Requirements interaction management

Robinson, William; Pawlowski, Suzanne D.; Volkov, V.Ya.

doi:10.1145/857076.857079

Cited by 140 publications

(108 citation statements)

References 147 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

104

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The survey in [78] introduces Requirements Interaction Management (RIM), which is concerned with the analysis and management of dependencies among the requirements. One of the activities in RIM, is reasoning on requirements interactions.…”

Section: Requirements Relationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Change impact analysis for requirements: A metamodeling approach

Göknil

Kurtev²,

Berg

et al. 2014

Information and Software Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tContext: Following the evolution of the business needs, the requirements of software systems change continuously and new requirements emerge frequently. Requirements documents are often textual artifacts with structure not explicitly given. When a change in a requirements document is introduced, the requirements engineer may have to manually analyze all the requirements for a single change. This may result in neglecting the actual impact of a change. Consequently, the cost of implementing a change may become several times higher than expected. Objective: In this paper, we aim at improving change impact analysis in requirements by using formal semantics of requirements relations and requirements change types. Method: In our previous work we present a requirements metamodel with commonly used requirements relation types and their semantics formalized in first-order logic. In this paper the classification of requirements changes based on structure of a textual requirement is provided with formal semantics. The formalization of requirements relations and changes is used for propagating proposed changes and consistency checking of proposed changes in requirements models. The tool support for change impact analysis in requirements models is an extension of our Tool for Requirements Inferencing and Consistency Checking (TRIC). Results: The described approach for change impact analysis helps in the elimination of some false positive impacts in change propagation, and enables consistency checking of changes. Conclusion: We illustrate our approach in an example which shows that the formal semantics of requirements relations and change classification enables change alternatives to be proposed semi-automatically, the reduction of some false positive impacts and contradicting changes in requirements to be determined.

show abstract

Section: Requirements Relationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Change impact analysis for requirements: A metamodeling approach

Göknil

Kurtev²,

Berg

et al. 2014

Information and Software Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Another consequence of explicitly representing non-functional requirements as softgoals is the capability of reasoning (Giorgini et al 2002) about contribution links, which is basically the problem of requirements interaction (Robinson et al 2003), and dealing with antagonistic requirements (Cappelli 2009). We will deal with these issues in Sect.…”

Section: Attaching Requirements To Softwarementioning

confidence: 99%

Software Transparency

2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Software transparency is a new and important concern that software developers must deal with. This paper reports on initial findings on exploring the obstacles for enabling software transparency. For providing a definition of transparency and understanding the semantics of software transparency, a SIG (Softgoal Interdependence Graph) is used, which has been refined in three versions. Based on three example situations we demonstrate the application of the transparency SIG.

show abstract

“…The survey in [42] introduces Requirements Interaction Management (RIM), which is concerned with the analysis and management of dependencies among the requirements. One of the activities in RIM, is reasoning on requirements interactions.…”

Section: Requirements Relationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Semantics of trace relations in requirements models for consistency checking and inferencing

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Requirements traceability is the ability to relate requirements back to stakeholders and forward to corresponding design artifacts, code, and test cases. Although considerable research has been devoted to relating requirements in both forward and backward directions, less attention has been paid to relating requirements with other requirements. Relations between requirements influence a number of activities during software development such as consistency checking and change management. In most approaches and tools, there is a lack of precise definition of requirements relations. In this respect, deficient results may be produced. In this paper, we aim at formal definitions of the relation types in order to enable reasoning about requirements relations. We give a requirements metamodel with commonly used relation types. The semantics of the relations is provided with a formalization in first-order logic. We use the formalization for consistency checking of relations and for inferring new relations. A tool has been built to support both reasoning activities. We illustrate our approach in an example which shows that the formal semantics of relation types enables new relations to be inferred and contradicting relations in requirements documents to be determined.

show abstract

Requirements interaction management

Cited by 140 publications

References 147 publications

Change impact analysis for requirements: A metamodeling approach

Change impact analysis for requirements: A metamodeling approach

Software Transparency

Semantics of trace relations in requirements models for consistency checking and inferencing

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About