Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
10.5555/2486788.2486864acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesicseConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Departures from optimality: understanding human analyst's information foraging in assisted requirements tracing

Published: 18 May 2013 Publication History

Abstract

Studying human analyst's behavior in automated tracing is a new research thrust. Building on a growing body of work in this area, we offer a novel approach to understanding requirements analyst's information seeking and gathering. We model analysts as predators in pursuit of prey --- the relevant traceability information, and leverage the optimality models to characterize a rational decision process. The behavior of real analysts with that of the optimal information forager is then compared and contrasted. The results show that the analysts' information diets are much wider than the theory's predictions, and their residing in low-profitability information patches is much longer than the optimal residence time. These uncovered discrepancies not only offer concrete insights into the obstacles faced by analysts, but also lead to principled ways to increase practical tool support for overcoming the obstacles.

References

[1]
J. H. Hayes, A. Dekhtyar, and S. K. Sundaram, “Advancing candidate link generation for requirements tracing: the study of methods,” IEEE TSE, vol. 32(1), pp. 4–19, 2006.
[2]
G. Antoniol, G. Canfora, G. Casazza, A. De Lucia, and E. Merlo, “Recovering traceability links between code and documentation,” IEEE TSE, vol. 28(10), pp. 970–983, 2002.
[3]
A. De Lucia, F. Fasano, R. Oliveto, and G. Tortora, “Recovering traceability links in software artifact management systems using information retrieval methods,” ACM TOSEM, vol. 16(4), 2007.
[4]
X. Zou, R. Settimi, and J. Cleland-Huang, “Improving automated requirements trace retrieval: a study of term-based enhancement methods,” Empir Softw Eng, vol. 15(2), pp. 119–146, 2010.
[5]
X. Chen and J. Grundy, “Improving automated documentation to code traceability by combining retrieval techniques,” in ASE, 2011, pp. 223– 232.
[6]
U.S. Federal Aviation Administration, “RTCA/DO-178B Software Considerations in Airborne Systems and Equipment Certification,” 1992.
[7]
D. Cuddeback, A. Dekhtyar, and J. H. Hayes, “Automated requirements traceability: the study of human analysts,” in RE, 2010, pp. 231–240.
[8]
A. Dekhtyar, O. Dekhtyar, J. Holden, J. H. Hayes, D. Cuddeback, and W.-K. Kong, “On human analyst performance in assisted requirements tracing: statistical analysis,” in RE, 2011, pp. 111–120.
[9]
J. H. Hayes and A. Dekhtyar, “Humans in the traceability loop: can’t live with ’em, can’t live without ’em,” in TEFSE, 2005, pp. 20–23.
[10]
W.-K. Kong, J. H. Hayes, A. Dekhtyar, and J. Holden, “How do we trace requirements? an initial study of analyst behavior in trace validation tasks,” in CHASE, 2011, pp. 32–39.
[11]
P. Pirolli, Information Foraging Theory: Adaptive Interaction with Information. Oxford University Press, 2007.
[12]
D. W. Stephens and J. R. Krebs, Foraging Theory. Princeton University Press, 1986.
[13]
J. Lawrance, R. Bellamy, and M. Burnett, “Scents in programs: does information foraging theory apply to program maintenance?” in VL/HCC, 2007, pp. 15–22.
[14]
J. Lawrance, R. Bellamy, M. Burnett, and K. Rector, “Using information scent to model the dynamic foraging behavior of programmers in maintenance tasks,” in CHI, 2008, pp. 1323–1332.
[15]
J. Lawrance, M. Burnett, R. Bellamy, C. Bogart, and C. Swart, “Reactive information foraging for evolving goals,” in CHI, 2010, pp. 25–34.
[16]
J. Lawrance, C. Bogart, M. Burnett, R. Bellamy, K. Rector, and S. D. Fleming, “How programmers debug, revisited: an information foraging theory perspective,” IEEE TSE, (accepted).
[17]
C. D. Manning, P. Raghavan, and H. Schütze, Introduction to Information Retrieval. Cambridge University Press, 2008.
[18]
U. Shardanand and P. Maes, “Social information filtering: algorithms for automating “word of mouth”,” in CHI, 1995, pp. 210–217.
[19]
P. Pirolli, “Computational models of information scent-following in a very large browsable text collection,” in CHI, 1997, pp. 3–10.
[20]
E. H. Chi, P. Pirolli, K. Chen, and J. E. Pitkow, “Using information scent to model user information needs and actions on the Web,” in CHI, 2001, pp. 490–497.
[21]
J. R. Anderson and P. Pirolli, “Spread of activation,” Journal of Experimental Psychology, vol. 10, pp. 791–798, 1984.
[22]
H. Schütze, “Dimensions of meaning,” in SC, 1992, pp. 787–796.
[23]
J. M. Spool, C. Perfetti, and D. Brittan, Designing for the Scent of Information. User Interface Engineering, 2004.
[24]
A. J. Ko, B. A. Myers, M. J. Coblenz, and H. H. Aung, “An exploratory study of how developers seek, relate, and collect relevant information during software maintenance tasks,” IEEE TSE, vol. 32(12), pp. 971– 987, 2006.
[25]
D. Piorkowski, S. D. Fleming, C. Scaffidi, L. John, C. Bogart, B. E. John, M. M. Burnett, and R. K. E. Bellamy, “Modeling programmer navigation: a head-to-head empirical evaluation of predictive models,” in VL/HCC, 2011, pp. 109–116.
[26]
N. Niu, A. Mahmoud, and G. Bradshaw, “Information foraging as a foundation for code navigation,” in ICSE, 2011, pp. 816–819.
[27]
R. Oliveto, M. Gethers, D. Poshyvanyk, and A. De Lucia, “On the equivalence of information retrieval methods for automated traceability link recovery,” in ICPC, 2010, pp. 68–71.
[28]
J. H. Hayes and A. Dekhtyar, “A framework for comparing requirements tracing experiments,” IJSEKE, vol. 15(5), pp. 751–782, 2005.
[29]
D. Cuddeback, A. Dekhtyar, J. H. Hayes, J. Holden, and W.-K. Kong, “Towards overcoming human analyst fallibility in the requirements tracing process (NIER Track),” in ICSE, 2011, pp. 860–863.
[30]
J. R. Anderson, The Adaptive Character of Thought. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1990.
[31]
J. Lin, C. C. Lin, J. Cleland-Huang, R. Settimi, J. Amaya, G. Bedford, B. Berenbach, O. B. Khadra, C. Duan, and X. Zou, “Poirot: a distributed tool supporting enterprise-wide automated traceability,” in RE, 2006, pp. 356–357.
[32]
A. Mahmoud and N. Niu, “TraCter: a tool for candidate traceability link clustering,” in RE, 2011, pp. 335–336.
[33]
J. Cleland-Huang, B. Berenbach, S. Clark, R. Settimi, and E. Romanova, “Best practices for automated traceability,” IEEE Computer, vol. 40(6), pp. 27–35, 2007.
[34]
A. Mahmoud and N. Niu, “Source code indexing for automated tracing,” in TEFSE, 2011, pp. 3–9.
[35]
A. De Lucia, R. Oliveto, and G. Tortora, “IR-based traceability recovery processes: an empirical comparison of “one-shot” and incremental processes,” in ASE, 2008, pp. 39–48.
[36]
N. Niu, J. Savolainen, T. Bhowmik, A. Mahmoud, and S. Reddivari, “A framework for examining topical locality in object-oriented software,” in COMPSAC, 2012, pp. 219–224.
[37]
H. Sultanov, J. H. Hayes, and W.-K. Kong, “Application of swarm techniques to requirements tracing,” REJ, vol. 16, pp. 209–226, 2011.
[38]
C. Duan and J. Cleland-Huang, “Clustering support for automated tracing,” in ASE, 2007, pp. 244–253.
[39]
A. Meneely, B. Smith, and L. Williams, “iTrust electronic health care system: a case study,” in Software and Systems Traceability, J. Cleland-Huang, O. Gotel, and A. Zisman, Eds. Springer, 2012.
[40]
W. J. Conover, Practical Nonparametric Statistics. Wiley, 1999.
[41]
N. Niu and A. Mahmoud, “Enhancing candidate link generation for requirements tracing: the cluster hypothesis revisited,” in RE, 2012, pp. 81–90.
[42]
M. A. Hearst, Search User Interfaces. Cambridge University Press, 2009.
[43]
B. J. Jansen, A. Spink, J. Bateman, and T. Saracevic, “Real life information retrieval: a study of user queries on the Web,” ACM SIGIR Forum, vol. 32(1), pp. 5–17, 1998.
[44]
A. Egyed, P. Grünbacher, M. Heindl, and S. Biffl, “Value-based requirements traceability: lessons learned,” in RE, 2007, pp. 115–118.
[45]
A. Egyed, F. Graf, and P. Grünbacher, “Effort and quality of recovering requirements-to-code traces: two exploratory experiments,” in RE, 2010, pp. 221–230.

Cited By

View all
  • (2021)The Shoutcasters, the Game Enthusiasts, and the AI: Foraging for Explanations of Real-time Strategy PlayersACM Transactions on Interactive Intelligent Systems10.1145/339604711:1(1-46)Online publication date: 15-Mar-2021
  • (2018)How the Experts Do ItProceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3173574.3174136(1-12)Online publication date: 21-Apr-2018
  • (2017)Software engineers' information seeking behavior in change impact analysisProceedings of the 25th International Conference on Program Comprehension10.1109/ICPC.2017.20(12-22)Online publication date: 20-May-2017
  • Show More Cited By

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences
ICSE '13: Proceedings of the 2013 International Conference on Software Engineering
May 2013
1561 pages
ISBN:9781467330763

Sponsors

Publisher

IEEE Press

Publication History

Published: 18 May 2013

Check for updates

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Conference

ICSE '13
Sponsor:

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 276 of 1,856 submissions, 15%

Upcoming Conference

ICSE 2025

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)1
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 10 Nov 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2021)The Shoutcasters, the Game Enthusiasts, and the AI: Foraging for Explanations of Real-time Strategy PlayersACM Transactions on Interactive Intelligent Systems10.1145/339604711:1(1-46)Online publication date: 15-Mar-2021
  • (2018)How the Experts Do ItProceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3173574.3174136(1-12)Online publication date: 21-Apr-2018
  • (2017)Software engineers' information seeking behavior in change impact analysisProceedings of the 25th International Conference on Program Comprehension10.1109/ICPC.2017.20(12-22)Online publication date: 20-May-2017
  • (2017)Advancing viewpoint merging in requirements engineeringRequirements Engineering10.1007/s00766-017-0271-022:3(317-338)Online publication date: 1-Sep-2017
  • (2016)Towards a pattern language for construction and maintenance of software architecture traceability linksProceedings of the 21st European Conference on Pattern Languages of Programs10.1145/3011784.3011810(1-20)Online publication date: 6-Jul-2016
  • (2016)On the impact of social network information diversity on end-user programming productivity: a foraging-theoretic studyProceedings of the 8th International Workshop on Social Software Engineering10.1145/2993283.2993284(15-21)Online publication date: 14-Nov-2016
  • (2016)Gray links in the use of requirements traceabilityProceedings of the 2016 24th ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Foundations of Software Engineering10.1145/2950290.2950354(384-395)Online publication date: 1-Nov-2016
  • (2016)Foraging and navigations, fundamentally: developers' predictions of value and costProceedings of the 2016 24th ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Foundations of Software Engineering10.1145/2950290.2950302(97-108)Online publication date: 1-Nov-2016
  • (2015)Tagging in assisted tracingProceedings of the 8th International Symposium on Software and Systems Traceability10.5555/2821445.2821448(8-14)Online publication date: 16-May-2015
  • (2015)On the Role of Structural Holes in Requirements IdentificationACM Transactions on Management Information Systems10.1145/27952356:3(1-30)Online publication date: 13-Sep-2015

View Options

Get Access

Login options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media