A systematic process for obtaining the behavior of context-sensitive systems

Vilela, Jéssyka; Castro, Jaelson; Pimentel, João

doi:10.1186/s40411-016-0028-3

Cited by 8 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…(1) Methods used to deal with context dynamicity Many requirement-modeling methods have been proposed to address the challenge of context dynamicity, such as language-based methods (extended UML [48]- [55], Adaptive RML [56]), extended goal-based methods [57]- [72], BPMN-based methods [73], [74] and model-based methods [75]- [86].…”

Section: Methods Used To Address the Challenges Of Dynamicitymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Survey on Challenges and Achievements in Context-Aware Requirement Modeling

Peng

Wang

2020

IEICE Trans. Inf. & Syst.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A context-aware system always needs to adapt its behaviors according to context changes; therefore, modeling context-aware requirements is a complex task. With the increasing use of mobile computing, research on methods of modeling context-aware requirements have become increasingly important, and a large number of relevant studies have been conducted. However, no comprehensive analysis of the challenges and achievements has been performed. The methodology of systematic literature review was used in this survey, in which 68 reports were selected as primary studies. The challenges and methods to confront these challenges in context-aware requirement modeling are summarized. The main contributions of this work are: (1) four challenges and nine sub-challenges are identified; (2) eight kinds of methods in three categories are identified to address these challenges; (3) the extent to which these challenges have been solved is evaluated; and (4) directions for future research are elaborated.

show abstract

Section: Methods Used To Address the Challenges Of Dynamicitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Goal-based methods are extended [57]- [72] to address the challenges of context dynamicity. As an example, [57]- [61] extend the goal model by introducing the element "variation points" to describe dynamic contexts.…”

Section: Methods Used To Address the Challenges Of Dynamicitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Survey on Challenges and Achievements in Context-Aware Requirement Modeling

Peng

Wang

2020

IEICE Trans. Inf. & Syst.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It has been demonstrated that there is not necessarily much difference between students and professionals in many experimental settings (Svahnberg, Aurum and Wohlin, 2008). Although the results are limited by the narrow scope, the study design can guide other studies to compare requirements techniques and it can also support other kind of studies (Vilela et al, 2016).…”

Section: Figure 3(b) Boxplots Of the Variable Number Of Functionalitmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…We followed the well-established framework proposed by Wohlin et al (2012) for performing experiments in software engineering to ensure a successful experiment (Vilela et al, 2016). In this study, we intend to answer the following research questions: The goal of the experiment is summarized in Table 1.…”

Section: Experiments Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Empirical Evaluation about Using Models to Improve Preliminary Safety Analysis

Vilela¹

2020

Anais Do Workshop Em Modelagem E Simulação De Sistemas Intensivos Em Software (MSSiS 2020)

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Context: Safety analysis is an activity of fundamental importance in the development of safety-critical systems (SCS) to ensure that hazardous situations are properly found and mitigated. Such analysis is usually performed after a system requirements specification is available. Therefore, it is then worthwhile to investigate specification techniques to detect their strengths and weaknesses with respect to finding and documenting hazards early in the development process. Objective: In this paper, we investigate similarities and differences in the results of a preliminary safety analysis from requirements specified using Textual Use Cases (TUC) and Business Process Modeling Notation (BPMN). Method: We adopted a controlled experiment as research method using computer engineering students as subjects. Results: The subjects of BPMN group found more accidents, hazards as well as more causes of hazards. Moreover, they have a higher preference for the template used for safety analysis documentation. Conclusions: The use of BPMN to represent the interactions among actors in a system probably lead to the discovery of more accidents and hazards, but more experiments are necessary to test this hypothesis since the results are not statistically significant.

show abstract

“…Furthermore, it is possible to generate behavioral models for adaptive [18] and context-sensitive systems [19] from goaloriented models such as i*. Since our method relies on i*, it supports trade-off analysis [20] that can be conducted to evaluate the impact of the different hazards and their causes in the satisfaction of safety requirements.…”

Section: Related Work and Comparative Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

SARSSi: a Safety Requirements Specification Method based on STAMP/STPA and i language

Vilela¹,

Silva²,

Castro³

et al. 2019

Anais Do I Brazilian Workshop on Large-Scale Critical Systems (BWare 2019)

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Context: traditional hazard analysis techniques were not proposed to be used in the Requirements Engineering (RE) process. Objective: The aim of this work is to present and discuss a new method for early safety requirements specification called SARSSi* to be used at the beginning of the development of safety-critical systems. Method: this goal is achieved through the combination of two techniques: (1) STAMP/STPA; and (2) i* language. Results: this paper attempts to bridge the gap between two parallel trends in systematic safety approaches – the combination of requirements and safety engineering techniques. Our method consists of six steps and guidelines to perform a preliminary hazard analysis and facilitate the systematic identification of safety-critical functions and components. Conclusions: We demonstrate the utility of our method by applying it in a real industry case study. The initial results show preliminary suitability of our method and its contribution to improving the visualization of the information generated in the hazard analysis such as the hazards, their causes, environmental conditions, and safety requirements.

show abstract

A systematic process for obtaining the behavior of context-sensitive systems

Cited by 8 publications

References 38 publications

Survey on Challenges and Achievements in Context-Aware Requirement Modeling

Survey on Challenges and Achievements in Context-Aware Requirement Modeling

An Empirical Evaluation about Using Models to Improve Preliminary Safety Analysis

SARSSi: a Safety Requirements Specification Method based on STAMP/STPA and i language

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

A systematic process for obtaining the behavior of context-sensitive systems

Cited by 8 publications

References 38 publications

Survey on Challenges and Achievements in Context-Aware Requirement Modeling

Survey on Challenges and Achievements in Context-Aware Requirement Modeling

An Empirical Evaluation about Using Models to Improve Preliminary Safety Analysis

SARSSi*: a Safety Requirements Specification Method based on STAMP/STPA and i* language

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

SARSSi: a Safety Requirements Specification Method based on STAMP/STPA and i language