Quality of requirements is of great importance for the software development lifecycle as it influences all steps of software development. To ensure various quality attributes, suitable requirements validation techniques such as reviews or testing are essential. In this paper, we show how defect taxonomies can improve requirements reviews and testing. We point out how defect taxonomies can be seamlessly integrated into the requirements engineering process and discuss requirements validation with defect taxonomies as well as its benefits and the lessons learned with reference to industrial projects of a public health insurance institution where this approach has been successfully applied.
{"title":"Using defect taxonomies for requirements validation in industrial projects","authors":"M. Felderer, Armin Beer","doi":"10.1109/RE.2013.6636733","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/RE.2013.6636733","url":null,"abstract":"Quality of requirements is of great importance for the software development lifecycle as it influences all steps of software development. To ensure various quality attributes, suitable requirements validation techniques such as reviews or testing are essential. In this paper, we show how defect taxonomies can improve requirements reviews and testing. We point out how defect taxonomies can be seamlessly integrated into the requirements engineering process and discuss requirements validation with defect taxonomies as well as its benefits and the lessons learned with reference to industrial projects of a public health insurance institution where this approach has been successfully applied.","PeriodicalId":6342,"journal":{"name":"2013 21st IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE)","volume":"41 1","pages":"296-301"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-10-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79733786","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}
We posit that machine learning can be applied to effectively address requirements engineering problems. Specifically, we present a requirements traceability method based on the machine learning technique Reinforcement Learning (RL). The RL method demonstrates a rather targeted generation of candidate links between textual requirements artifacts (high level requirements traced to low level requirements, for example). The technique has been validated using two real-world datasets from two problem domains. Our technique demonstrated statistically significant better results than the Information Retrieval technique.
{"title":"Application of reinforcement learning to requirements engineering: requirements tracing","authors":"Hakim Sultanov, J. Hayes","doi":"10.1109/RE.2013.6636705","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/RE.2013.6636705","url":null,"abstract":"We posit that machine learning can be applied to effectively address requirements engineering problems. Specifically, we present a requirements traceability method based on the machine learning technique Reinforcement Learning (RL). The RL method demonstrates a rather targeted generation of candidate links between textual requirements artifacts (high level requirements traced to low level requirements, for example). The technique has been validated using two real-world datasets from two problem domains. Our technique demonstrated statistically significant better results than the Information Retrieval technique.","PeriodicalId":6342,"journal":{"name":"2013 21st IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE)","volume":"47 1","pages":"52-61"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74156173","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}
This position paper argues that industry tracks have no place in any research conference. Instead, a research conference should always have room for industrial case studies, evaluated according to criteria for empirical research. Such case studies would not be acceptable at a practitioners' industrial conference, just as papers presented at such conferences would not be acceptable at research conferences. It follows as corollary that if researchers want to become familiar with problems and solutions of RE practice, they should visit industrial conferences.
{"title":"Requirements engineering conferences: Wither industry tracks?","authors":"R. Wieringa, P. V. Eck, J. Mylopoulos","doi":"10.1109/RE.2013.6636749","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/RE.2013.6636749","url":null,"abstract":"This position paper argues that industry tracks have no place in any research conference. Instead, a research conference should always have room for industrial case studies, evaluated according to criteria for empirical research. Such case studies would not be acceptable at a practitioners' industrial conference, just as papers presented at such conferences would not be acceptable at research conferences. It follows as corollary that if researchers want to become familiar with problems and solutions of RE practice, they should visit industrial conferences.","PeriodicalId":6342,"journal":{"name":"2013 21st IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE)","volume":"5 1","pages":"349-352"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"75279203","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}
Software Ecosystems is becoming a relevant research topic by analysing the software industry as networked organisations based on a common interest in a central software technology. In this context, appropriately handling Requirements Engineering is a success factor for Software Platform Management. Nevertheless, recent research in this subject does not integrate the ecosystem's social dimension to a business view during requirements negotiations. The state-of-the-art is generally concerned with challenges of achieving and agreed requirements understanding. Thereby, this PhD proposes a Requirements Negotiation Model to address the negotiation process through a more holistic perspective. It aims to present an insightful reasoning on how requirements negotiation collaborates to ecosystem's health and success, defining negotiation strategies along Software Ecosystem evolution considering the Software Platform Management.
{"title":"Requirements negotiation model: A social oriented approach for software ecosystems evolution","authors":"George Valença","doi":"10.1109/RE.2013.6636763","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/RE.2013.6636763","url":null,"abstract":"Software Ecosystems is becoming a relevant research topic by analysing the software industry as networked organisations based on a common interest in a central software technology. In this context, appropriately handling Requirements Engineering is a success factor for Software Platform Management. Nevertheless, recent research in this subject does not integrate the ecosystem's social dimension to a business view during requirements negotiations. The state-of-the-art is generally concerned with challenges of achieving and agreed requirements understanding. Thereby, this PhD proposes a Requirements Negotiation Model to address the negotiation process through a more holistic perspective. It aims to present an insightful reasoning on how requirements negotiation collaborates to ecosystem's health and success, defining negotiation strategies along Software Ecosystem evolution considering the Software Platform Management.","PeriodicalId":6342,"journal":{"name":"2013 21st IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE)","volume":"105 1","pages":"393-396"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82443514","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}
E. Yu, Daniel Amyot, G. Mussbacher, Xavier Franch, J. Castro
i* is a goal-oriented and agent-oriented modeling framework that focuses on the analysis of intentional and strategic relationships among actors. In this mini-tutorial, we highlight a number of recent applications in practical industrial and business settings.
I *是一个面向目标和面向主体的建模框架，侧重于分析参与者之间的意图和战略关系。在这个迷你教程中，我们将重点介绍一些最近在实际工业和商业环境中的应用。
{"title":"Practical applications of i∗ in industry: The state of the art","authors":"E. Yu, Daniel Amyot, G. Mussbacher, Xavier Franch, J. Castro","doi":"10.1109/RE.2013.6636754","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/RE.2013.6636754","url":null,"abstract":"i* is a goal-oriented and agent-oriented modeling framework that focuses on the analysis of intentional and strategic relationships among actors. In this mini-tutorial, we highlight a number of recent applications in practical industrial and business settings.","PeriodicalId":6342,"journal":{"name":"2013 21st IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE)","volume":"11 1","pages":"366-367"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"87614626","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}
This paper traces the history of the International Requirements Engineering Conference from its beginnings as the International Symposium on Requirements Engineering and the International Conference on Requirements Engineering. The history is tracked to the present, with suggestions for future considerations, such as more emphasis on systems requirements engineering, and enhanced practitioner participation. Other requirements engineering events and activities are also discussed. A timeline of major milestones is included, along with a brief discussion of requirements engineering research activities that occurred in parallel with the conference.
{"title":"A history of the international requirements engineering conference (RE)RE@21","authors":"N. Mead","doi":"10.1109/RE.2013.6636721","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/RE.2013.6636721","url":null,"abstract":"This paper traces the history of the International Requirements Engineering Conference from its beginnings as the International Symposium on Requirements Engineering and the International Conference on Requirements Engineering. The history is tracked to the present, with suggestions for future considerations, such as more emphasis on systems requirements engineering, and enhanced practitioner participation. Other requirements engineering events and activities are also discussed. A timeline of major milestones is included, along with a brief discussion of requirements engineering research activities that occurred in parallel with the conference.","PeriodicalId":6342,"journal":{"name":"2013 21st IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE)","volume":"1 1","pages":"21-221"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86343291","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}
Requirement-based test generation (RBTG) is a verification and validation technique, which ensures the conformance of a final product with its requirements. In collaboration with an industry partner, we studied and analyzed their current practice of applying RBTG in the context of developing a family of subsea oil and gas production systems, which are cyber-physical systems. The company aims at improving their current RBTG practice by enhancing the reuse of test artifacts across different products. Due to the complexity of developing such systems and being in the context of system product-line engineering, achieving this goal requires a systematic approach for RBTG. As the first step to this end, we conducted a domain analysis with the industry partner to characterize their current practice of applying RBTG and to identify their needs and challenges. In this paper, we report results of the domain analysis. Moreover, we discuss the limitations of employing existing RBTG approaches in an industrial setting and suggest directions for improvement.
{"title":"Towards a systematic requirement-based test generation framework: Industrial challenges and needs","authors":"S. Hesari, Razieh Behjati, T. Yue","doi":"10.1109/RE.2013.6636727","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/RE.2013.6636727","url":null,"abstract":"Requirement-based test generation (RBTG) is a verification and validation technique, which ensures the conformance of a final product with its requirements. In collaboration with an industry partner, we studied and analyzed their current practice of applying RBTG in the context of developing a family of subsea oil and gas production systems, which are cyber-physical systems. The company aims at improving their current RBTG practice by enhancing the reuse of test artifacts across different products. Due to the complexity of developing such systems and being in the context of system product-line engineering, achieving this goal requires a systematic approach for RBTG. As the first step to this end, we conducted a domain analysis with the industry partner to characterize their current practice of applying RBTG and to identify their needs and challenges. In this paper, we report results of the domain analysis. Moreover, we discuss the limitations of employing existing RBTG approaches in an industrial setting and suggest directions for improvement.","PeriodicalId":6342,"journal":{"name":"2013 21st IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE)","volume":"3 1","pages":"261-266"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86717221","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}
This short piece provides an introduction to a panel session that will take place at the RE'13 conference. The purpose of the panel will be to explore different possible future directions of the RE conference and its community. This piece outlines the arguments that will be made by each of the panelists to direct the conference and community towards different perspectives - both more academic - and practitioner-oriented.
{"title":"Future directions of the RE conference and its community","authors":"N. Maiden","doi":"10.1109/RE.2013.6636748","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/RE.2013.6636748","url":null,"abstract":"This short piece provides an introduction to a panel session that will take place at the RE'13 conference. The purpose of the panel will be to explore different possible future directions of the RE conference and its community. This piece outlines the arguments that will be made by each of the panelists to direct the conference and community towards different perspectives - both more academic - and practitioner-oriented.","PeriodicalId":6342,"journal":{"name":"2013 21st IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE)","volume":"34 1","pages":"347-348"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86756628","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}
This paper reports on the use and importance of models in the RE (Requirements Engineering) series of conferences based on the results of an analysis of the use of the word `model' and of other words with `model...' as their stem in the main bodies of the texts of published papers. The 620 papers examined contained 18,066 instances of these words. The words identified were divided into `general terms' for models (505), `special names' for models (215) and names for the `nature and characteristics' of models and modelling (120). The large numbers are a clear indicator of the overall importance which the model has as a dominant concept and as a still proliferating artifact in the practice of those participating in the series. The three groups of names represent social conventions adopted for communication and continuity; the third provides a pragmatically rather than theoretically based overview of the factors affecting models and modelling. The conclusions suggest questions that may improve general practice and form the basis of more specific model declaration.
{"title":"Models in the RE seriesre@21","authors":"S. Morris","doi":"10.1109/RE.2013.6636723","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/RE.2013.6636723","url":null,"abstract":"This paper reports on the use and importance of models in the RE (Requirements Engineering) series of conferences based on the results of an analysis of the use of the word `model' and of other words with `model...' as their stem in the main bodies of the texts of published papers. The 620 papers examined contained 18,066 instances of these words. The words identified were divided into `general terms' for models (505), `special names' for models (215) and names for the `nature and characteristics' of models and modelling (120). The large numbers are a clear indicator of the overall importance which the model has as a dominant concept and as a still proliferating artifact in the practice of those participating in the series. The three groups of names represent social conventions adopted for communication and continuity; the third provides a pragmatically rather than theoretically based overview of the factors affecting models and modelling. The conclusions suggest questions that may improve general practice and form the basis of more specific model declaration.","PeriodicalId":6342,"journal":{"name":"2013 21st IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE)","volume":"17 1","pages":"230-237"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83243010","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}
Shinobu Saito, Mutsuki Takeuchi, Masatoshi Hiraoka, T. Kitani, M. Aoyama
We have been involved in a number of large-scale software development projects, which might lead to loss of millions of dollars if failed. The quality of SRS (Software Requirements Specification) is the key to success of the software development. Review and inspection are common practices for the verification and validation of SRS. However, verification techniques used in projects might be characterized as ad hoc. In this article, we propose requirements clinic, a third party inspection methodology for improving the quality of the SRS. In order to systematically inspect a SRS, we developed a perspective-based inspection methodology based on PQM (Pragmatic Quality Model) of SRS. PQM is derived from IEEE Std. 830 from the perspective of pragmatic quality. To inspect a SRS according to PQM, we identified 198 inspection points, which lead to a quality score between 0 and 100. The requirements clinic advises to the requirements engineering team by a comprehensive quality inspection report including quality score, benchmark and SRS patterns for improvement. Since 2010, we have been practicing the methodology to a variety of development projects, and revealed an average of 10.6 ROI in 12 projects. We also discuss the feasibility of the methodology and lessons learned from the practices.
{"title":"Requirements clinic: Third party inspection methodology and practice for improving the quality of software requirements specifications","authors":"Shinobu Saito, Mutsuki Takeuchi, Masatoshi Hiraoka, T. Kitani, M. Aoyama","doi":"10.1109/RE.2013.6636732","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/RE.2013.6636732","url":null,"abstract":"We have been involved in a number of large-scale software development projects, which might lead to loss of millions of dollars if failed. The quality of SRS (Software Requirements Specification) is the key to success of the software development. Review and inspection are common practices for the verification and validation of SRS. However, verification techniques used in projects might be characterized as ad hoc. In this article, we propose requirements clinic, a third party inspection methodology for improving the quality of the SRS. In order to systematically inspect a SRS, we developed a perspective-based inspection methodology based on PQM (Pragmatic Quality Model) of SRS. PQM is derived from IEEE Std. 830 from the perspective of pragmatic quality. To inspect a SRS according to PQM, we identified 198 inspection points, which lead to a quality score between 0 and 100. The requirements clinic advises to the requirements engineering team by a comprehensive quality inspection report including quality score, benchmark and SRS patterns for improvement. Since 2010, we have been practicing the methodology to a variety of development projects, and revealed an average of 10.6 ROI in 12 projects. We also discuss the feasibility of the methodology and lessons learned from the practices.","PeriodicalId":6342,"journal":{"name":"2013 21st IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE)","volume":"35 1","pages":"290-295"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89802275","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：