fixup! fixup! fixup! Process feedback conclusion

hace 4 años · f9a86a8114
--- a/content/conclusion.tex
+++ b/content/conclusion.tex
@@ -1,17 +1,3 @@
 %&tex
 %    \begin{itemize}
 %        \item Extend the \ac{ridm} with a preliminary design phase, focussing on the physical part of \ac{cps}.
 %        \item Refine the \ac{ridm} to make the design steps more explicit with improved instructions.
 %        \item Develop and perform a case study that tests and evaluates the \ac{ridm} as a design method for the physical part of \ac{cps}.
 %    \end{itemize}
 %    Evaluation of the \ac{ridm} as a design method is done with the results of the case study as the following objectives:
 %    \begin{itemize}
 %        \item Assess the influence that applying the \ac{ridm} has on the design process for \ac{cps}.
 %        \item Describe which adaptations are required for both the \ac{ridm} and the design method to establish a competent design process for \ac{cps}.
 %    \end{itemize}



 \chapter{Conclusion}
 \label{chap:conclusion}
 % Intro: end goal
@@ -29,6 +15,7 @@ These steps are based on the \ac{se}-approach.
 To perform a reproducible evaluation of the \ac{ridm}, the method of the different design steps were defined more explicit.
 The \ac{ridm} specifies the development cycle and the variable-detail approach with sufficient detail, making them ready to use.
 How to define features and tests for the development cycle, were not as clearly defined.
 In this thesis, two steps were added to the design method: one with a method to define the set of features and one that is used to specify the test protocol.
 Two design steps were added in this thesis that describe a method to define the set of features and create a test protocol.
 Furthermore, a feature selection step was added to aid with the development.

@@ -37,16 +24,15 @@ Furthermore, a feature selection step was added to aid with the development.
 The case study consisted of the development of a \emph{Tweet on a Whiteboard} writer.
 This development is performed according to the design plan, that was the result of the first two research objectives.
 The \emph{tweet on a whiteboard} writer was chosen as subject of design based on a set of requirements.
 The aim of these requirements is to find a subject of design that would optimize the evaluation of the \ac{ridm}.
 The goal of these requirements is to find a subject of design that evaluates most aspects of the \ac{ridm} when implemented.

 A list of questions was formed to monitor the progress of the case study.
 The questions are answered before and after each step of the design process.
 The list was created to ensure a consistent flow of information that can be used to compare the expected result with the actual result of each step.
 The list was created to ensure a consistent documentation of the expected outcome and the actual outcome of each step.
 Both the expected and actual outcome are used to evaluate the design step.

 \section{\acl{ridm}}
 \emph{Assess the influence that applying the \ac{ridm} has on the design process for \ac{cps}.}\newline
 %De kern van het RIDM bestaat uit de development cycle en de variable-detail approach.
 %Beide hebben hun eigen specifieke invloed op het design process.
 The core of the \ac{ridm} consists of the development cycle and the variable-detail approach.
 Both of these methods have specific influence on the design process.

@@ -56,13 +42,13 @@ This requires the development team to split the functionality of the system into
 It forces the developers to go through the design in a structured manner.
 Furthermore, to determine in what order the features are implemented, the developers must establish the \emph{cost of change} and \emph{chance of failure}-metric for each feature.

 With the \emph{chance of failure} and \emph{cost of change} metrics, the features are order with the goal to reduce the impact of a design failure.
 Based on the \emph{chance of failure} and \emph{cost of change} metrics, the features are ordered with the aim to reduce the impact of a design failure.
 Even though the case study only applied the feature selection twice, it proved itself useful by selecting the end-effector feature first.
 By prioritizing the end-effector, its failure had only a minor impact on the design.

 During each iteration of the development cycle, the selected feature is implemented according to the variable-detail approach.
 However, the ability to assess the influence of the variable-detail approach is limited by the absence of tooling for model organization and testing.
 Without the tooling it is difficult to switch between model versions, undo design changes or run automated testing.
 Without tooling that is compatible with version control, it is difficult to switch between model versions, undo design changes, or run automated testing.
 Furthermore, as the development did not distinct between design and model, the models used often contained more detail than strictly necessary.
 Both these limitations resulted in models that would surpass the minimal required level of detail; therefore, it is not possible to assess whether the minimum required level of detail can be established with passing all the tests.
 Nevertheless, the variable-detail approach introduces a step wise addition of detail that enforces a structured method similar to the development cycle.
@@ -73,43 +59,47 @@ Consequently, this limits the accuracy of the assessment on the actual influence
 Notwithstanding these limitations, the results of the case study suggest that the structured approach of \ac{ridm} reduces the impact of design failures and reduces the development cost for \ac{cps} design.

 \emph{Describe which adaptations are required for both the \ac{ridm} and the design method to establish a competent design process for \ac{cps}.}\newline
 At the start of this thesis it was clear that the \ac{ridm} required adaptations to make it suitable for the development of physical part of a \ac{cps}.
 A new design method was created by adding a preparation phase and refining the steps that \ac{ridm} provided.
 The case study showed that it is possible to create a set of features and implement those features with the new design method.
 However, the adaptations show variable degrees of success. 

 In the design method in this thesis, the goal of the preparation phase is to define the features of the system.
 These features stem from splitting the functionality and each of the feature is then developed using the \ac{ridm}.
 However, the functionality of the system is dictated by the design choices made in the system.
 In the case of developing systems from scratch, therefore, it seems that the design steps of the preparation phase play a critical role in the success of the design process.

 The \ac{ridm} must have a design process to get from the problem description to the features or the \ac{ridm} must be incorporated into an existing design model, in order to use the \ac{ridm} as a design process for \ac{cps}.
 In either situation, the functionality, components and requirements of the system must be incorporated together in the design.
 These three elements together form the features of the system that are implemented using the \ac{ridm}.

 The evaluation of the case study suggest that the feature selection method described in this thesis is an effective approach to establish the order of implementation.
 The current metrics used to establish the order leave much room for improvement.
 Both the \emph{cost of change} and the \emph{chance of failure} metric must be improved in order to be used more reliable.

 Apart from the lack of preparation phase, the \ac{ridm} has to a couple of obstacles to fully utilize the advantages that it provides.
 The models from the development cycle and the variable-detail approach must inherit all their properties from the design documents.
 To make design changes easier, there must be a machine readable database for all design parameters, where all models download the required parameters from.

 Especially the variable-detail approach is currently hindered by the lack of tooling.
 This is even more apparent when the model is correctly separated from the design, as it allows for more specific models.
 This results in more models that are smaller.
 The large set of models improves the testing results, but tooling for automated testing is required to handle the increasing amount of models.
 Furthermore, to deal with the large set of models, the modelling software must be compatible with version control.
 The \ac{ridm} required adaptations before it could be evaluated.
 The adaptations made in this thesis showed variable degrees of success during the case study.
 To create a competent design process, some adaptations must be improved and some new ones must be added.

 The produced result by the development cycle depends strongly on the provided features to implement.
 To ensure a consistent result for the design of \ac{cps}, \ac{ridm} must incorporate a design process to define these features.
 Moreover, the features must not only describe functionality, but each feature must also include a physical component and a requirement.
 These three elements together make it that features can be implemented and tested individually.

 The design process must describe a complete method from problem description till the set of features.
 In this design process, the solution to the problem is established in the form of the functionality of the system.
 The design process determines what components perform that functionality, and puts requirements on the components and the functionality.
 All design decisions made during this process shape the final product.
 Therefore, the design process to determine the features is urgently important in the ability of \ac{ridm} to successfully develop \ac{cps} from scratch.

 The variable-detail approach requires adaptations to fully utilize the advantages that the short cycle and testing provide.
 Therefore, the models must be separated from the design.
 This requires a centralized design including a database for all design parameters.
 Models are no longer required to represent the complete design, allowing for more specific models.
 Moreover, the models can conform to the general model properties.
 Because the models are more specific, more of them are required to cover all aspects of the design.

 To manage the increased number of models a form of version control is needed.
 The version control makes it possible to organize, and if necessary to combine and integrate, different models.
 Furthermore, it makes it possible to revert design changes and switch to different model versions.

 The final adaptation is the ability for automated testing.
 Automated testing provides a major advantage on top of the previous adaptations.
 As the models inherit their parameters directly from the centralized design database, every design change propagates to all models.
 With automated testing, all model are simulated after a design change. 
 This highlights any unwanted behavior caused by the design change.
 As the models are made more specific, a failed simulation of a model automatically pin points the area where the problem occurs.

 Implementing and evaluating the adaptations as described above are required to determine if these adaptations are sufficient.
 The next section describes recommendations that must be considered before implementing these adaptations.

 \section{Recommendations}
 % Voordat er de hierboven genoemde adaptations worden meegenomen in het RIDM, is er eerst aanvullend onderzoek nodig naar de exacte invulling.
 % De aanbevelingen voor dat aanvullende onderzoek zijn als volgt:
 Before any of the adaptations are applied to the \ac{ridm}, further research on the exact format of these adaptations is recommended.
 The recommended steps taken in further research are:

 \begin{itemize}
 % - Bepaal in wat voor setting het RIDM moet opereren: Denk aan: cps-soort, samenstelling van ontwikkelteam, focus van de design methode.
 % Aan de hand van deze setting.
    \item \emph{Make the application area and purpose of the \ac{ridm} specific}: To design a good design method, the design process must start with a clear problem description.
        Currently, the \ac{ridm} does provide a design method, but does not state clear requirements such as:
        \begin{itemize}
@@ -118,45 +108,32 @@ The recommended steps taken in further research are:
            \item \emph{Internal or external use}: is the client directly involved?
            \item \emph{Development team}: number of developers from what background?
        \end{itemize}
 % - Explore bestaande design projecten die passen in de omschreven setting.
 % Evalueer de design projecten op
 % -- Wat voor design paradigm of model wordt er gebruikt?
 % -- Waar in het project bevind zich de complexiteit en hoe wordt daar mee om gegaan?
 % -- Hoe bepalen ze COF en COC in hun projecten?
 % -- Hoe wordt er gezorgd voor de connectie tussen het design en hun modellen?
 % -- Welke tooling wordt er gebruikt binnen deze projecten?
 % -- Zijn er bepaalde pijnpunten waar alle design methodes mee te maken hebben?
 % -- Hoe word de opdrachtgever meegenomen in het ontwikkeltraject?
 % -- Welke afweging wordt er gemaakt tussen modelleren en hardware prototyping.
        These requirements improve the focus of further research and could help to get other organisations involved.
        These requirements improve the focus of further research.
        This focus could also help to attract and involve other organizations.
        Above all, it prevents the \ac{ridm} of becoming a "master of none".
    \item \emph{Explore existing design projects that share the application area and purpose}: To avoid a reinvention of the wheel or solve a problem that does not exist, it is recommended to collect and evaluate the results of existing design projects with at least the following questions:
    \item \emph{Explore existing design projects that share the application area and purpose}:
        To avoid inventing the wheel or or provide a solution none wants, it is recommended to explore existing design project. 
        Involve projects from companies and universities, successful and unsuccessful. 
        Evaluate all the projects with at least the following questions:
        \begin{itemize}
            \item What type of design paradigm or model is being applied?
            \item Where is the complexity in the project and how is it dealt with?
            \item How are the metrics of \emph{cost of change} and \emph{chance of failure} defined?
            \item How are the design and models connected?
            \item Which design tools are used by the design team? Why are they used?
            \item Are there common problems that hinder (almost) all design projects?
            \item Are there common design problems between the different projects?
            \item How is the client involved in the development process?
            \item What considerations are made to chose between modelling or hardware prototyping?
        \end{itemize}

 % - Onderzoek of en hoe het RIDM deze punten zou kunnen verbeteren.
 % - Onderzoek of en hoe deze punten het RIDM zouden kunnen verbeteren.
    \item \emph{Hypothesize the improvements provided by \ac{ridm} for existing design projects, and vice versa}: Based on the existing design projects:
        How could the \ac{ridm} improve those existing design projects? What lessons can be drawn from the existing design projects?
    \item \emph{Hypothesize the improvements provided by \ac{ridm} for existing design projects, and vice versa}: 
        Based on the evaluation of the design projects:
        \begin{itemize}
            \item How could the \ac{ridm} improve those existing design projects? 
            \item What lessons can be drawn from the existing design projects?
        \end{itemize}
 \end{itemize}

 % 
 % Afhankelijk van de uitkomst moet er een strategie gemaakt worden om het RIDM uit te breiden.
 % Op dit moment zijn er twee voor de hand liggende opties:
 % - Verwerk het RIDM in een bestaand design model.
 % - Breidt het RIDM uit tot een compleet design model.
 % Voor deze beide opties geldt:
 % - Verwerk hierin de punten van het de project evaluatie
 % - Voer het ontwerp van de vernieuwde RIDM uit door een multidisiplinair design team.
 % - Evalueer het RIDM aan de hand van realistische projecten.
 Depending on what the results and conclusions of the recommended research topics are, a strategy has to be created to further develop the \ac{ridm}.
 Currently, there are two likely scenarios:
 \begin{itemize}
@@ -171,9 +148,11 @@ Independent of what strategy is chosen, it is recommended to:
 \end{itemize}

 The recommendations result in a more focussed development of the \ac{ridm}.
 But expected is that a full development of the \ac{ridm} takes multiple years and multiple developers to complete.
 However, it is possible to improve separate techniques from the \ac{ridm}.
 These techniques can improve existing design methods.
 But these recommendations are only the top of the iceberg of what is required to develop \ac{ridm} as a complete design method for \ac{cps}
 Expected is that a full development of the \ac{ridm} takes multiple years and many developers and researchers to complete.

 The \ac{ridm} does bring some techniques that show potential.
 These techniques could improve existing design methods.
 Based on this thesis, the following research topics are recommended:

 \begin{itemize}
@@ -181,39 +160,3 @@ Based on this thesis, the following research topics are recommended:
    \item \emph{Tooling for modelling software, to allow for unit testing}: Software development applies unit testing, where behavior of each function is tested separately.
        In modelling this would allow every sub-model to be tested separately.
 \end{itemize}





 % Kleine recommendations zijn 
 % - Werk aan automated testing
 % - 


       
        





 %\begin{itemize}
 %    \item To use the variable-detail approach in an optimal way, there are two issues that must be addressed.
 %        The first one is the continuous testing of dynamic models.
 %        In a similar approach to unit testing in software, it must be possible to apply changes to a model and check whether everything still works as expected.
 %        A big issue here is the two-port behavior of dynamic models in comparison with software functions.
 %        When a software function is called with given parameters, it returns a specific result.
 %        This result is independent of the program this function is part of.
 %        In contrary, a dynamic model is not independent.
 %        The step response of a electro motor is significantly different if a fly-wheel is attached or not.
 %        Unit testing on sub-models in a dynamic model is therefore not reliable, making intermediate testing of the model difficult.
 %        The second issue is the organization of model versions.
 %        The benefit of switching between different sub-models is discussed in this thesis.
 %        However, switching between different detail versions is difficult and labor intensive.
 %\end{itemize}