Advertisement

Automated Completeness Check in KAOS

  • Joshua C. Nwokeji
  • Tony Clark
  • Balbir Barn
  • Vinay Kulkarni
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8823)

Abstract

KAOS is a popular and useful goal oriented requirements engineering (GORE) language, which can be used in business requirements modelling, specification, and analysis. Currently, KAOS is being used in areas such as business process modelling, and enterprise architecture (EA). But, an incomplete or malformed KAOS model can result to incomplete and erroneous requirements analysis, which in turn can lead to overall systems failure . Therefore, it is necessary to check that a requirements specification in KAOS language are complete and well formed. The contribution at hand is to provide an automated technique for checking the completeness and well-formed-ness of a requirements specification in KAOS language. Such a technique can be useful, especially to business or requirements analysts in industries and research, to check that requirements specification in KAOS language is well formed.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Anton, A.: Goal-based requirements analysis. In: ICRE, pp. 136–144 (1996)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Baccarini, D., Salm, G., Love, P.E.D.: Management of risks in information technology projects. Industrial Management & Data Systems 104(4), 286–295 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dardenne, A., van Lamsweerde, A., Fickas, S.: Goal-directed requirements acquisition. Sci. Comput. Program. 20(1-2), 3–50 (1993)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Engelsman, W., Quartel, D., Jonkers, H., van Sinderen, M.: Extending enterprise architecture modelling with business goals and requirements. Enterprise Information Systems 5(1), 9–36 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Engelsman, W., Wieringa, R.: Goal-oriented requirements engineering and enterprise architecture: Two case studies and some lessons learned. In: Regnell, B., Damian, D. (eds.) REFSQ 2011. LNCS, vol. 7195, pp. 306–320. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Epsilon. Live validation and quick-fixes in gmf-based editors with evl, https://www.eclipse.org/epsilon/doc/articles/evl-gmf-integration/ (accessed May 29, 2014)
  7. 7.
    Espada, P., Goulao, M., Araujo, J.: Measuring complexity and completeness of kaos goal models. In: 2011 First International Workshop on Empirical Requirements Engineering (EmpiRE), pp. 29–32 (August 2011)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Heaven, W., Finkelstein, A.: Uml profile to support requirements engineering with kaos. IEE Proceedings Software 151(1), 10–27 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kolovos, D., Rose, L., Paige, R., Polack, F.A.C.: The epsilon book. Structure 178, 1–10 (2010)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lapouchnian, A.: Goal oriented requirement engineering: An overview of the current research (2005)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Matulevicius, R., Heymans, P.: Analysis of kaos meta-model: Technical report (2005)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Monteiro, R., Araujo, J., Amaral, V., Goulao, M., Patricio, P.M.B.: Model-driven development for requirements engineering: The case of goal-oriented approaches. In: Machado, R., Faria, J.P., Silva, A. (eds.) 8th International Conference on the Quality of Information and Communications Technology (QUATIC 2012). Quality of Information and Communications Technology, vol. 8, pp. 75–84. IEEE Computer Society (September 2012)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Nwokeji, J.C., Clark, T., Barn, B.S.: Towards a comprehensive meta-model for kaos. In: 2013 International Workshop on Model-Driven Requirements Engineering (MoDRE), pp. 30–39 (2013)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    OMG. Business motivation model (2010)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Respect-IT. A kaos tutorial (2007)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    van Lamsweerde, A., Letier, E.: Handling obstacles in goal-oriented requirements engineering. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 26, 978–1005 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Werneck, V.M.B., de Padua Albuquerque Oliveira, A., do Prado Leite, J.C.S.: Comparing gore frameworks: i-star and kaos. In: Ibero-American Workshop of Engineering of Requirements, Val Paraiso, Chile (July 2009)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Yeo, K.T.: Critical failure factors in information system projects. International Journal of Project Management 20(3), 241–246 (2002)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Yu, E.: Modeling strategic requirement for process reengineering (1995)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Yu, E., Giorgini, P., Maiden, N., Mylopoulos, J.: Social modeling for requirement engineering: an introduction (2009)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Joshua C. Nwokeji
    • 1
  • Tony Clark
    • 1
  • Balbir Barn
    • 1
  • Vinay Kulkarni
    • 2
  1. 1.Middlesex UniversityLondonUK
  2. 2.Tata Consultancy ServicesIndia

Personalised recommendations