Advertisement

Configurable Satisfiability Propagation for Goal Models Using Dynamic Compilation Techniques

  • Elena Navarro
  • Patricio Letelier
  • David Reolid
  • Isidro Ramos

It is frequently the case that at early stages of the requirements engineering process, critical decisions about what the system should provide are taken. Stakeholders and developers must evaluate alternatives and conflicts among the system requirements. In addition, a great deal of work must be done through focused brainstorming, validation, negotiation, and decision-making associated to vague or not completely defined requirements. In this context, Goal-Oriented modeling techniques emerge as a suitable way of defining and analyzing requirements, but also as an effective way to provide the necessary traceability towards other derived software artifacts.

Keywords

Requirement Engineering Goal Model Requirement Engineer Propagation Processor Rule Editor 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Chung L, Nixon B A, Yu E and Mylopoulos J (2000) Non-Functional Require-ments in Software Engineering, Kluwer Academic Publishing.Google Scholar
  2. Dardenne A, Lamsweerde A van, and Fickas S (1993) Goal-directed Require-ments Acquisition. Science of Computer Programming, 20, pp 3-50.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Giorgini P, Nicchiarelli E, Mylopoulous J, and Sebastiani R (2003) Formal rea-soning techniques for goal models. Journal of Data Semantics, 1: 1-20. GOLD Parsing System, http://www.devincook.com/GOLParser/, 2005.
  4. Hansen K M, Ravn A P, Stavridou V (1998) From Safety analysis to software requirements. IEEE Tran. on Software Engineering, 24(7):573-584.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Harrison N (2003) Using the CodeDOM. O’Reilly Network, http://www.ondotnet.com/pub/a/dotnet/2003/02/03/codedom.html.
  6. Kavakli E and Loucopoulos P (2004) Goal Driven Requirements Engineering: Analysis and Critique of Current Methods. In: Krogstie J, Halpin T and Siau K (eds) Information Modeling Methods and Methodologies, 102-124.Google Scholar
  7. Lamsweerde A van (2000) Goal-Oriented Requirements Engineering: A Round-trip from Research to Practice. In: Proc 12th IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference, IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos, pp 4-7.Google Scholar
  8. Letier E and Lamsweerde A van (2004) Reasoning about Partial Goal Satisfaction for Requirements and Design Engineering. In: Taylor R N, Dwyer M B (eds) Proc of 12th ACM International Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering, ACM Press, New York, pp 53-62.Google Scholar
  9. Navarro E, Letelier P, Mocholí, J.A, Ramos I (2006) A Metamodeling Approach for Requirements Specification. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 46 (5): 67-77, Special Issue on Systems Analysis and Design.Google Scholar
  10. Navarro E, Letelier P and Ramos I (2004) Goals and Quality Characteristics: Separating Concerns, Early Aspects 2004: Aspect-Oriented Requirements En-gineering and Architecture Design Workshop, collocated to OOPSLA.Google Scholar
  11. Navarro E, Ramos I and Pérez J (2003) Software Requirements for Architectured Systems. In Proc of 11th IEEE International Requirements Engineering Con-ference, IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos, pp 365-366 (position paper).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Elena Navarro
    • 1
  • Patricio Letelier
    • 2
  • David Reolid
    • 1
  • Isidro Ramos
    • 2
  1. 1.Computing Systems DepartmentUCLM, EPSASpain
  2. 2.Department of Information Systems and ComputationUPVSpain

Personalised recommendations