Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
10.1145/3297280.3299745acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagessacConference Proceedingsconference-collections
poster

VeriCCM: improving the syntax and semantics of requirements models

Published: 08 April 2019 Publication History

Abstract

Many problems in software systems can ultimately be traced to problematic system requirements. To mitigate this problem, some systems builders have adopted a more systematic approach to requirements elicitation and analysis. However, many of these approaches treat requirements as isolated entities having no direct connection to the actual system implementation. We propose Veri-CCM, an approach that addresses potential problems both in the semantics and the syntax of requirements models. We also evaluate our approach with an empirical study.

References

[1]
D. Aceituna and H. Do. 2015. Exposing the Susceptibility of Off-Nominal Behaviors in Reactive System Requirements. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference, Vol. 23. IEEE, 136--145.
[2]
C. Arora, M. Sabetzadeh, L. Briand, and F. Zimmer. 2016. Extracting domain models from natural-language requirements. In Proceedings of the ACM/IEEE 19th International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems - MODELS '16. ACM Press, New York, New York, USA, 250--260.
[3]
Marco Brambilla, Jordi Cabot, and Manuel Wimmer. 2017. Model-Driven Software Engineering in Practice: Second Edition (2nd ed.). Morgan & Claypool Publishers.
[4]
B. R. Bryant, J. Gray, M. Mernik, P. J. Clarke, R. B. France, and G. Karsai. 2011. Challenges and directions in formalizing the semantics of modeling languages. Computer Science and Information Systems 8, 2 (2011), 225--253.
[5]
S. A. Busari and E. Letier. 2017. RADAR: A Lightweight Tool for Requirements and Architecture Decision Analysis. In 2017 IEEE/ACM 39th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE). IEEE, 552--562.
[6]
A. Ferraiuolo, R. Xu, D. Zhang, A. C. Myers, and G. E. Suh. 2017. Verification of a Practical Hardware Security Architecture Through Static Information Flow Analysis. ACM SIGOPS Operating Systems Review 51, 2 (Apr 2017), 555--568.
[7]
J. Hassine and D. Amyot. 2016. A questionnaire-based survey methodology for systematically validating goal-oriented models. Requirements Engineering 21, 2 (2016), 285--308.
[8]
J. Holt, S. Perry, R. Payne, J. Bryans, S. Hallerstede, and F. O. Hansen. 2015. A Model-Based Approach for Requirements Engineering for Systems of Systems. IEEE Systems Journal 9, 1 (Mar 2015), 252--262.
[9]
Y. Lee, C. M. Eastman, W. Solihin, and R. See. 2016. Modularized rule-based validation of a BIM model pertaining to model views. Automation in Construction 63 (Mar 2016), 1--11.
[10]
N. G. Leveson. 2004. The role of software in spacecraft accidents. Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets 41, 4 (2004), 564--575.
[11]
Kaushik Madala, Danielle Gaither, Rodney Nielsen, and Hyunsook Do. 2017. Automated identification of component state transition model elements from requirements. In Proceedings - 2017 IEEE 25th International Requirements Engineering Conference Workshops, REW 2017.
[12]
A. Mavin, P. Wilkinson, A. Harwood, and M. Novak. 2009. Easy Approach to Requirements Syntax (EARS). In 17th IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference. IEEE, 317--322.
[13]
T. Parr. 2014. ANTLR. http://www.antlr.org/
[14]
J. Pennington, R. Socher, and C. D. Manning. 2014. GloVe: Global Vectors for Word Representation. In Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP). 1532--1543. http://www.aclweb.org/anthology/D14-1162
[15]
O. Semeráth, A. Barta, A. Horváth, Z. Szatmári, and D. Varró. 2017. Formal validation of domain-specific languages with derived features and well-formedness constraints. Software & Systems Modeling 16, 2 (May 2017), 357--392.
[16]
E. So, J. Ajtum, Y. Moy, and Y. L. Quach. 2005. Requirements Specification. http://www.ecs.umass.edu/ece/sdp/sdp05/preston/sdp_data/RequirementSpecification.doc

Cited By

View all
  • (2023)Identifying safety issues from energy conservation requirementsJournal of Software: Evolution and Process10.1002/smr.251535:7Online publication date: 2-Jul-2023

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences
SAC '19: Proceedings of the 34th ACM/SIGAPP Symposium on Applied Computing
April 2019
2682 pages
ISBN:9781450359337
DOI:10.1145/3297280
Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the Owner/Author.

Sponsors

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 08 April 2019

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. machine learning
  2. requirements analysis
  3. verification and validation

Qualifiers

  • Poster

Conference

SAC '19
Sponsor:

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 1,650 of 6,669 submissions, 25%

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)5
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 09 Nov 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2023)Identifying safety issues from energy conservation requirementsJournal of Software: Evolution and Process10.1002/smr.251535:7Online publication date: 2-Jul-2023

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