© 2016 LDRA Ltd The FACE Conformance Verification Matrix in Practice.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
© Telelogic AB Modeling DoDAF Compliant Architectures Operational Systems Technical.
Advertisements

Universal Fulfillment Organizer Leads CHT to NGOSS
Configuration Management
Testing Workflow Purpose
IBM Software Group ® Traceability From Need To Solution What, Why and How Tammy Lavi Alon Bar-Ner.
Test Automation Success: Choosing the Right People & Process
HP Quality Center Overview.
Sixth Hour Lecture 10:30 – 11:20 am, September 9 Framework for a Software Management Process – Artifacts of the Process (Part II, Chapter 6 of Royce’ book)
Validata Release Coordinator Accelerated application delivery through automated end-to-end release management.
PRJ270: Essentials of Rational Unified Process
Define ● Deliver ● Sustain Sundar Chellamani Technical Director SysComm Project Management Ltd.
Applied Software Project Management Andrew Stellman & Jennifer Greene Applied Software Project Management Applied Software.
Software Engineering Tools and Methods Presented by: Mohammad Enamur Rashid( ) Mohammad Rashim Uddin( ) Masud Ur Rahman( )
Handouts Software Testing and Quality Assurance Theory and Practice Chapter 11 System Test Design
Click to add text © 2010 IBM Corporation OpenPages Solution Overview Mark Dinning Principal Solutions Consultant.
© 2006, Cognizant Technology Solutions. All Rights Reserved. The information contained herein is subject to change without notice. Automation – How to.
System Design/Implementation and Support for Build 2 PDS Management Council Face-to-Face Mountain View, CA Nov 30 - Dec 1, 2011 Sean Hardman.
The Integration Story: Rational Quality Manager / Team Foundation Server / Quality Center Introductions This presentation will provide an introduction.
LDRA Technology Pvt. Ltd
Overview of Change Management ClearQuest Overview for CORUG January, 2008.
Business Flow Modeller (BFM) Simplify and standardize your business processes across the project lifecycle.
Achieving Agility with WSO2 App Factory S. Uthaiyashankar Director, Cloud Solutions WSO2 Inc. Dimuthu Leelarathne Software Architect WSO2 Inc.
© VESP International Pty Limited To Contents Slide CLICK to advance slides/ bullet points within slides Integrated Master Planner An Overview.
Don Von Dollen Senior Program Manager, Data Integration & Communications Grid Interop December 4, 2012 A Utility Standards and Technology Adoption Framework.
Introduction to RUP Spring Sharif Univ. of Tech.2 Outlines What is RUP? RUP Phases –Inception –Elaboration –Construction –Transition.
1 IBM Software Group ® Mastering Object-Oriented Analysis and Design with UML 2.0 Module 1: Best Practices of Software Engineering.
Thirteenth Lecture Hour 8:30 – 9:20 am, Sunday, September 16 Software Management Disciplines Process Automation (from Part III, Chapter 12 of Royce’ book)
Dan Parish Program Manager Microsoft Session Code: OFC 304.
Rational Unified Process Fundamentals Module 4: Disciplines II.
What is a life cycle model? Framework under which a software product is going to be developed. – Defines the phases that the product under development.
1 © Quality House QUALITY HOUSE The best testing partner in Bulgaria.
“Software Life Cycle Processes”
™ ™ © 2006, KDM Analytics Software Assurance Ecosystem and its Applications Djenana Campara Chief Executive Officer, KDM Analytics Board Director, Object.
Identify steps for understanding and solving the
Service Transition & Planning Service Validation & Testing
Testing Workflow In the Unified Process and Agile/Scrum processes.
© 2012 xtUML.org Bill Chown – Mentor Graphics Model Driven Engineering.
© Mahindra Satyam 2009 Configuration Management QMS Training.
How to Improve the Safety of Signalling Systems with a Shortened Construction Period in Engineering Construction Projects Gao Guoliang Safety Assurance.
Software Product Line Material based on slides and chapter by Linda M. Northrop, SEI.
Rational Unified Process Fundamentals Module 3: Disciplines I.
1 Technology Infusion of the Software Developer’s Assistant (SDA) into the MOD Software Development Process NASA/JSC/MOD/Brian O’Hagan 2008 Software Assurance.
Software Project Management (SEWPZG622) BITS-WIPRO Collaborative Programme: MS in Software Engineering SECOND SEMESTER /1/ "The content of this.
Technical Support to SOA Governance E-Government Conference May 1-2, 2008 John Salasin, Ph.D. DARPA
LOGO TESTING Team 8: 1.Nguyễn Hoàng Khánh 2.Dương Quốc Việt 3.Trang Thế Vinh.
Lecture 13.  Failure mode: when team understands requirements but is unable to meet them.  To ensure that you are building the right system Continually.
System/SDWG Update Management Council Face-to-Face Flagstaff, AZ August 22-23, 2011 Sean Hardman.
Rational Unified Process Fundamentals Module 4: Core Workflows II - Concepts Rational Unified Process Fundamentals Module 4: Core Workflows II - Concepts.
Rational Unified Process Fundamentals Best Practices of Software Engineering Rational Unified Process Fundamentals Best Practices of Software Engineering.
Software Testing Process
An Agile Requirements Approach 1. Step 1: Get Organized  Meet with your team and agree on the basic software processes you will employ.  Decide how.
Screening activities Mike E. Farrell James E. Bartlett and Ghislaine C.Y. Gillessen Munich, January 2014.
Unified Software Practices v D Copyright  1998 Rational Software, all rights reserved 1 Practice 5: Verify Software Quality Control Changes Develop.
RUP RATIONAL UNIFIED PROCESS Behnam Akbari 06 Oct
SG SCM with MKS scmGalaxy Author: Rajesh Kumar
Parasoft : Improving Productivity in IT Organizations David McCaw.
This has been created by QA InfoTech. Choose QA InfoTech as your Automated testing partner. Visit for more information.
Integrated ALM with Cross-Tool Reporting Kovair Marketing Kovair Software Copyright ©
Introduction for the Implementation of Software Configuration Management I thought I knew it all !
Automated Software Testing
2012 Spring Simulation Interoperability Workshop
CIM Modeling for E&U - (Short Version)
BA Continuum India Pvt Ltd
Speaker’s Name, SAP Month 00, 2017
Software Quality Engineering
Verification and Validation Unit Testing
HHS Child Welfare National IT Managers' Meeting
Test Domain and Description Language Recommendations
Contract Management Software from ContraxAware Simplify Your Contract Management Process.
Presentation transcript:

© 2016 LDRA Ltd The FACE Conformance Verification Matrix in Practice

FACE Adoption Challenges FACE conformance across multiple stakeholders Unifying artifacts across the lifecycle Achieving and maintaining conformance within iterative development Ease of adoption Simplify the verification process FACE conformance within a safety and security critical standards framework

FACE Approaches within the LDRA tool suite Scoping FACE requirements with filters for a given segment against the compliance verification matrix Easy to follow verification layout and placeholders for review artifacts and the FACE Test Suite Application of FACE coding standard to aid in conformance Cost effectively scoping requirements, verification artifacts, and performing verification for a given system Performing verification activities for conformance with both standard from within the LDRA tool suite Utilizing artifacts from the lifecycle for conformance to both standards Reconciling and leveraging DO-178B/C with FACE conformance

Traceability, Verification Workflow & Test Requirements Traceability Requirements traceability Impact Analysis Traceability Matrix Import/Export Report Generation Verification Workflow Process Unification and Enforcement Verification Workflow Management Test Automation Objective Fulfillment Audit trail LDRA Verification Coding Standards Unit Testing Code Coverage Quality Metrics Target Integration Data/Control Flow REDUCING COST ACROSS THE LIFECYCLE

FACE Technical Standard and CVM FACE CVM Spreadsheet version of the FACE Technical Standard with verification guidance FACE Requirement Verification Verified by test or inspection or both Test implies the FACE Conformance Test Suite Inspection entails inspecting relevant portions of project artifacts (SRS, SDD, STP, STR etc.) to verify requirements FACE Reference Architecture Excerpt from the Compliance Verification Matrix

Importing the CVM into LDRA TBmanager FACE CVM with identifiers. Ready for parsing into TBmanager CVM perspective within the TBmanager requirements grid Tailored import of the CVM into TBmanager Automated generation of conformance artifacts infrastructure Conformance Test Suite execution and artifact capture can be instantiated

Integrating the FACE Conformance Test Suite FACE Conformance Test Suite configuration CVM perspective within the TBmanager requirements grid FACE Conformance Test Suite (CTS) Supplied separately by Vanderbilt’s Institute for Software Integrated Systems (ISIS) and approved for conformance testing Configuration required is based on FACE segments, profiles, conditional requirements, and data model

Traceability from the CTS to Requirements FACE Conformance Test Suite (CTS) Supplied separately by Vanderbilt’s Institute for Software Integrated Systems (ISIS) and approved for conformance testing Configuration required based on FACE segments, profiles, conditional requirements, and data model Automation of Execution Execution of the CTS can be configured and automated from TBmanager to simply execution, traceability and regression Traceability from the CTS to FACE Requirements, simplifies the verification process and quickly isolates verification gaps FACE requirements, test suite, and associated conformance artifacts FACE Requirements to the FACE CTS configured for the TSS segment and general purpose profile

Mapping Conformance Artifacts to Requirements Artifacts association Providing the entire artifact Providing references to specific locations within an artifact How does the artifact and relevant sections verify the FACE requirement? Standalone and aggregated artifacts Some instances require a reference to a single artifact Other references require requirements, tests, and results and artifacts must be reviewed in aggregate

Utilizing Coding Standards Utilizing static analysis to detect non-conformant API calls Early detection of non-conformant Can be combined with internally recognized standards such as the MISRA, JSF- AV, HIC, CERT and other standards FACE requirements can explicitly specify interface details Detecting non-conformant calls statically

Impact Analysis Scenarios Assessing impact of conformance related changes Conformance related changes to source code and artifacts impact development activities Impact of changes from conformance activities can be easily assessed and reviewed

Objective Tracking Requirements Traceability Coding Standards Compliance Data & Control Coupling Analysis Structural Coverage Target Testing Object Code Verification Tool Qualification Reduce Time To Compliance And Market CERTIFICATE Of QUALITY Software has been tested and conforms to DO-178C Reduce Cost of Compliance Manage Distributed Team Challenges on the Path to DO-178B/C Compliance Management

Integrated FACE and DO-178B/C Solution Reduce the cost of adopting both DO-178B/C and FACE by unifying the verification environment and leveraging work across standards Enforce and manage FACE and DO-178B/C conformance across a distributed set of suppliers Predict and manage effort and progress to improve proposal to contract execution cost control Convergence of DO-178C and FACE standards Transition to DO-178C and increased rigor in use of the guidance Increasing number of RFI’s are requiring FACE conformance

For further information: @ldra_technology LDRA Software Technology LDRA Limited