V.N. Negoda – Dr.Sc.(Eng.), Associate Professor, Professor,

Department of Computing Machinery, Ulyanovsk State Technical University

E-mail: nvnulstu@gmail.com

A.V. Lylova – Senior Lecturer, 

Department of Computing Machinery, Ulyanovsk State Technical University E-mail: lylovaannav@gmail.com

The process of managing the choice of design solutions for software implementation of the logical control functions is considered. In this process, the initial and implementation representations of functional dependencies are separated. For each initial representation of the functional dependence, many implementation ones are constructed, which, in turn, are divided into interpreted and directly executed. An interpreted representation is a data set that, when calculating the values of functions, is fed to the input of an interpreter oriented to a given type of representation. A directly executable view is most often an automatically generated program, although sometimes created manually. For each implementation representation, an analytical assessment of the criteria parameters is formed. The main criteria parameters are the computational time and memory. Estimates are built for various potential target hardware and software platforms. All design decisions are sorted by the value of the criterion parameters and then, by the method of exclusion, the space of design decisions narrows. Estimates of the criteria parameters are represented by intervals of possible values. The paper presents the logical-algebraic models that underlie the specifications of design decisions.

1. Shalyto A.A. Logicheskoe upravlenie. Metody apparatnoi i programmnoi realizatsii algoritmov. SPb: Nauka. 2000. 780 s. (in Russian)
2. Prangishvili I.V. Proektirovanie ustroistv logicheskogo upravleniya. M: Nauka. 1984. 239 s. (in Russian)
3. Keil-Slawik R. Artifacts in Software Design. Software Development and Reality Construction. Springer: 1992. P. 168−188.
4. El-Bakry, Atwan A. Simplification and Implementation of Boolean Functions. International Journal of Universal Computer Sciences. 2010. V. 1. № 1. P. 41−50.
5. Antipova E.V. Vliyanie sposoba preobrazovaniya avtomatnykh diagramm na parametry sgenerirovannogo programmnogo koda. Vestnik Volzhskogo universiteta im. V.N. Tatishcheva. Ser. Informatika. 2012. № 20. S. 111−122. (in Russian)
6. Parviainen P., Takalo J., Teppola S., Tihinen M. Model-Driven Development. Process and practices.  URL: http://www.vtt.fi/inf/pdf/workingpapers/2009/ W114.pdf (data obrashcheniya: 11.09.2019).
7. Negoda V.N., Lylova A.V. Parametrizatsiya proektnykh reshenii v sisteme avtomatizatsii proektirovaniya programmnykh realizatsii funktsii logicheskogo upravleniya. Radiotekhnika. 2016. № 9. S. 99−106. (in Russian)
8. Norenkov I.P., Arutuyunyan I.M. Evolyutsionnye metody v zadachakh vybora proektnykh reshenii. Nauka i obrazovanie. Elektronnoe izdanie MVTU im. Baumana. 2007. № 9. (in Russian)
9. Ferreira N., Fisher D., König A. Sample-oriented task-driven visualizations: Allowing users to make better, more confident decisions. Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - Proceedings. 2014. P. 571−580.
10. Darji Veera, Venkata Rao, Ravipudi. Application of AHP/EVAMIX Method for Decision Making in the Industrial Environment. American Journal of Operations Research. 2013. P. 542−569.