The human element is often found to be the weakest link in the information security chain. The Personal Information Security Assistant project aims to address this by improving the privacy and security awareness of end-users and by aligning the user's personal IT environment to the user's security requirements. It does this by elicitation of a user's privacy and security requirements (risk appetite) as well as a user's risk perception. The PISA then takes action by aligning the user's requirements and perceptions, thereby improving user awareness regarding privacy and security. This article outlines the research questions, methodology and current results associated with the PISA project.
{"title":"The Personal Information Security Assistant","authors":"Roeland H. P. Kegel","doi":"10.1109/RE.2015.7320457","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/RE.2015.7320457","url":null,"abstract":"The human element is often found to be the weakest link in the information security chain. The Personal Information Security Assistant project aims to address this by improving the privacy and security awareness of end-users and by aligning the user's personal IT environment to the user's security requirements. It does this by elicitation of a user's privacy and security requirements (risk appetite) as well as a user's risk perception. The PISA then takes action by aligning the user's requirements and perceptions, thereby improving user awareness regarding privacy and security. This article outlines the research questions, methodology and current results associated with the PISA project.","PeriodicalId":132568,"journal":{"name":"2015 IEEE 23rd International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE)","volume":"152 6","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2015-11-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"113972911","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Security requirements analysis depends on how well-trained analysts perceive security risk, understand the impact of various vulnerabilities, and mitigate threats. When systems are composed of multiple machines, configurations, and software components that interact with each other, risk perception must account for the composition of security requirements. In this paper, we report on how changes to security requirements affect analysts risk perceptions and their decisions about how to modify the requirements to reach adequate security levels. We conducted two user surveys of 174 participants wherein participants assess security levels across 64 factorial vignettes. We analyzed the survey results using multi-level modeling to test for the effect of security requirements composition on participants' overall security adequacy ratings and on their ratings of individual requirements. We accompanied this analysis with grounded analysis of elicited requirements aimed at lowering the security risk. Our results suggest that requirements composition affects experts' adequacy ratings on security requirements. In addition, we identified three categories of requirements modifications, called refinements, replacements and reinforcements, and we measured how these categories compare with overall perceived security risk. Finally, we discuss the future impact of our work in security requirements assessment practice.
{"title":"Assessment of risk perception in security requirements composition","authors":"Hanan Hibshi, T. Breaux, S. Broomell","doi":"10.1109/RE.2015.7320417","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/RE.2015.7320417","url":null,"abstract":"Security requirements analysis depends on how well-trained analysts perceive security risk, understand the impact of various vulnerabilities, and mitigate threats. When systems are composed of multiple machines, configurations, and software components that interact with each other, risk perception must account for the composition of security requirements. In this paper, we report on how changes to security requirements affect analysts risk perceptions and their decisions about how to modify the requirements to reach adequate security levels. We conducted two user surveys of 174 participants wherein participants assess security levels across 64 factorial vignettes. We analyzed the survey results using multi-level modeling to test for the effect of security requirements composition on participants' overall security adequacy ratings and on their ratings of individual requirements. We accompanied this analysis with grounded analysis of elicited requirements aimed at lowering the security risk. Our results suggest that requirements composition affects experts' adequacy ratings on security requirements. In addition, we identified three categories of requirements modifications, called refinements, replacements and reinforcements, and we measured how these categories compare with overall perceived security risk. Finally, we discuss the future impact of our work in security requirements assessment practice.","PeriodicalId":132568,"journal":{"name":"2015 IEEE 23rd International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE)","volume":"515 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2015-11-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116205774","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pradeep K. Murukannaiah, A. Kalia, Pankaj R. Telang, Munindar P. Singh
A stakeholder's beliefs influence his or her goals. However, a stakeholder's beliefs may not be consistent with the goals of all stakeholders of a system being constructed. Such belief-goal inconsistencies could manifest themselves as conflicting goals of the system to be. We propose Arg-ACH, a novel approach for capturing inconsistencies between stakeholders' goals and beliefs, and resolving goal conflicts. Arg-ACH employs a hybrid of (1) the analysis of competing hypotheses (ACH), a structured analytic technique, for systematically eliciting stakeholders' goals and beliefs, and (2) rational argumentation for determining belief-goal inconsistencies to resolve conflicts. Arg-ACH treats conflicting goals as hypotheses that compete with each other and the winning hypothesis as a goal of the system to be. Arg-ACH systematically captures the trail of a requirements engineer's thought process in resolving conflicts. We evaluated Arg-ACH via a study in which 20 subjects applied Arg-ACH or ACH to resolve goal conflicts in a sociotechnical system concerning national security. We found that Arg-ACH is superior to ACH with respect to completeness and coverage of belief search; length of belief chaining; ease of use; explicitness of the assumptions made; and repeatability of conclusions across subjects. Not surprisingly, Arg-ACH required more time than ACH: although this is justified by improvements in quality, the gap could be reduced through better tooling.
{"title":"Resolving goal conflicts via argumentation-based analysis of competing hypotheses","authors":"Pradeep K. Murukannaiah, A. Kalia, Pankaj R. Telang, Munindar P. Singh","doi":"10.1109/RE.2015.7320418","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/RE.2015.7320418","url":null,"abstract":"A stakeholder's beliefs influence his or her goals. However, a stakeholder's beliefs may not be consistent with the goals of all stakeholders of a system being constructed. Such belief-goal inconsistencies could manifest themselves as conflicting goals of the system to be. We propose Arg-ACH, a novel approach for capturing inconsistencies between stakeholders' goals and beliefs, and resolving goal conflicts. Arg-ACH employs a hybrid of (1) the analysis of competing hypotheses (ACH), a structured analytic technique, for systematically eliciting stakeholders' goals and beliefs, and (2) rational argumentation for determining belief-goal inconsistencies to resolve conflicts. Arg-ACH treats conflicting goals as hypotheses that compete with each other and the winning hypothesis as a goal of the system to be. Arg-ACH systematically captures the trail of a requirements engineer's thought process in resolving conflicts. We evaluated Arg-ACH via a study in which 20 subjects applied Arg-ACH or ACH to resolve goal conflicts in a sociotechnical system concerning national security. We found that Arg-ACH is superior to ACH with respect to completeness and coverage of belief search; length of belief chaining; ease of use; explicitness of the assumptions made; and repeatability of conclusions across subjects. Not surprisingly, Arg-ACH required more time than ACH: although this is justified by improvements in quality, the gap could be reduced through better tooling.","PeriodicalId":132568,"journal":{"name":"2015 IEEE 23rd International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE)","volume":"74 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2015-11-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122719181","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The software requirements selection process has an important role in software development because it aims in identifying an (close to) optimal subset of candidate requirements by exploiting trade-offs among these requirements to satisfy the demands of users. Usually, more than one stakeholder participates in the requirements selection process analyzing important aspects in this context, such as budget, costs, available resources, and technical aspects to find a set of requirements that meets the users' needs. In a scenario in which different stakeholders are involved, the inclusion of their preferences, decision criteria and judgment are important factors to guarantee the selection of the best requirements according to project constraints. An interactive approach to incorporate preferences from multiple stakeholders is proposed aiming to assist users in obtaining solutions as close to their needs.
{"title":"Incorporating preferences from multiple stakeholders in software requirements selection an interactive search-based approach","authors":"Antônio Mauricio Pitangueira","doi":"10.1109/RE.2015.7320455","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/RE.2015.7320455","url":null,"abstract":"The software requirements selection process has an important role in software development because it aims in identifying an (close to) optimal subset of candidate requirements by exploiting trade-offs among these requirements to satisfy the demands of users. Usually, more than one stakeholder participates in the requirements selection process analyzing important aspects in this context, such as budget, costs, available resources, and technical aspects to find a set of requirements that meets the users' needs. In a scenario in which different stakeholders are involved, the inclusion of their preferences, decision criteria and judgment are important factors to guarantee the selection of the best requirements according to project constraints. An interactive approach to incorporate preferences from multiple stakeholders is proposed aiming to assist users in obtaining solutions as close to their needs.","PeriodicalId":132568,"journal":{"name":"2015 IEEE 23rd International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE)","volume":"9 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2015-11-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130934829","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In this paper, we propose an enhancement to requirements gathering interface used in open source software (OSS) development environments. Specifically we propose embedding currently used interface with reusable requirement patterns. We propose this enhancement based on the result we obtained from an experiment on the availability of requirement patterns during requirements generation in OSS development.
{"title":"An enhanced requirements gathering interface for open source software development environments","authors":"Jaison Kuriakose, J. Parsons","doi":"10.1109/RE.2015.7320442","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/RE.2015.7320442","url":null,"abstract":"In this paper, we propose an enhancement to requirements gathering interface used in open source software (OSS) development environments. Specifically we propose embedding currently used interface with reusable requirement patterns. We propose this enhancement based on the result we obtained from an experiment on the availability of requirement patterns during requirements generation in OSS development.","PeriodicalId":132568,"journal":{"name":"2015 IEEE 23rd International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE)","volume":"47 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2015-11-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133754098","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Despite the importance of Requirements Engineering (RE) for the success of software products, most of the requirements decisions such as requirements specification and prioritization are still ad hoc and depend upon the managers' preferences and the trade-offs they make. The Technical Debt (TD) metaphor looks into the trade-offs between short term and long-term goals in software development projects that may lead to increased cost in the future. This problem is mainly due to the lack of a systematic and well-defined approach to manage the high level of uncertainty in requirements decisions. In this paper, we propose to apply the real options thinking to develop a quantitative method for managing requirements decisions under uncertainty and, more specifically for managing requirements debt in software development projects. A real option is a right without an obligation to make a specific future decision depending on how uncertainty resolves. We demonstrate the application of real options in the context of requirements debt valuation by using the binomial model combined with dynamic programming. We provide an illustrative example to show how uncertainty creates option value and influences requirements decisions and finally outline a future research agenda.
{"title":"Using real options to manage Technical Debt in Requirements Engineering","authors":"Zahra Shakeri Hossein Abad, G. Ruhe","doi":"10.1109/RE.2015.7320428","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/RE.2015.7320428","url":null,"abstract":"Despite the importance of Requirements Engineering (RE) for the success of software products, most of the requirements decisions such as requirements specification and prioritization are still ad hoc and depend upon the managers' preferences and the trade-offs they make. The Technical Debt (TD) metaphor looks into the trade-offs between short term and long-term goals in software development projects that may lead to increased cost in the future. This problem is mainly due to the lack of a systematic and well-defined approach to manage the high level of uncertainty in requirements decisions. In this paper, we propose to apply the real options thinking to develop a quantitative method for managing requirements decisions under uncertainty and, more specifically for managing requirements debt in software development projects. A real option is a right without an obligation to make a specific future decision depending on how uncertainty resolves. We demonstrate the application of real options in the context of requirements debt valuation by using the binomial model combined with dynamic programming. We provide an illustrative example to show how uncertainty creates option value and influences requirements decisions and finally outline a future research agenda.","PeriodicalId":132568,"journal":{"name":"2015 IEEE 23rd International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE)","volume":"429 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2015-11-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116279593","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
A large part of Requirements Engineering is concerned with involving system users, capturing their needs, and getting their feedback. As users are becoming more and more demanding, markets and technologies are evolving fast, and systems are getting more and more individual, a broad and systematic user involvement in Requirements Engineering is becoming more important than ever. This paper presents the idea of pushing user involvement in Requirements Engineering to its extreme by systematically delegating the responsibility for developing the requirements and deciding about future releases to the crowd of users. We summarize the pros and cons of this vision, its main challenges, and sketch promising solution concepts, which have been proposed and used in E-Participation and E-Democracy. We discussed our vision with ten experts from the fields of Requirements Engineering, politics, psychology, and market research, who were partly supportive partly skeptical.
{"title":"Democratic mass participation of users in Requirements Engineering?","authors":"Timo Johann, W. Maalej","doi":"10.1109/RE.2015.7320433","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/RE.2015.7320433","url":null,"abstract":"A large part of Requirements Engineering is concerned with involving system users, capturing their needs, and getting their feedback. As users are becoming more and more demanding, markets and technologies are evolving fast, and systems are getting more and more individual, a broad and systematic user involvement in Requirements Engineering is becoming more important than ever. This paper presents the idea of pushing user involvement in Requirements Engineering to its extreme by systematically delegating the responsibility for developing the requirements and deciding about future releases to the crowd of users. We summarize the pros and cons of this vision, its main challenges, and sketch promising solution concepts, which have been proposed and used in E-Participation and E-Democracy. We discussed our vision with ten experts from the fields of Requirements Engineering, politics, psychology, and market research, who were partly supportive partly skeptical.","PeriodicalId":132568,"journal":{"name":"2015 IEEE 23rd International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE)","volume":"41 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2015-11-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133479329","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
One of the key challenges in the software engineering lies in requirement engineering. As an important technique for modeling and analyzing requirements, software architecture has been intensively studied in recent years. Although various modeling tools have been proposed in both academy and industry, these tools typically provide limited support for analyzing non-functional requirements at architecture level. To address this problem, in this tool demo, we present a tool, called Breeze, that models, analyzes, and improves software architecture, with an emphasis on its non-functional requirements. In particular, Breeze has three key modules: (1) a modeling module that facilitates the modeling for software systems, (2) an analysis module that verifies non-functional requirements (e.g. safety, reliability and correctness) at the architecture level, and (3) a reconfiguration module that allows users to repair defects or to further improve architectures.
{"title":"Breeze: A modeling tool for designing, analyzing, and improving software architecture","authors":"Luxi Chen, Linpeng Huang, Hao Zhong, Chen Li, Xiwen Wu","doi":"10.1109/RE.2015.7320440","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/RE.2015.7320440","url":null,"abstract":"One of the key challenges in the software engineering lies in requirement engineering. As an important technique for modeling and analyzing requirements, software architecture has been intensively studied in recent years. Although various modeling tools have been proposed in both academy and industry, these tools typically provide limited support for analyzing non-functional requirements at architecture level. To address this problem, in this tool demo, we present a tool, called Breeze, that models, analyzes, and improves software architecture, with an emphasis on its non-functional requirements. In particular, Breeze has three key modules: (1) a modeling module that facilitates the modeling for software systems, (2) an analysis module that verifies non-functional requirements (e.g. safety, reliability and correctness) at the architecture level, and (3) a reconfiguration module that allows users to repair defects or to further improve architectures.","PeriodicalId":132568,"journal":{"name":"2015 IEEE 23rd International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE)","volume":"51 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2015-11-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123639237","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Data-driven Natural Language Processing (NLP) methods have noticeably advanced in the past few years. These advances can be tied to the drastic growth of the quality of collaborative knowledge bases (KB) available on the World Wide Web. Such KBs contain vast amounts of up-to-date structured human knowledge and common sense data that can be exploited by NLP methods to discover otherwise-unseen semantic dimensions in text, aiding in tasks related to natural language understanding, classification, and retrieval. Motivated by these observations, we describe our research agenda for exploiting online human knowledge in Requirements Engineering (RE). The underlying assumption is that requirements are a product of the human domain knowledge that is expressed mainly in natural language. In particular, our research is focused on methods that exploit the online encyclopedia Wikipedia as a textual corpus. Wikipedia provides access to a massive number of real-world concepts organized in hierarchical semantic structures. Such knowledge can be analyzed to provide automated support for several exhaustive RE activities including requirements elicitation, understanding, modeling, traceability, and reuse, across multiple application domains. This paper describes our preliminary findings in this domain, current state of research, and prospects of our future work.
{"title":"Exploiting online human knowledge in Requirements Engineering","authors":"Anas Mahmoud, D. Carver","doi":"10.1109/RE.2015.7320434","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/RE.2015.7320434","url":null,"abstract":"Data-driven Natural Language Processing (NLP) methods have noticeably advanced in the past few years. These advances can be tied to the drastic growth of the quality of collaborative knowledge bases (KB) available on the World Wide Web. Such KBs contain vast amounts of up-to-date structured human knowledge and common sense data that can be exploited by NLP methods to discover otherwise-unseen semantic dimensions in text, aiding in tasks related to natural language understanding, classification, and retrieval. Motivated by these observations, we describe our research agenda for exploiting online human knowledge in Requirements Engineering (RE). The underlying assumption is that requirements are a product of the human domain knowledge that is expressed mainly in natural language. In particular, our research is focused on methods that exploit the online encyclopedia Wikipedia as a textual corpus. Wikipedia provides access to a massive number of real-world concepts organized in hierarchical semantic structures. Such knowledge can be analyzed to provide automated support for several exhaustive RE activities including requirements elicitation, understanding, modeling, traceability, and reuse, across multiple application domains. This paper describes our preliminary findings in this domain, current state of research, and prospects of our future work.","PeriodicalId":132568,"journal":{"name":"2015 IEEE 23rd International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE)","volume":"88 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2015-11-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130493503","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Requirements engineering is recognized as a creative process where stakeholders jointly discover new creative ideas for innovative and novel products that eventually are expressed as requirements. This paper evaluates four different creativity techniques, namely Hall of Fame, Constraint Removal, Brainstorming, and Idea Box, using creativity workshops with students and industry practitioners. In total, 34 creativity workshops were conducted with 90 students from two universities, and 86 industrial practitioners from six companies. The results from this study indicate that Brainstorming can generate by far the most ideas, while Hall of Fame generates most creative ideas. Idea Box generates the least number of ideas, and the least number of creative ideas. Finally, Hall of Fame was the technique that led to the most number of requirements that was included in future releases of the products.
需求工程被认为是一个创造性的过程，在这个过程中，涉众共同为创新的和新颖的产品发现新的创造性的想法，这些想法最终被表达为需求。本文评估了四种不同的创造力技术，即名人堂，约束去除，头脑风暴和创意盒，使用与学生和行业从业者的创造力研讨会。来自两所大学的90名学生和来自六家公司的86名业界人士共举办了34个创意工作坊。这项研究的结果表明，到目前为止，头脑风暴能产生最多的想法，而名人堂能产生最多的创意。“创意盒”产生的创意最少，创意最少。最后，Hall of Fame是一种技术，它导致了大量的需求，这些需求被包含在产品的未来版本中。
{"title":"Selecting creativity techniques for creative requirements: An evaluation of four techniques using creativity workshops","authors":"Richard Berntsson-Svensson, Maryam Taghavianfar","doi":"10.1109/RE.2015.7320409","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/RE.2015.7320409","url":null,"abstract":"Requirements engineering is recognized as a creative process where stakeholders jointly discover new creative ideas for innovative and novel products that eventually are expressed as requirements. This paper evaluates four different creativity techniques, namely Hall of Fame, Constraint Removal, Brainstorming, and Idea Box, using creativity workshops with students and industry practitioners. In total, 34 creativity workshops were conducted with 90 students from two universities, and 86 industrial practitioners from six companies. The results from this study indicate that Brainstorming can generate by far the most ideas, while Hall of Fame generates most creative ideas. Idea Box generates the least number of ideas, and the least number of creative ideas. Finally, Hall of Fame was the technique that led to the most number of requirements that was included in future releases of the products.","PeriodicalId":132568,"journal":{"name":"2015 IEEE 23rd International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE)","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2015-11-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129500653","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：