module as a first
iteration and then with inventory module and so forth (Melsatar, 2012).
2.6 EXTREME PROGRAMMING (AGILE MODEL)
It is based on iterative and incremental development, where requirements and solutions evolve
through collaboration between cross-functional teams. It can be used with any type of the project,
but it needs more engagement from the customer and to be interactive. Also, it can be used when
the customer needs to have some functional requirement ready in less than three weeks and the
requirements are not clear enough (Melsatar, 2012).
3. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
Cohen et al (2010) proposed and evaluated a SDLC model which by the use of communication
and collaboration among stakeholders, improved system implementation was successfully
achieved. In Goparaju et al (2012), the author focused on the productivity measurements of
software development team and provides techniques and models to measure the productivity.
Balci (1990) provided guidelines for conducting a successful simulation study. For the complete
life cycle composed of ten (10) phases, thirteen (13) credibility assessment stages and ten (10)
processes. Chi (1997) introduced the Software Engineering Process Simulation (SEPS) model for
the dynamic simulation of the software project development process. SEPS is a planning tool to
inspect agenda, trade-offs of cost, functionality and to test the implications of different
managerial strategies on a project’s outcome. Youssef (2012) made a simulation model for the
4. International Journal of Computer Science & Engineering Survey (IJCSES) Vol.8, No.4, August 2017
4
Waterfall development process. This model is built using the Simphony.NET simulation tool. In
this paper author’s part is to help project managers in determining how to attain the maximum
productivity with the minimum number of hours, expenses and workers. In Prakriti et al (2013),
the authors made a comparative study between iterative waterfall and incremental software
development life cycle model for improving the resources using the Simphony.NET simulation
tool. All the phases consisted in the iterative waterfall and incremental model are simulated.
4. MOTIVATION AND PROBLEM DEFINITION
In 2012, an empirical study Rupa (2012) was made in an Indian software firm. According to this
study, as shown in Table 1. There were many factors which play an important role in the
selection of SDLC model. One of the most important factors in this study is team size. As we
know a particular software industry has software development team, the team members depends
on each other and works in co- ordination. The Standish group conducted a deep investigation
about this problem and shows that many software projects do not deliver on budget, on time and
as expected by the customer. The main reason behind this is the assignment of expert team
members unintelligently to the various phases of the SDLC models. For this reason, some phases
of the process model may stay idle, while other may be delayed, due to the insufficient number of
resources. The proposed simulation model for Spiral SDLC helps the project manager in
determining how to increase the productivity of a software firm with the use of minimum
resources (Roger, 2001). This model increase the utilization of different processes by keeping all
development team members busy all the time, which help in decrease idle and waste time.
Table 1: Factors affecting the software industry (Sonia et al, 2015)
4.1 STUDENTS COMMUNICATION AND COLLABORATION MODEL
Students use digital media and environments to communicate and work collaboratively, including
at a distance, to support individual learning and contribute to the learning of others. Students:
5. International Journal of Computer Science & Engineering Survey (IJCSES) Vol.8, No.4, August 2017
5
a. Interact, collaborate, and publish with peers, experts, or others employing a variety of
digital environments and media.
b. Communicate information and ideas effectively to multiple audiences using a variety of
media and formats.
c. Develop cultural understanding and global awareness by engaging with learners of other
cultures.
d. Contribute to project teams to produce original works or solve problems.
Students need to develop these skills both online and face-to-face in order to compete and lead in
the 21st century. By using Edmodo to create a student personal learning network (PLN), students
take tremendous strides toward meeting and exceeding this standard. Students have used
Edmodo to communicate with one another, share class data and help each other on homework.
The best part of our Edmodo PLN is that it often breaks the face-to-face social boundaries that
sometimes hinder effective collaboration. Students communicate and collaborate with peers that
they would not normally interact with or, in some cases, people they never met. It allow an
increase in students giving positive feedback, encouragement, and support to one another.
One of favourite features of Edmodo is the ability to form small groups within your class. This
feature have been used in many different ways to get students to engage with their peers and truly
collaborate with one another on projects or ideas. Work on team building skills and the students
are required to work together on inquiry based labs and projects. The feature in Edmodo has
allowed students to have a space to share their ideas, lab data, and continue their discussions
beyond the classroom. It is especially helpful when students are working on group projects and
need a place to share documents, answer questions, or discuss a presentation.
Before using Edmodo, students had to rely on class time to communicate with one another.
When students needed to get in touch with classmates, they typically used email, texting, or other
social networking sites. The advantage of using Edmodo is that it keeps student communication
in one place and allows the teacher to be a part of the conversation. Students also work more
efficiently and they are more willing to share their documents and ideas with the whole group.
The best part is that the project manager will be able to track their progress and virtually meet
with them too when needed. This interaction often led to greater understanding of content,
effective collaboration, and higher quality projects and ideas.
4.2 COMPUTATION SPECIFICATION
The Spiral model which moves in clock-wise direction and the final product is delivered in many
incremental iterations. For the simulation of Spiral SDLC model, following specification are
made: A feedback loop is used in order to include the probability of failure concept, We can use
the Symphony.NET tool with the spiral model to determine the optimized expert team members,
we can deliver the complete software product in five (5) increments of the spiral simulation
model. And for each increment of the simulation model, necessary and optimal resources can be
determined.
The software projects arrive randomly in a software firm. We divide the projects into three types:
(a) Small Scale Projects (b) Medium Scale Projects and (c) Large Scale Projects. 60% projects are
small scale projects, 30% projects are medium scale projects and 10% projects are large scale
projects. The projects arrive randomly and the inter-arrival time of software project is fixed by
6. International Journal of Computer Science & Engineering Survey (IJCSES) Vol.8, No.4, August 2017
6
using triangular distribution function. The minimum arrival time of a software project is 20 days,
maximum time is 40 days and the average time is 30 days.
Mathematically, as in equation (1)
(1)
The Spiral model uses five SDLC phases and the number of available expert team member for
each phase, at the software firm are:15 business analyst, 20 business designer, 30 business
programmer, 35 business tester, 15 business maintenance men.
The following combinations of employees are present in software industry:
1. Small-scale software projects require 1 business analyst, 2 business designer, 3 business
programmer, 4 business tester and 2 business maintenance.
2. Medium scale software projects require 7 business analyst, 10 business designers, 15
business programmers, 25 business testers and 10 business maintenance.
3. Large scale software projects require 15 business analysts, 20 business designer, 30 business
programmers, 35 business testers and 15 business maintenance men.
The time duration of each phase of the model to be completed is defined as follows:
A. For small scale projects
1. The lower limit of 2 days, upper limits of 3 days with uniform distribution are for business
analysis phase as in equation (2):
(2)
2. The time duration for designing phase is simulated by using exponential distribution, with
mean = 2.
3. The time duration for programming phase is simulated by using exponential distribution,
with mean = 4.
4. The lower limit of 6 days and an upper limit of 10 days with uniform distribution are for
business testing phase as in equation (3):
7. International Journal of Computer Science & Engineering Survey (IJCSES) Vol.8, No.4, August 2017
7
(3)
5. The lower limit of 2 days and an upper limit of 3 days with uniform distribution are for
business maintenance phase. The equation is same as equation (2).
B. For medium scale projects
1. The lower limit of 5 days, upper limit of 10 days with uniform distribution are for business
analysis phase as in equation (4):
(4)
2. The duration (time) for designing phase is simulated by using exponential distribution, with
mean = 8.
3. The duration (time) for programming phase is simulated by using exponential distribution,
with mean = 15.
4. The lower limit of 10 days and an upper limit of 20 days with uniform distribution are for
business testing phase as in equation (5):
(5)
5. The lower limit of 7 days and an upper limit of 10 days with uniform distribution are for
business maintenance phase as in equation (6):
(6)
C. For large scale projects
1. The lower limit of 10 days and an upper limit of 20 days with uniform distribution are for
business analysis phase. The equation is same as equation (5).
2. The time duration for designing phase is simulated by using exponential distribution, with
mean = 25.
3. The time duration for programming phase is simulated by using exponential distribution,
with mean = 35.
4. The lower limit of 30 days and an upper limit of 35 days with uniform distribution are for
business testing phase as in equation (7):
8. International Journal of Computer Science & Engineering Survey (IJCSES) Vol.8, No.4, August 2017
8
(7)
5. The lower limit of 15 days and an upper limit of 20 days with uniform distribution are for
business maintenance phase as in equation (8):
(8)
Each phase of the model, for different size projects upon completion show the following
probability of having an error: for small scale project = 5%, for medium scale project = 10% and
for large scale project = 35%.
5. THE SIMULATION MODEL FOR SPIRAL SDLC
The proposed model consists of many modeling elements like capture, release, task, file, counter
and resource. For this model resources are the expert team members assigned on different phases
of the spiral model. The simulation model for different phases of Spiral model is shown in
Figure.1
Figure 1 Simulation model for small scale projects (Sonia et al, 2015)
9. International Journal of Computer Science & Engineering Survey (IJCSES) Vol.8, No.4, August 2017
9
At very beginning of the model, a counter element counts the total number of projects received.
At the end of the simulation model another counter counts the number of delivered projects.
There are total of 60 projects arrive randomly in a software firm. A probabilistic branch element
exists at beginning of the model with 3 core branches: branch 1 shows that 60% projects are of
small scale, branch 2 shows that 30% projects are of medium scale and branch 3 shows that 10%
projects are of large scale. Each phase of the model is modelled with a capture element and a
release element. The capture element links a specific resource to a specific task and the release
modelling element releases the resources (expert team members) from the task element when it is
completed.
5.1 SIMULATION RESULTS & ANALYSIS
A. Statistics obtained for simulating the spiral model
Using the symphony.NET environment, we execute the simulation model five (5) times with 60
incoming projects. Following Table.2 and Table.3 shows the statistics obtained after running the
model including average mean of the number projects delivered and the average utilization for
each phase, for each increment of different scale projects.
Table.2 The Average Mean for the simulation model (Sonia et al, 2015)
Table.3 The Average Utilization for different scale projects (Sonia et al, 2015)
10. International Journal of Computer Science & Engineering Survey (IJCSES) Vol.8, No.4, August 2017
10
6. CONCLUSION
This paper proposes a model for the spiral development process with the use of a simulating tool
(Simphony.NET). This model helps the software project manager in determining how to increase
the productivity of a software firm with the use of minimum resources. We can assume three size
projects: small scale projects, medium scale projects and large scale projects. A software project
of any size is developed with the co-ordination of development team. Therefore it is important to
assign team members intelligently to the different phases of the software project by the project
manager. This model increase the utilization of different development processes by keeping all
development team members busy all the time, which helps in decrease idle and waste time.
REFERENCES
[1] Balci, O (1990) “Guidelines for successful simulation studies,”Proceedings of the Winter Simulation
Conference, Vol 1,No 1 pp. 25-32.
[2] Chi Y. Lin, Tarek Abdel-Hamid, Joseph S. Sherif (1997) “Software-Engineering Process Simulation
Model (SEPS),” Journal of Systems and Software,Vol.38, No. 3, pp.263-277.
[3] Cohen. S, D.Dori and De Haan .U(2010) “A Software System Development Life Cycle Model for
Improved Stakeholders Communication and Collaboration,” International Journal of Computers,
Communications & Control, Vol 5, No1 pp.20-41.
[4] Goparaju Purna Sudhakara, Ayesha Farooq and Sanghamitra Patnaik (2012) “Measuring Productivity
of Software Development teams,”Serbian Journal of Management, Vol 7 No 1 pp. 65 – 75.
[5] https://melsatar.blog/2012/03/15/software-development-life-cycle-models-and-methodologies/
[6] https://blog.edmodo.com/2011/06/02/a-model-for-student-communication-and-collaboration/
[7] Munassar. N and Govardhan. A (2010) “A Comparison between five Models of Software
Engineering,” IJCSI International Journal of Computer Science Issues, Vol. 7, No. 5, pp.1694-
[8] Osman Balci, Richard E. Nance, E. Joseph Demck, Emest H. Page and John L. Bishop, "Model
Generation Issues in a Simulation Support Environment," in Proceedings of the I990 Winter
Simulation Conference. Vol. 8, No.1, pp. 105-127.
[9] Prakriti Trivedi and Ashwani Sharma (2013) "A Comparative Study between Iterative Waterfall and
Incremental Software Development Life Cycle Model for Optimizing the Resources using
Computer Simulation,”Information Management in the Knowledge Economy (IMKE)Vol. 7,No.5,
pp. 188-194.
[10] Roger S.Pressman,(2001) “Software engineering: A practitioner approach” published march 12,
1982, 5th ed,, macGraw-Hill, 2001.
[11] Rupa Mahanti, M.S. Neogi and Vandana Bhattacherjee(2012) “Factors Affecting the Choice of
Software Life Cycle Models in the Software Industry- An Empirical Study,”Journal of Computer
Science (Science Publications),Vol. 8, No. 8, pp.1253-1262.
[12] Sonia Thind, Karambir (2015)“A simulation model for spiral software development life
cycle”International journal of innovative Research in computer and communication engineering
Vol. 3, No. pp. 2320-2330.
[13] Youssef Bassil(2012) “A Simulation Model for the Waterfall Software Development Life cycle”,
International Journal of Engineering&Technology. Vol.2, no.5, pp. 2049-3444