Scope Management of Non-Functional Requirements

Kassab, Mohamad; Daneva, Maya; Ormandjieva, Olga

doi:10.1109/euromicro.2007.53

Cited by 14 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Aspect-oriented Pattern-based • Spectrum analysis [86] • TCM Framework [87] • Abstract Interpretation-based verification [88] • EMIMCE model [89] • COSMIC-FFP method [90] • Quantitative measure [91] • Goal-centric traceability [92] • Automate verification [93] • Execution-based Model Checking [94] • Goal decomposition [95] • Quantitative priority assessment framework [96] • QR mining framework [97] • NFR Evaluation Model [98] • Bayesian Belief Network [99] • Bayesian Reliability Prediction [100] • Model-based approach [101] • NFR pattern approach [102] • Performance Requirements Framework [103] • Scenario-based assessment [104] …”

Section: Goal-orientedmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Goal-oriented approaches are proposed to measure the adequacy and quality of NFRs in requirements specification using domain knowledge [86,87], abstract interpretation [88], interrelations of NFRs [89], quantitative size and effort estimation [90,91], goal-centric traceability links between NFRs [92], and reasoning on NFRs in different contexts [93]. Also, some approaches are proposed to evaluate and validate system behaviour conflicts [94], changing requirements during system development [95] and relative priority of NFRs in trade-off analysis [96].…”

Section: Goal-orientedmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Classification and Qualitative Analysis of Non-Functional Requirements Approaches

Hasan

Loucopoulos

Νικολαϊδου

2014

Enterprise, Business-Process and Information Systems Modeling

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

LNBIP reports state-of-the-art results in areas related to business information systems and industrial application software development -timely, at a high level, and in both printed and electronic form. The type of material published includes• Proceedings (published in time for the respective event)• Postproceedings (consisting of thoroughly revised and/or extended final papers) • Other edited monographs (such as, for example, project reports or invited volumes) • Tutorials (coherently integrated collections of lectures given at advanced courses, seminars, schools, etc.) • Award-winning or exceptional theses LNBIP is abstracted/indexed in DBLP, EI and Scopus. LNBIP volumes are also submitted for the inclusion in ISI Proceedings.

show abstract

Section: Goal-orientedmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Goal-orientedmentioning

confidence: 99%

Classification and Qualitative Analysis of Non-Functional Requirements Approaches

Hasan

Loucopoulos

Νικολαϊδου

2014

Enterprise, Business-Process and Information Systems Modeling

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There are several approaches used to analyse the NFR [34][35][36][37]. Research has also proposed enhanced versions of these approaches [15].…”

Section: Non-functional Requirementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Managing non‐functional requirements in agile software development

Rahy

Bass

2021

IET Software

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Non-functional requirements define qualities of the software system that ensure effectiveness while embedding any constraints and restrictions on the design. A challenge rises with agile implementation in handling non-function requirements in regulated environments. Thus, a practitioner's perceptions of agile method tailoring are described in relation to inter-team boundaries and non-functional requirements. The research comprises 18 practitioner interviews from two multinational agile software development companies. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analysed using an approach informed by grounded theory and information flow models were used to compare and contrast interactions of processes. It was discovered that one of the case study companies managed non-functional requirements as artefacts in their agile methodology, while the other company reverts to conventional plan-based software development practices of documentation, timeline estimations, and safety critical requirements. This research creates a detailed comparison of these contrasting approaches. The main contribution of this study is a set of proposed recommendations to deal with non-functional requirements in a regulated environment using agile techniques. The introduction of two new artefacts, Documentation Work Item and Safety Critical Work Item, is recommended and it is accompanied with an illustrative example, to transform the handling of documentation and safety critical requirements in a more agile way. K E Y W O R D Ssoftware development management, software engineering | INTRODUCTIONSoftware development has become an integral part of our current globalised world. Since the creation of the agile manifesto in 2001, agile software development has been growing vertically within organisations and horizontally across organisations in different business sectors. Initially, agile methods were viewed as best suited for small projects with co-located teams [1]. With the increasing spread of agile methods, largescale organisations started implementing agile methods [2,3]. This implementation was associated with agile methods tailoring to fit large-scale organisations [4,5].A set of agile principles was introduced to the software development industry in the Agile Manifesto. Agile methods enhance customer involvement in the development process by encouraging regular customer feedback and its prioritisation [6]. Conventionally, agile methods are comprised of ceremonies, artefacts, and roles.Inter-team communication in agile has been identified as an important topic for researchers [7,8] and refers to communication between teams in the same company. The right combination of communication mechanisms improves agile implementation while a mismatch may be an impediment [9]. Inter-dependent teams are highly reliant on team This manuscript is submitted to IET Software and is not under consideration for publication anywhere else. Thank you for your consideration! This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommerc...

show abstract

“…Additionally, for each microservice and the associated QoS metrics, acceptable threshold values/ranges are specified. NFRs can be understood as parameters with categorical, continuous and ordinal values 18 and as such are suitable for statistical analysis. In the current study, we have considered the following metrics, presented in Table 1.…”

Section: Multi‐domain Deployment Of Microservicesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Quality of Service‐aware matchmaking for adaptive microservice‐based applications

Štefanič

Kochovski

Rana

et al. 2020

Concurrency and Computation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Applications that make use of Internet of Things (IoT) can capture an enormous amount of raw data from sensors and actuators, which is frequently transmitted to cloud data centers for processing and analysis. However, due to varying and unpredictable data generation rates and network latency, this can lead to a performance bottleneck for data processing. With the emergence of fog and edge computing hosted microservices, data processing could be moved towards the network edge. We propose a new method for continuous deployment and adaptation of multi-tier applications along edge, fog, and cloud tiers by considering resource properties and non-functional requirements (e.g., operational cost, response time and latency etc.). The proposed approach supports matchmaking of application and Cloud-To-Things infrastructure based on a subgraph pattern matching (P-Match) technique. Results show that the proposed approach improves resource utilization and overall application Quality of Service. The approach can also be integrated into software engineering workbenches for the creation and deployment of cloud-native applications, enabling partitioning of an application across the multiple infrastructure tiers outlined above.

show abstract

Scope Management of Non-Functional Requirements

Cited by 14 publications

References 13 publications

Classification and Qualitative Analysis of Non-Functional Requirements Approaches

Classification and Qualitative Analysis of Non-Functional Requirements Approaches

Managing non‐functional requirements in agile software development

Quality of Service‐aware matchmaking for adaptive microservice‐based applications

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About