Requirements traceability in model-driven development: Applying model and transformation conformance

Abstract

The variety of design artifacts (models) produced in a model-driven design process results in an intricate relationship between requirements and the various models. This paper proposes a methodological framework that simplifies management of this relationship, which helps in assessing the quality of models, realizations and transformation specifications. Our framework is a basis for understanding requirements traceability in model-driven development, as well as for the design of tools that support requirements traceability in model-driven development processes. We propose a notion of conformance between application models which reduces the effort needed for assessment activities. We discuss how this notion of conformance can be integrated with model transformations.

Providing tool support for specifying safety-critical systems by enforcing syntactic contract conditions

“…In contrast to [23,27,44,50,51], but in accordance with the present paper, the works [2,3,28,29] describe formally founded support for RE. Similar to the present paper, the works [3,28] both focus on establishing trace links between requirements and design/architecture.…”

“…Similar to the present paper, the works [3,28] both focus on establishing trace links between requirements and design/architecture. However, while the approach in the present paper is applicable for any type design flow, i.e., top-down, bottom-up, or anything in between, the approach in [3] requires using model transformations for driving development and is therefore only applicable for a top-down design flow.…”

“…However, while the approach in the present paper is applicable for any type design flow, i.e., top-down, bottom-up, or anything in between, the approach in [3] requires using model transformations for driving development and is therefore only applicable for a top-down design flow. In contrast to the present paper, but similar to the previously mentioned contract-based approaches [13,14,16], the support in [3,28] relies on formal representations of architectures and requirements. The work in [2] describes a formal modelbased development methodology using requirements refinement.…”

“…The work in [2] describes a formal modelbased development methodology using requirements refinement. However, analogous to [3], this methodology is only applicable to a top-down design flow and also prescribes the use of formal models and requirements. In comparison, the support in the present paper is applicable in a greater context and this is to cater to needs in current state of industrial practice where requirements and architectures are typically not represented formally and where design flows vary, sometimes even within the same company.…”

Application of Agent Technology for Fault Diagnosis of Telecommunication Networks

“…Furthermore, the traceability from a User Story to a test case makes easy to know which features or what test cases must be modified to fits the updated requirements. Traceability from user requirements to executable tests is one of the keys of success in any software project (Almeida et al, 2007). To ensure this traceability, the BEAST Methodology proposes a set of mapping rules that connect the outcomes of all phases of the methodology.…”