From Stakeholder Requirements to Formal Specifications Through Refinement

详细信息    查看全文

• 作者：Feng-Lin Li (15)
  Jennifer Horkoff (16)
  Alexander Borgida (17)
  Giancarlo Guizzardi (18)
  Lin Liu (19)
  John Mylopoulos (15)
  
  15. Department of Information Engineering and Computer Science ; University of Trento ; Trento ; Italy
  16. Centre for Human Computer Interaction Design ; City University ; London ; UK
  17. Department of Computer Science ; Rutgers University ; New Brunswick ; USA
  18. Computer Science Department ; Federal University of Esp铆rito Santo ; Vit贸ria ; Brazil
  19. School of Software ; Tsinghua University ; Beijing ; China
  
• 关键词：Requirements modeling language ; Functional requirements ; Non ; functional requirements ; Ontologies
• 刊名：Lecture Notes in Computer Science
• 出版年：2015
• 出版时间：2015
• 年：2015
• 卷：9013
• 期：1
• 页码：164-180
• 全文大小：393 KB
• 参考文献：1. Rolland, C, Proix, C A natural language approach for requirements engineering. In: Loucopoulos, P eds. (1992) Advanced Information Systems Engineering. Springer, Heidelberg, pp. 257-277 35136" target="_blank" title="It opens in new window">CrossRef
  2. Dardenne, A, Lamsweerde, A, Fickas, S (1993) Goal-directed requirements acquisition. Sci. Comput. Program. 20: pp. 3-50 3(93)90021-G" target="_blank" title="It opens in new window">CrossRef
  3. IBM - Rational DOORS. 3.ibm.com/software/products/en/ratidoor" class="a-plus-plus">http://www-03.ibm.com/software/products/en/ratidoor
  4. Menzies, T., Caglayan, B., He, Z., Kocaguneli, E., Krall, J., Peters, F., Turhan, B.: The PROMISE Repository of empirical software engineering data. http://promisedata.googlecode.com
  5. Fraser, MD, Kumar, K, Vaishnavi, VK (1991) Informal and formal requirements specification languages: bridging the gap. IEEE Trans. on Softw. Eng. 17: pp. 454-466 32.90448" target="_blank" title="It opens in new window">CrossRef
  6. Giese, M, Heldal, R From informal to formal specifications in UML. In: Baar, T, Strohmeier, A, Moreira, A, Mellor, SJ eds. (2004) The Unified Modeling Language. Modeling Languages and Applications. Springer, Heidelberg, pp. 197-211
  7. Seater, R, Jackson, D, Gheyi, R (2007) Requirement progression in problem frames: deriving specifications from requirements. Requir. Eng. 12: pp. 77-102 CrossRef
  8. Letier, E., Van Lamsweerde, A.: Deriving operational software specifications from system goals. In: FSE, ACM SIGSOFT Symposium, pp. 119鈥?28 (2002)
  9. Aziz, B., Arenas, A., Bicarregui, J., Ponsard, C., Massonet, P.: From goal-oriented requirements to Event-B specifications. In: NFM (2009)
  10. Chung, L., Nixon, B.A., Yu, E.: Non-Functional Requirements in Software Engineering, vol. 5. Kluwer Academic Pub. (2000)
  11. ISO/IEC, ISO/IEC TR 9126-2 Software engineering - Product quality - Part 2: External metrics, ISO/IEC (2003)
  12. Gilb, T.: Competitive engineering: a handbook for systems engineering, requirements engineering, and software engineering using Planguage. Butterworth-Heinemann (2005)
  13. Jureta, I., Borgida, A., Ernst, N.A., Mylopoulos, J.: Techne: Towards a new generation of requirements modeling languages with goals, preferences, and inconsistency handling. In: RE, pp. 115鈥?24 (2010)
  14. Kaiya, H., Saeki, M.: Using domain ontology as domain knowledge for requirements elicitation. In: RE, pp. 189鈥?98 (2006)
  15. Jureta, IJ, Mylopoulos, J, Faulkner, S (2009) A core ontology for requirements. Appl. Ontol. 4: pp. 169-244
  16. Guizzardi, R., Li, F.-L., Borgida, A., Guizzardi, G., Horkoff, J., Mylopoulos, J.: An ontological interpretation of non-functional requirements. In: FOIS (2014)
  17. Guizzardi, G.: Ontological foundations for structural conceptual models. CTIT, Centre for Telematics and Information Technology (2005)
  18. Li, F.-L., Horkoff, J., Mylopoulos, J., Guizzardi, R.S., Guizzardi, G., Borgida, A., Liu, L.: Non-functional requirements as qualities, with a spice of ontology. In: RE (2014)
  19. ISO/IEC 25010:2011, Systems and software engineering 鈥?Systems and software Quality Requirements and Evaluation (SQuaRE) 鈥?System and software quality models (2011)
  20. McGuinness, D.L., Van Harmelen, F., et al.: OWL web ontology language overview. W3C Recomm. 10(10), 2004 (2004)
  21. Cohen, W.W., Hirsh, H.: Learning the classic description logic: theoretical and experimental results. In: KR, vol. 94, pp. 121鈥?33 (1994)
  22. Feather, MS, Fickas, S, Finkelstein, A, Lamsweerde, A (1997) Requirements and specification exemplars. Autom. Softw. Eng. 4: pp. 419-438 3/A:1008680612960" target="_blank" title="It opens in new window">CrossRef
  23. Berntsson Svensson, R, Olsson, T, Regnell, B (2013) An investigation of how quality requirements are specified in industrial practice. Inf. Softw. Technol. 55: pp. 1224-1236 of.2013.01.006" target="_blank" title="It opens in new window">CrossRef
  
• 作者单位：Requirements Engineering: Foundation for Software Quality
• 丛书名：978-3-319-16100-6
• 刊物类别：Computer Science
• 刊物主题：Artificial Intelligence and Robotics
  Computer Communication Networks
  Software Engineering
  Data Encryption
  Database Management
  Computation by Abstract Devices
  Algorithm Analysis and Problem Complexity
  
• 出版者：Springer Berlin / Heidelberg
• ISSN：1611-3349

文摘

[Context and motivation] Stakeholder requirements are notoriously informal, vague, ambiguous and often unattainable. The requirements engineering problem is to formalize these requirements and then transform them through a systematic process into a formal specification that can be handed over to designers for downstream development. [Question/problem] This paper proposes a framework for transforming informal requirements to formal ones, and then to a specification. [Principal ideas/results] The framework consists of an ontology of requirements, a formal requirements modeling language for representing both functional and non-functional requirements, as well as a rich set of refinement operators whereby requirements are incrementally transformed into a formal, practically satisfiable and measurable specification. [Contributions] Our proposal includes a systematic, tool-supported methodology for conducting this transformation. For evaluation, we have applied our framework to a public requirements dataset. The results of our evaluation suggest that our ontology and modeling language are adequate for capturing requirements, and our methodology is effective in handling requirements in practice.