2010 18th IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference 2010
DOI: 10.1109/re.2010.49
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Model Based Requirements Analysis and Testing of Automotive Systems with Timed Usage Models

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
9
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
4
3
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 18 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 6 publications
0
9
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This pattern is expected for model transformations, e.g. as in Case F [Nebut et al 2006] (use case transitions system → test objectives) or Case L [Siegl et al 2010] (time usage model → test cases). It also shows that transformation links from early RE phases to ST are not common.…”
Section: Summary Analysismentioning
confidence: 90%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…This pattern is expected for model transformations, e.g. as in Case F [Nebut et al 2006] (use case transitions system → test objectives) or Case L [Siegl et al 2010] (time usage model → test cases). It also shows that transformation links from early RE phases to ST are not common.…”
Section: Summary Analysismentioning
confidence: 90%
“…We have applied the taxonomy, in total, on 13 alignment methods. In the remainder of this paper they are referenced as cases A-M: A [Güldali et al 2011], B [Flammini et al 2009 [Siegl et al 2010], and M [Metsa et al 2007].…”
Section: Methods Classificationmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…This allows for formal verification of the requirements that can guarantee that the implementation conform to specification [38]. This is of great importance in safety critical domains, such as the automotive industry, that must meet safety standards [39]. Improved traceability: Traceability is important to understand the impact of change during the development [40].…”
Section: Focus Of Research (Rq2)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This tester receives the software in a binary form with the ECU in order to protect the corporate intellectual property (IP) rights, whereupon they perform black-box testing of each supplier's ECU and send the test results back to each relevant developer. Finally, each developer performs debugging based on these test results [5]. Unfortunately, there is relatively little information that is exchangeable between the OEM company and supplier companies because development and testing are performed in independent environments.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%