Skip Navigation

IEICE Transactions on Information and Systems 2008 E91-D(4):921-932; doi:10.1093/ietisy/e91-d.4.921
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by YAMAMOTO, K.
Right arrow Articles by SAEKI, M.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Copyright © 2008 The Institute of Electronics, Information and Communication Engineers

Special Section on Knowledge-Based Software Engineering -- Papers -- Software Engineering

Attributed Goal-Oriented Analysis Method for Selecting Alternatives of Software Requirements

Kazuma YAMAMOTO1 and Motoshi SAEKI1

1 The authors are with the Dept. of Computer Science, Tokyo Institute of Technology, Tokyo, 152–8552 Japan. E-mail: saeki{at}se.cs.titech.ac.jp

During software requirements analysis, developers and stakeholders have many alternatives of requirements to be achieved and should make decisions to select an alternative out of them. There are two significant points to be considered for supporting these decision making processes in requirements analysis; 1) dependencies among alternatives and 2) evaluation based on multi-criteria and their trade-off. This paper proposes the technique to address the above two issues by using an extended version of goal-oriented analysis. In goal-oriented analysis, elicited goals and their dependencies are represented with an AND-OR acyclic directed graph. We use this technique to model the dependencies of the alternatives. Furthermore we associate attribute values and their propagation rules with nodes and edges in a goal graph in order to evaluate the alternatives with them. The attributes and their calculation rules greatly depend on the characteristics of a development project. Thus, in our approach, we select and use the attributes and their rules that can be appropriate for the project. TOPSIS method is adopted to show alternatives and their resulting attribute values.

Key Words: goal-oriented analysis, requirements analysis, attribute grammar, decision making, TOPSIS method, attributed graph


Manuscript received July 2, 2007. Manuscript revised October 17, 2007.

Reference

[1] J. Akker, S. Brinkkemper, G. Diepen, and J. Versendaal, "Determination of the next release of a software product: An approach using integer linear programming," Proc. CAiSE '05 Forum, pp.119–124, 2005.

[2] E. Cecchet, J. Marguerite, and W. Zwaenepoel, "Performance and scalability of EJB applications," Proc. 2002 ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Object-Oriented Programming Systems, Languages and Applications (OOPSLA2002), pp.246–261, 2002.

[3] L. Chung, B. Nixon, E. Yu, and J. Mylopoulos, Non-Functional Requirements in Software Engineering, Academic Publishers, 1999.

[4] A. Dardenne, A. van Lamsweerde, and S. Fickas, "Goal-directed requirements acquisition," Science of Computer Programming, vol.20, pp.3–50, 1993.

[5] P. Giorgini, J. Mylopoulos, E. Nicchiarelli, and R. Sebastiani, "Reasoning with goal models," Lect. Notes Comput. Sci. (ER2002), vol.2503, pp.167–181, 2002.

[6] ISO, Information Technology – Software product evaluation – Quality characteristics and guidelines for their use, 1991.

[7] H. Kaiya, H. Horai, and M. Saeki, "AGORA: Attributed goal-oriented requirements analysis method," IEEE Joint International Requirements Engineering Conference, RE '02, pp.13–22, Sept. 2002.

[8] H. Kaiya, D. Shinbara, J. Kawano, and M. Saeki, "Improving the detection of requirements discordances among stakeholders," Requirements Engineering, vol.10, no.4, pp.289–303, Dec. 2005.

[9] D.E. Knuth, "Semantics of context-free languages," Mathematical Systems Theory, vol.2, pp.127–145, 1968.

[10] N. Maiden, P. Pavan, A. Gizikis, O. Clause, H. Kim, and X. Zhu, "Making decisions with requirements: Integrating I* goal modelling and AHP," Proc. REFSQ '2002 Workshop, pp.24–35, 2002.

[11] J. Mylopoulos, L. Chung, and B. Nixon, "Representing and using non-functional requirements: A process-oriented approach," IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng., vol.6, no.4, pp.489–497, 1992.

[12] J. Mylopoulos, L. Chung, and E. Yu, "From object-oriented to goal-oriented requirements analysis," Commun. ACM, vol.42, no.1, pp.31–37, Jan. 1999.

[13] T. Saaty, The Analytic Hierarchy Process, McGraw-Hill, 1980.

[14] E. Triantaphyllou, Multi-Criteria Decision Making Methods: A Comparative Study, Kluwer Academic, 2000.

[15] A. van Lamsweerde, "Goal-oriented requirements engineering: A guided tour," RE '01, pp.249–263, Aug. 2001.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?



This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by YAMAMOTO, K.
Right arrow Articles by SAEKI, M.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?