Requirements Traceability in Agent Oriented Development

  • Jaelson Castro
  • Rosa Pinto
  • Andréa Castor
  • John Mylopoulos
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2603)


Agent-oriented development is emerging as the software development paradigm of this new century. Indeed, software developers are using agents as a new metaphor for understanding, modeling, and implementing software that operates in dynamic, open, and often unpredictable environments. The growth of interest in software agents has led to the development of new methodologies based on agent concepts. However, requirements traceability has been recognized as an important prerequisite for developing and maintaining high quality software. It is intended to ensure continued alignment between stakeholder requirements and various outputs of the system development process. In this paper we present a general traceability framework, which can be used during agent-oriented development. We also sketch an approach to enhance the Tropos methodology to support traceability. An e-commerce case study is used to demonstrate the applicability of the approach.


requirements traceability agent-oriented software development. 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [1]
    Bauer, B., Muller, J., and Odell, J. “Agent UML: A Formalism for Specifying Multiagent Interaction”, in Proceedings of the First International Workshop on Agent-Oriented Software Engineering, AOSE’00, pages 91–104, Limerick, Ireland, 2001.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    Castro, J., Kolp, M. and Mylopoulos, J. “Tropos: A Requirements-Driven Software Development Methodology”, in 13 th International Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering. CaiSE’01 Interlaken, Switzerland, June 2001. LNCS 2068, pp. 108–123.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    Castro, J. Kolp, M. and Mylopoulos, J. Towards Requirements-Driven Information Systems Engineering: The Tropos Project. Information Systems Journal, Elsevier, 2002. Vol 27, pp. 365–89zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. [4]
    Chung, L. K., Nixon, B. A., Yu, E., and Mylopoulos, J. Non-Functional Requirements in Software Engineering, Kluwer Publishing, 2000.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    Finin, T., Labrou, Y. and Mayfield, J.. KQML as an Agent Communication Language. In J. Bradshaw, editor, Software Agents. MIT Press, 1997.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    FIPA. The Foundation for Intelligent Physical Agents. At, 2001.
  7. [7]
    Fuxman, A., Giorgini, P., Kolp, M., and Mylopoulos, J. “Information Systems as Social Structures”, in Proceedings of the Second International Conference On Formal Ontologies for Information Systems, FOIS’01, Ogunquit, USA, Oct. 2001.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    Gomes-Casseres, B. The Alliance Revolution: The New Shape of Business Rivalry, Cambridge, Harvard University Press, 1996.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    Gotel, O. Contribution Structures for Requirements Engineering. Ph.D Thesis. Department of Computing, Imperial College of Science, Technology, and Medicine, London, U.K., 1996.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    IBM. Patterns for E-business. At, 2001.
  11. [11]
    Iglesias, C. A., Garijo, M. and Gonzáles, J. C. “A Survey of Agent-Oriented Methodologies”, in J. P. Muller, M. P, Singh, and A. S. Rao (Ed), Proceedings of the Fifth International Workshop on Agent Theories, Architectures and Languages (ATAL-98), July 2–8, 1998, LNAI, Springer-Verlag, 1999Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    Kinny, D., Georgeff, M. and Rao, A. “A Methodology and Modelling Technique for Systems of BDI Agents”, in W. Van Der Velde and J. Perram, editors., Agents Breaking Away: Proceedings of the Seventh European Workshop on Modelling Autonomous Agents in a Multi-Agent World MAAMAW’96, (LNAI Volume 1038). Springer-Verlag, 1996.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    Kolp, M., Castro, J., and Mylopoulos J. “A Social Organization Perspective on Software Architectures”, in Proceedings of the First International Workshop on From Software Requirements to Architectures, STRAW’01, pages 5–12, Toronto, Canada, May 2001.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    Kolp, M., Giorgini, P., and Mylopoulos, J. “A Goal-Based Organizational Perspective on Multi-Agents Architectures”, in Proceedings of the Eightth International Workshop on Intelligent Agents: Agent Theories, Architectures, and Languages, ATAL’01, Seattle, USA, Aug.2001.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    Labrou, Y., Finin, T. and Peng, Y. “The Current Landscape of Agent Communication Languages,” Intelligent Systems, 14(2):45–52, 1999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. [16]
    Letier, E. and van Lamsweerde, A. “Agent-Based Tactics for Goal-Oriented Requirements Elaboration”, in Proceedings of the Twenty-Fourth International Conference on Software Engineering, ICSE 2002, Orlando, Florida, May 19–25, 2002.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    Mylopoulos, J., Borgida, A., Jarke, M., Koubarakis, M. Telos: “Representing Knowledge About Information Systems,” ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 8 (4), Oct. 1990, pp. 325–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. [18]
    Mylopoulos, J and Castro, J. Tropos: “A Framework for Requirements-Driven Software DDevelopment”, J. Brinkkemper, A. Solvberg (eds.), Information Systems Engineering: State of the Art and Research Themes, Springer-Verlag, pp. 261–273, June 2000.Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    Mylopoulos, J., Kolp, M. and Castro, J. “ UML for Agent-Oriented Software Development: The Tropos Proposal”, in Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference On the Unified Modeling Language UML’01, Toronto, Canada, Oct. 2001.Google Scholar
  20. [20]
    Odell, J., Parunak, H. V. D. and Bauer, B. “Extending UML for Agents”, in Proceedings of the Second International Bi-Conference Workshop on Agent-Oriented Information Systems, AOIS’00, pages 3–17, Austin, USA, July 2000.Google Scholar
  21. [21]
    Ramesh, B. and Jarke, M. “Towards Reference Models For Requirements Traceability.” IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. 27, pp. 58–93, Jan. 2001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. [22]
    Scott, W. R. Organizations: Rational, Natural, and Open Systems, Upper Saddle River, N.J., Prentice Hall, 1998.Google Scholar
  23. [23]
    Shaw, M., and Garlan, D. Software Architecture: Perspectives on Emerging Discipline. Prentice Hall, 1996.Google Scholar
  24. [24]
    Toranzo, M and Castro, J. A “Comprehensive Traceability Model to Support the Design of Interactive Systems”, in WISDOM’99-International Workshop on Interactive System Development and Object Models, 1999, Lisboa. 1999. Also included in Nunes, N., et al, Interactive System Design and Object Models In: International Workshop on Interactive System Development and Object Models, 1999, Lisboa. ECOOP’99-Workshop Reader. London: Springer Verlag-Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 1999. v.1743. p.267–287.Google Scholar
  25. [25]
    Toranzo, M. A Framework to Improve Requirements Traceability (in Portuguese: Um Framework para Melhorar o Rastreamento de Requisitos). Ph.D thesis, Centro de Informática daUniversidade Federal de Pernambuco-UFPE, Brazil, 2002.Google Scholar
  26. [26]
    Wood, M. and DeLoach, S. A. “An Overview of the Multiagent System Engineering Methodology”, in the First International Workshop on Agent-Orientes Software Engineering (AOSE-2000), June, 10, 2000-Limerick. IrelandGoogle Scholar
  27. [27]
    Wooldridge, M. “Intelligent Agents,” in G. Weiss, editor. Multiagent Systems, the MIT Press, April 1999.Google Scholar
  28. [28]
    Wooldridge, M., Jennings, N. and Kinny D. “The Gaia Methodology for Agent-Oriented Analyis and Design,” Journal of Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, 2000.Google Scholar
  29. [29]
    Yu, E. and Mylopoulos, J., “Understanding ‘Why’ in Software Process Modeling, Analysis and Design,” in Proceedings Sixteenth International Conference on Software Engineering-ICSE, Sorrento, Italy, May 1994.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jaelson Castro
    • 1
  • Rosa Pinto
    • 1
  • Andréa Castor
    • 1
  • John Mylopoulos
    • 2
  1. 1.Centro de InformáticaUniversidade Federal de PernambucoRecifeBrazil
  2. 2.Dept. of Computer ScienceUniversity of TorontoTorontoCanada

Personalised recommendations