A feature-oriented approach to modeling requirements dependencies

Zhang, Wei; Mei, Hong; Zhao, Haiyan

doi:10.1109/re.2005.6

Cited by 47 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…For instance, as explained earlier, the feature History has a modification dependency with Number Systems. This corresponds to similar the dependency types Influences [9] and Intentional Interaction [8].…”

Section: B Feature Dependenciessupporting

confidence: 56%

“…Note that the Usage dependency [7], [8], which corresponds to Inform and Data Flow dependencies in [9], is the most common form of feature dependency. However, we are not interested in this dependency because Usage dependencies do not vary independent from their associated features.…”

Section: B Feature Dependenciesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, we are not interested in this dependency because Usage dependencies do not vary independent from their associated features. Instead, features involved in a Usage dependency must be always configured together [9].…”

Section: B Feature Dependenciesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Aspectual Separation of Feature Dependencies for Flexible Feature Composition

Lee

Botterweck

Thiel

2009

2009 33rd Annual IEEE International Computer Software and Applications Conference

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-Aspect-oriented programming (AOP) provides effective mechanisms for improving the modularity of feature implementations. However, as features in general are not independent of each other, changes in the implementation of one feature may cause changes to or side effects in the implementation of other features. We address this challenge by separating feature dependencies from feature implementations using AOP techniques. Specifically, this paper contributes by providing aspect-oriented implementation patterns for feature dependencies (e.g., modification dependency and activation dependency). With the resulting clear separation of dependencies, this approach makes each feature implementation easier to understand and reuse. A product line of scientific calculator applications is used to demonstrate and evaluate the proposed approach.

show abstract

Section: B Feature Dependenciessupporting

confidence: 56%

Section: B Feature Dependenciesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Aspectual Separation of Feature Dependencies for Flexible Feature Composition

Lee

Botterweck

Thiel

2009

2009 33rd Annual IEEE International Computer Software and Applications Conference

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Breitman and Leite used language extended lexicon (LEL) to represent terms and phrases in application language, and then proposed framework to construct ontology [1]. Similarly, Zhang, Mei, and Zhao provided feature diagram to represent domain knowledge [2]; Bao et al proposed maintenance framework for domain ontology with focus on formal representation of process changes [3]. The above three researches focused on construction of ontology, but they did not focus on verification of quality of ontology with rules.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rule-Based Verification Method of Requirements Ontology

Dzung

Huy

Ohnishi

2014

IEICE Trans. Inf. & Syst.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARYThere have been many researches about construction and application of ontology in reality, notably the usage of ontology to support requirements engineering. The effect of ontology-based requirements engineering depends on quality of ontology. With the increasing size of ontology, it is difficult to verify the correctness of information stored in ontology. This paper will propose a method of using rules for verification the correctness of requirements ontology. We provide a rule description language to specify properties that requirements ontology should satisfy. Then, by checking whether the rules are consistent with requirements ontology, we verify the correctness of the ontology. We have developed a verification tool to support the method and evaluated the tool through experiments. key words: requirements ontology, ontology verification, requirements elicitation and analysis

show abstract

“…Breitman and Leite [10] used language extended lexicon (LEL) to represent terms and phrases in application language, and then proposed framework to construct ontology. Similarly, Zhang, Mei, and Zhao [11] provided feature diagram to represent domain knowledge; Bao et al [12] proposed maintenance framework for domain ontology with focus on formal representation of process changes.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ontology-Based Checking Method of Requirements Specification

Dzung

Ohnishi

2014

IEICE Trans. Inf. & Syst.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARYThis paper introduces an ontology-based method for checking requirements specification. Requirements ontology is a knowledge structure that contains functional requirements (FR), attributes of FR and relations among FR. Requirements specification is compared with functional nodes in the requirements ontology, then rules are used to find errors in requirements. On the basis of the results, requirements team can ask questions to customers and correctly and efficiently revise requirements. To support this method, an ontology-based checking tool for verification of requirements has been developed. Finally, the requirements checking method is evaluated through an experiment.

show abstract

A feature-oriented approach to modeling requirements dependencies

Cited by 47 publications

References 18 publications

Aspectual Separation of Feature Dependencies for Flexible Feature Composition

Aspectual Separation of Feature Dependencies for Flexible Feature Composition

Rule-Based Verification Method of Requirements Ontology

Ontology-Based Checking Method of Requirements Specification

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About