Abstract
It seems to be inevitable to confront vague information about customer’s needs during the software requirements stage. It may be desirable to record and clarify the vague information to avoid missing real requirements. In this paper, we provide an inconsistency-based strategy to handle vague information in the framework of Annotated Predicate Calculus. This strategy permits the stakeholder to describe the different vague information using statements with different levels of belief, where each level of belief is determined by the degree of vagueness. By checking consistency of the union of vague requirements and clear requirements, we then heighten the level of belief in uncontroversial vague requirements. We also lower the levels of belief in requirements involved in undesirable inferences and leave them to be articulated in some following stage. To support this, Annotated Predicate Calculus is used to represent the requirements specification. In particular, we present a special belief semilattice, which defines truth values appropriate for representing the strength of analyst’s belief in the truth of requirements statements.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Spanoudakis, G., Finkelstein, A.: Reconciling requirements: a method for managing interference, inconsistency and conflict. Annals of Software Engineering 3, 433–457 (1997)
Spanoudakis, G., Zisman, A.: Inconsistency management in software engineering: Survey and open research issues. In: Chang, S.K. (ed.) Handbook of Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering, pp. 329–380. World Scientific Publishing Co., Singapore (2001)
Hunter, A., Nuseibeh, B.: Managing inconsistent specification. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology 7, 335–367 (1998)
Lamsweerde, A., Letier, E.: Handling obstacles in goal-driven requirements engineering. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 26, 978–1005 (2000)
Bowman, H., Steen, M., Boiten, E., Derrick, J.: A formal framework for viewpoint consistency. Formal Methods in System Design 21, 111–166 (2002)
Easterbrook, S., Chechik, M.: 2nd international workshop on living with inconsistency. Software Engineering Notes 26, 76–78 (2001)
Easterbrook, S., Chechik, M.: A framework for multi-valued reasoning over inconsistent viewpoints. In: Harrold, M., Schafer, W., Muller, H. (eds.) Proceedings of International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE 2001), Toronto, Canada, pp. 411–420 (2001)
Chechik, M., Devereux, B., Easterbrook, S.P.: Efficient multiple-valued model-checking using lattice representations. In: Larsen, K.G., Nielsen, M. (eds.) CONCUR 2001. LNCS, vol. 2154, pp. 21–24. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)
Kifer, M., Lozinskii, E.L.: A logic for reasoning with inconsistency. Journal of Automated Reasoning 9, 179–215 (1992)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2005 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Mu, K., Jin, Z., Lu, R. (2005). Inconsistency-Based Strategy for Clarifying Vague Software Requirements. In: Zhang, S., Jarvis, R. (eds) AI 2005: Advances in Artificial Intelligence. AI 2005. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 3809. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/11589990_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/11589990_7
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-30462-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-31652-7
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)