Verification and validation of operational software: a process and methodology critique

Verification and Validation (V&V) play a crucial role in producing a quality product on time, within budget and within scope. In this article, we examine the effectiveness of the Software Engineering Evaluation System (SEES), a V&V methodology developed by the U.S. Army Software Engineering...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Software process improvement and practice 2004-07, Vol.9 (3), p.157-171
Hauptverfasser: Arthur, James D., Gröner, Markus K.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 171
container_issue 3
container_start_page 157
container_title Software process improvement and practice
container_volume 9
creator Arthur, James D.
Gröner, Markus K.
description Verification and Validation (V&V) play a crucial role in producing a quality product on time, within budget and within scope. In this article, we examine the effectiveness of the Software Engineering Evaluation System (SEES), a V&V methodology developed by the U.S. Army Software Engineering Directorate. The critique draws on experiences and insights stemming from an application of that methodology to a controlled software development effort. In addition to citing the beneficial activities mandated by the V&V methodology, we also provide a discussion of prescribed (or lacking) activities having an adverse impact on the V&V effort. Recommendations to improve V&V effectiveness are also presented. Although our discussion focuses on V&V activities defined by the Army's methodology, the insights, lessons learned, and suggested improvements are widely applicable to the more generalized approaches to V&V. Copyright © 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
doi_str_mv 10.1002/spip.203
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_29784700</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>29784700</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2103-481b5863c1fbf61360a7c7bd86ff00150277356c13779e2b369a91e527dbfcbc3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kM1OwzAQhC0EEqUg8Qg5IS4pdtzYCTfU0lKpQBE_5WY5jg0Gtw52Ssnb4zYIiQPaw-5I3-6OBoBjBHsIwuTMV7rqJRDvgA6CeR4jQuHuZqY07meE7IMD798gRKFIB8yfpNNKC15ru4z4sow-udFlK62KbCXdVnATeavqNXfyPOJR5ayQ3m83FrJ-taU19qWJhNO1_ljJQ7CnuPHy6Kd3wePo8mFwFU9vx5PBxTQWCYI4OEJFmhEskCoUQZhATgUtyowoFTymMKEUp0QgTGkukwKTnOdIpgktCyUKgbvgpL0bDIW3vmYL7YU0hi-lXXmW5DTrUwgDeNqCwlnvnVSscnrBXcMQZJvk2CY5FpILaNyia21k8y_H7meT2R9e-1p-_fLcvTNCMU3Z_GbMZtfp3fMoG7Ih_gZHkYAM</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>29784700</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Verification and validation of operational software: a process and methodology critique</title><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Arthur, James D. ; Gröner, Markus K.</creator><creatorcontrib>Arthur, James D. ; Gröner, Markus K.</creatorcontrib><description><![CDATA[Verification and Validation (V&V) play a crucial role in producing a quality product on time, within budget and within scope. In this article, we examine the effectiveness of the Software Engineering Evaluation System (SEES), a V&V methodology developed by the U.S. Army Software Engineering Directorate. The critique draws on experiences and insights stemming from an application of that methodology to a controlled software development effort. In addition to citing the beneficial activities mandated by the V&V methodology, we also provide a discussion of prescribed (or lacking) activities having an adverse impact on the V&V effort. Recommendations to improve V&V effectiveness are also presented. Although our discussion focuses on V&V activities defined by the Army's methodology, the insights, lessons learned, and suggested improvements are widely applicable to the more generalized approaches to V&V. Copyright © 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.]]></description><identifier>ISSN: 1077-4866</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1099-1670</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/spip.203</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Chichester, UK: John Wiley &amp; Sons, Ltd</publisher><subject>independent V&amp;V ; methodology critique ; process assessment ; software engineering ; verification and validation</subject><ispartof>Software process improvement and practice, 2004-07, Vol.9 (3), p.157-171</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2004 John Wiley &amp; Sons, Ltd.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2103-481b5863c1fbf61360a7c7bd86ff00150277356c13779e2b369a91e527dbfcbc3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27903,27904</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Arthur, James D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gröner, Markus K.</creatorcontrib><title>Verification and validation of operational software: a process and methodology critique</title><title>Software process improvement and practice</title><addtitle>Softw. Process: Improve. Pract</addtitle><description><![CDATA[Verification and Validation (V&V) play a crucial role in producing a quality product on time, within budget and within scope. In this article, we examine the effectiveness of the Software Engineering Evaluation System (SEES), a V&V methodology developed by the U.S. Army Software Engineering Directorate. The critique draws on experiences and insights stemming from an application of that methodology to a controlled software development effort. In addition to citing the beneficial activities mandated by the V&V methodology, we also provide a discussion of prescribed (or lacking) activities having an adverse impact on the V&V effort. Recommendations to improve V&V effectiveness are also presented. Although our discussion focuses on V&V activities defined by the Army's methodology, the insights, lessons learned, and suggested improvements are widely applicable to the more generalized approaches to V&V. Copyright © 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.]]></description><subject>independent V&amp;V</subject><subject>methodology critique</subject><subject>process assessment</subject><subject>software engineering</subject><subject>verification and validation</subject><issn>1077-4866</issn><issn>1099-1670</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2004</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp1kM1OwzAQhC0EEqUg8Qg5IS4pdtzYCTfU0lKpQBE_5WY5jg0Gtw52Ssnb4zYIiQPaw-5I3-6OBoBjBHsIwuTMV7rqJRDvgA6CeR4jQuHuZqY07meE7IMD798gRKFIB8yfpNNKC15ru4z4sow-udFlK62KbCXdVnATeavqNXfyPOJR5ayQ3m83FrJ-taU19qWJhNO1_ljJQ7CnuPHy6Kd3wePo8mFwFU9vx5PBxTQWCYI4OEJFmhEskCoUQZhATgUtyowoFTymMKEUp0QgTGkukwKTnOdIpgktCyUKgbvgpL0bDIW3vmYL7YU0hi-lXXmW5DTrUwgDeNqCwlnvnVSscnrBXcMQZJvk2CY5FpILaNyia21k8y_H7meT2R9e-1p-_fLcvTNCMU3Z_GbMZtfp3fMoG7Ih_gZHkYAM</recordid><startdate>200407</startdate><enddate>200407</enddate><creator>Arthur, James D.</creator><creator>Gröner, Markus K.</creator><general>John Wiley &amp; Sons, Ltd</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7SC</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>JQ2</scope><scope>L7M</scope><scope>L~C</scope><scope>L~D</scope></search><sort><creationdate>200407</creationdate><title>Verification and validation of operational software: a process and methodology critique</title><author>Arthur, James D. ; Gröner, Markus K.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c2103-481b5863c1fbf61360a7c7bd86ff00150277356c13779e2b369a91e527dbfcbc3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2004</creationdate><topic>independent V&amp;V</topic><topic>methodology critique</topic><topic>process assessment</topic><topic>software engineering</topic><topic>verification and validation</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Arthur, James D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gröner, Markus K.</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Computer Science Collection</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies Database with Aerospace</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts – Academic</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts Professional</collection><jtitle>Software process improvement and practice</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Arthur, James D.</au><au>Gröner, Markus K.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Verification and validation of operational software: a process and methodology critique</atitle><jtitle>Software process improvement and practice</jtitle><addtitle>Softw. Process: Improve. Pract</addtitle><date>2004-07</date><risdate>2004</risdate><volume>9</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>157</spage><epage>171</epage><pages>157-171</pages><issn>1077-4866</issn><eissn>1099-1670</eissn><abstract><![CDATA[Verification and Validation (V&V) play a crucial role in producing a quality product on time, within budget and within scope. In this article, we examine the effectiveness of the Software Engineering Evaluation System (SEES), a V&V methodology developed by the U.S. Army Software Engineering Directorate. The critique draws on experiences and insights stemming from an application of that methodology to a controlled software development effort. In addition to citing the beneficial activities mandated by the V&V methodology, we also provide a discussion of prescribed (or lacking) activities having an adverse impact on the V&V effort. Recommendations to improve V&V effectiveness are also presented. Although our discussion focuses on V&V activities defined by the Army's methodology, the insights, lessons learned, and suggested improvements are widely applicable to the more generalized approaches to V&V. Copyright © 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.]]></abstract><cop>Chichester, UK</cop><pub>John Wiley &amp; Sons, Ltd</pub><doi>10.1002/spip.203</doi><tpages>15</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1077-4866
ispartof Software process improvement and practice, 2004-07, Vol.9 (3), p.157-171
issn 1077-4866
1099-1670
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_29784700
source Alma/SFX Local Collection
subjects independent V&V
methodology critique
process assessment
software engineering
verification and validation
title Verification and validation of operational software: a process and methodology critique
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-21T17%3A59%3A42IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Verification%20and%20validation%20of%20operational%20software:%20a%20process%20and%20methodology%20critique&rft.jtitle=Software%20process%20improvement%20and%20practice&rft.au=Arthur,%20James%20D.&rft.date=2004-07&rft.volume=9&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=157&rft.epage=171&rft.pages=157-171&rft.issn=1077-4866&rft.eissn=1099-1670&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/spip.203&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E29784700%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=29784700&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true