Abstract
To ensure fulfilling stakeholder wishes, it is crucial to validate the documented requirements. This is often complicated by the fact that the wishes and intentions of different stakeholders are somewhat contradictory, which manifests itself in inconsistent requirements. To aid requirements engineers in identifying and resolving inconsistent requirements, we investigated the usefulness for manual reviews of two different model-based representation formats for inconsistent requirements; one that represent the inconsistent requirements in separate diagrams and one that represents them integrated into one diagram using annotations. The results from a controlled experiment show that the use of such integrated review diagrams can significantly increase efficiency of manual reviews, without sacrificing effectiveness.
An extended version containing supplemental experiment material can be found at: https://arxiv.org/abs/1707.02907.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
References
France, R., Rumpe, B.: Model-driven development of complex software: a research roadmap. In: 2007 Future of Software Engineering, pp. 37–54. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC (2007)
Loniewski, G., Insfran, E., Abrahão, S.: A systematic review of the use of requirements engineering techniques in model-driven development. In: Petriu, D.C., Rouquette, N., Haugen, Ø. (eds.) MODELS 2010. LNCS, vol. 6395, pp. 213–227. Springer, Heidelberg (2010). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-16129-2_16
Finkelstein, A., Goedicke, M., Kramer, J., Niskier, C.: ViewPoint oriented software development: methods and viewpoints in requirements engineering. In: Bergstra, J.A., Feijs, L.M.G. (eds.) Algebraic Methods II: Theory, Tools and Applications. LNCS, vol. 490, pp. 29–54. Springer, Heidelberg (1991). doi:10.1007/3-540-53912-3_17
ISO/IEC/IEEE: ISO/IEC/IEEE 29148:2011 - Systems and software engineering – Life cycle processes – Requirements engineering (2011)
Daun, M., Salmon, A., Weyer, T., Pohl, K.: The impact of students’ skills and experiences on empirical results: a controlled experiment with undergraduate and graduate students. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering, pp. 29:1–29:6. ACM (2015)
Klein, J., Caillaud, B., Hélouët, L.: Merging scenarios. Electron. Notes Theor. Comput. Sci. 133, 193–215 (2005)
Denger, C., Ciolkowski, M.: High quality statecharts through tailored, perspective-based inspections. In: 29th EUROMICRO Conference 2003, New Waves in System Architecture, pp. 316–325. IEEE Computer Society (2003)
Binder, R.V.: Testing Object-Oriented Systems: Models, Patterns, and Tools. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1999)
Travassos, G., Shull, F., Fredericks, M., Basili, V.R.: Detecting defects in object-oriented designs: using reading techniques to increase software quality. In: Proceedings of the 1999 ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Object-Oriented Programming Systems, Languages & Applications (OOPSLA 1999), pp. 47–56. ACM (1999)
Daun, M., Weyer, T., Pohl, K.: Detecting and correcting outdated requirements in function-centered engineering of embedded systems. In: Fricker, S.A., Schneider, K. (eds.) REFSQ 2015. LNCS, vol. 9013, pp. 65–80. Springer, Cham (2015). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-16101-3_5
Miller, J., Wood, M., Roper, M.: Further experiences with scenarios and checklists. Empir. Softw. Eng. 3, 37–64 (1998)
Basili, V.R., Green, S., Laitenberger, O., Lanubile, F., Shull, F., Sørumgård, S., Zelkowitz, M.V.: The empirical investigation of perspective-based reading. Empir. Softw. Eng. 1, 133–164 (1996)
Daun, M., Brings, J., Weyer, T.: On the impact of the model-based representation of inconsistencies to manual reviews: results from a controlled experiment - extended version. arXiv:1707.02907 Cs (2017)
Daun, M., Salmon, A., Bandyszak, T., Weyer, T.: Common threats and mitigation strategies in requirements engineering experiments with student participants. In: Daneva, M., Pastor, O. (eds.) REFSQ 2016. LNCS, vol. 9619, pp. 269–285. Springer, Cham (2016). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-30282-9_19
Höst, M., Regnell, B., Wohlin, C.: Using students as subjects-a comparative study of students and professionals in lead-time impact assessment. Empir. Softw. Eng. 5, 201–214 (2000)
Svahnberg, M., Aurum, A., Wohlin, C.: Using students as subjects an empirical evaluation. In: Proceedings of the 2nd International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement, ESEM 2008, pp. 288–290. ACM (2008)
Acknowledgment
This research was partly funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (grant no. 01IS16043V and grant no. 01IS12005C). We thank Stefan Beck and Arnaud Boyer (Airbus Defence and Space), Jens Höfflinger (Bosch), and Karsten Albers (inchron) for their support regarding the adoption of industrial specifications to fit as experiment material.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Daun, M., Brings, J., Weyer, T. (2017). On the Impact of the Model-Based Representation of Inconsistencies to Manual Reviews. In: Mayr, H., Guizzardi, G., Ma, H., Pastor, O. (eds) Conceptual Modeling. ER 2017. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 10650. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-69904-2_35
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-69904-2_35
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-69903-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-69904-2
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)