## 2 Proposed Software Architecture
### Software Architecture Evaluation
#### 2.4.3. Usability Assessment of the Prototype Developed Based on the Proposed Software Architecture  
We conducted a usability assessment of an SMDS prototype developed based on the proposed software architecture in this work, applying a laboratory study [42] with \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c} \hline \hline
**Module** & & **Action** & **Success** \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{People} & \(\bullet\) & The data of the new person are saved in the system. \\  & \(\bullet\) & The person can register in the mobile app. \\  & \(\bullet\) & The person enters their email. \\  & \(\bullet\) & The application allows capturing a password. \\  & \(\bullet\) & The person saves the password. \\  & \(\bullet\) & The person can log into the mobile app. \\  & \(\bullet\) & The GHEI personnel are authenticated in the mobile application. \\  & \(\bullet\) & The application tracks the user’s location and sends it to the database. \\  & \(\bullet\) & The GHEI personnel can see their location in real time. \\  & \(\bullet\) & Brigades can view the people inside a specified building. \\ \multirow{2}{*}{Attendance} & \(\bullet\) & The brigades can see the list of people in the GHEI by date. \\  & \(\bullet\) & Brigades register people as located or absent. \\  & \(\bullet\) & The GHEI personnel user selects the type of emergency report. \\ \multirow{2}{*}{Emergencies} & \(\bullet\) & The information of the emergency report, the location, and the user who is making the report are saved. \\  & \(\bullet\) & The brigades consult the information on the list of emergency reports. \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 4: Integration test summary. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline  
four users: one GHEI student, one academic staff member, one evacuation brigade leader, and one search and rescue brigade leader, to validate the considered requirements in our proposed software architecture. Table 5 describes the characteristics of the usability assessment participants. Notably, the users participating in this usability evaluation had received continuous training in civil protection programs that detail the actions that must be carried out before, during, and after an earthquake. Following the guidelines of the ISO/IEC 25019:2023 usability standard [43], user satisfaction was assessed using the QUIS 7.0 questionnaire [44; 45]. This questionnaire consists of a set of questions grouped into aspects such as a (a) general reaction to the software, (b) system user interface (screens), (c) terminology and system information, (d) learning, (e) system capabilities, and (f) usability and graphical user interface. In this instrument, the Likert scale, selected for each question, consists of nine conceptual satisfaction levels, where 1 point is the lowest rating, and 9 points represent the highest rating. Once the user's answers are compiled, the average of each category is estimated, as well as the total average. Based on [44; 45; 46], the acceptability ranges are as follows:  
1 \(\leq\) satisfaction \(\leq\) 3: unsatisfactory  
4 \(\leq\) satisfaction \(\leq\) 6: acceptable  
7 \(\leq\) satisfaction \(\leq\) 9: satisfactory  
The average results of each category, based on the responses of the QUIS 7.0 satisfaction questionnaire of the users, are presented in Table 6.  
Based on these results, the final average was computed to measure the user's satisfaction levels. The averages of each category were added and then divided by six, which is the total number of categories. The final average satisfaction score was 8.1. Therefore, the satisfaction aspect since the users' point of view is satisfactory in terms of a global reaction to the system (utility, flexibility, ease of use, among other features), screen, terminology, information system (user support to reach his/her goal, consistency in the location and content of messages), learning (user facility to learn how to use the system), system capacities, and usability and graphical user interface (design of the software interface); see Figure 9.