Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Analysis of Early Aspects in Requirements Goal Models: A Concept-Driven Approach

  • Chapter
Transactions on Aspect-Oriented Software Development III

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((TAOSD,volume 4620))

Abstract

Early aspects are stakeholder concerns that crosscut the problem domain, with the potential for a broad impact on questions of scoping, prioritization, and architectural design. Analyzing early aspects improves early stage decision-making, and helps trace stakeholder interests throughout the software development life cycle. However, analysis of early aspects is hard because stakeholders are often vague about the concepts involved, and may use different vocabularies to express their concerns. In this paper, we present a rigorous approach to conceptual analysis of stakeholder concerns. We make use of the repertory grid technique to identify terminological interference between stakeholders’ descriptions of their goals, and formal concept analysis to uncover conflicts and trade-offs between these goals. We demonstrate how this approach can be applied to the goal models commonly used in requirements analysis, resulting in the clarification and elaboration of early aspects. Preliminary qualitative evaluation indicates that the approach can be readily adopted in existing requirements analysis processes, and can yield significant insights into crosscutting concerns in the problem domain.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Baniassad, E., Clements, P.C., Araújo, J., Moreira, A., Rashid, A., Tekinerdoğan, B.: Discovering early aspects. IEEE Software 23(1), 61–70 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Becker, P., Correia, J.H.: The TosCanaJ suite for implementing conceptual information systems. In: Ganter, B., Stumme, G., Wille, R. (eds.) Formal Concept Analysis. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3626, pp. 324–348. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Birkhoff, G.: Lattice Theory. Providence, RI.: Am. Math. Soc., 25 (1940)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Castro, J., Kolp, M., Mylopoulos, J.: Towards requirements-driven information systems engineering: the Tropos project. Information Systems 27(6), 365–389 (2002)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Chung, L., Nixon, B.A., Yu, E., Mylopoulos, J.: Non-Functional Requirements in Software Engineering. Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht (2000)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Clarke, S., Baniassad, E.: Aspect-Oriented Analysis and Design: The Theme Approach. Addison-Wesley, Reading (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Delugach, H.S., Lampkin, B.E.: Troika: using grids, lattices and graphs in knowledge acquisition. In: Intl. Conf. on Conceptual Structures, pp. 201–214 (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Early aspects portal: (Cited on March 7, 2007), http://www.early-aspects.net/

  9. Eisenbarth, T., Koschke, R., Simon, D.: Locating features in source code. IEEE Transactions Software Engineering 29(3), 195–209 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Fransella, F., Bell, R., Bannister, D.: A Manual for Repertory Grid Technique, 2nd edn. Wiley, NewYork (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Gaines, B.: An overview of knowledge acquisition and transfer. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 12(3-4), 441–459 (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Ganter, B., Wille, R.: Formal Concept Analysis. Springer, Heidelberg (1996)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Hickey, A.M., Davis, A.M.: Elicitation technique selection: how do experts do it?. In: International RE Conference, pp. 169–178 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  14. IDEF0 portal: http://www.idef.com/idef0.html (Cited on March 7, 2007)

  15. Jackson, M.: Problems, subproblems and concerns. In: Early Aspects Workshop, International Conference on AOSD (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Jutras, J.: An automatic reviser: the transcheck system. In: Christodoulakis, D.N. (ed.) NLP 2000. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1835, pp. 127–134. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Kaindl, H., Brinkkemper, S., Bubenko Jr., J.A., Farbey, B., Greenspan, S.J., Heitmeyer, C.L., do Prado Leite, J.C.S., Mead, N.R., Mylopoulos, J., Siddiqi, J.I.A.: Requirements engineering and technology transfer: obstacles, incentives and improvement agenda. RE Journal 7(3), 113–123 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Kelly, G.: The Psychology of Personal Constructs, Norton, New York (1955)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Kiczales, G., Lamping, J., Menhdhekar, A., Maeda, C., Lopes, C., Loingtier, J.-M., Irwin, J.: Aspect-oriented programming. In: Aksit, M., Matsuoka, S. (eds.) ECOOP 1997. LNCS, vol. 1241, pp. 220–242. Springer, Heidelberg (1997)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  20. Krone, M., Snelting, G.: On the interference of configuration structures from source code. In: ICSE, pp. 49–57 (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Lethbridge, T.C., Sim, S.E., Singer, J.: Studying software engineers: data collection techniques for software field studies. Empirical SE 10(3), 311–341 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. McKnight, C.: The personal construction of information space. Journal of the American Society for Information Science 51(8), 730–733 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Murphy, G., Schwanninger, C.: Aspect-oriented programming. IEEE Software 23(1), 20–23 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Niu, N., Easterbrook, S., Yu, Y.: A taxonomy of asymmetric requirements aspects. In: Early Aspects Workshop at AOSD (in press, 2007)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Niu, N., Easterbrook, S.: Discovering aspects in requirements with repertory grid. In: Early Aspects Workshop at ICSE, pp. 35–41 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Niu, N., Easterbrook, S.: Managing terminological interference in goal models with repertory grid. In: International RE Conference, pp. 303–306 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Niu, N., Easterbrook, S.: So, you think you know others’ goals? A repertory grid study. IEEE Software 24(2), 53–61 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Novak, J.D.: Learning, Creating, and Using Knowledge. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Nuseibeh, B., Easterbrook, S.M.: Requirements Engineering: A Roadmap. In: The Future of Software Engineering (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Nuseibeh, B.: Weaving together requirements and architectures. IEEE Computer 34(3), 115–117 (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Nuseibeh, B.: Crosscutting requirements. In: International Conference on AOSD, pp. 3–4 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  32. Parnas, D.: On the criteria to be used in decomposing systems into modules. Communications of the ACM 15(12), 1053–1058 (1972)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Pisan, Y.: Extending requirement specifications using analogy. In: ICSE, pp. 70–76 (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Popper, K.: Epistemology without a knowing subject. In: International Congress for Logic, Methodology and Philosophy of Science, pp. 333–372 (1968)

    Google Scholar 

  35. Potts, C., Takahashi, K., Anton, A.: Inquiry-based requirements analysis. IEEE Software 11(2), 21–32 (1993)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Richards, D.: Merging individual conceptual models of requirements. RE Journal 8(4), 195–205 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  37. Richards, L.: Handling Qualitative Data: A Practical Guide. Sage, Beverely Hills (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  38. Rogers, E.M.: Diffusion of Innovations, 4th edn. Free Press, NewYork (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  39. Ryle, A.: Frames and Cages: The Repertory Grid Approach to Human Understanding. Sussex University Press, Sussex (1975)

    Google Scholar 

  40. Sabetzadeh, M., Easterbrook, S.: Traceability in viewpoint merging: a model management perspective. In: International Workshop on Traceability in SE (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  41. Sampaio, A., Chitchyan, R., Rashid, A., Rayson, P.: EA-Miner: a tool for automating aspect-oriented requirements identification. In: International Conference on ASE, pp. 352–355 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  42. Shaw, M.: On Becoming A Personal Scientist: Interactive Computer Elicitation of Personal Models of the World. Academic Press, Dublin (1980)

    Google Scholar 

  43. Shaw, M., Gaines, B.: Comparing conceptual structures: consensus, conflict, correspondence and contrast. Knowledge Acquisition 1(4), 341–363 (1989)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Snelting, G., Tip, F.: Reengineering class hierarchies using concept analysis. ACM Transactions on Programming Languages System 22(3), 540–582 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Sowa, J.F.: Conceptual Structures: Information Processing in Mind and Machine. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1984)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  46. Suen, R., Baniassad, E.: Isolating concerns in requirements using latent semantic analysis. In: Early Aspects Workshop, OOPSLA (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  47. Sutton, D.C.: Linguistic problems with requirements and knowledge elicitation. RE Journal 5(2), 114–124 (2000)

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  48. Tilley, T.: Tool support for FCA. In: Eklund, P.W. (ed.) ICFCA 2004. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2961, pp. 104–111. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  49. Tilley, T., Cole, R., Becker, P., Eklund, P.: A survey of formal concept analysis support for software engineering activities. In: Ganter, B., Stumme, G., Wille, R. (eds.) Formal Concept Analysis. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3626, pp. 250–271. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  50. Tonella, P.: Concept analysis for module restructuring. IEEE Transactions Software Engineering 27(4), 351–363 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Tonella, P.: Formal concept analysis in software engineering. In: ICSE, pp. 743–744 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  52. Tonella, P.: Using a concept lattice of decomposition slices for program understanding and impact analysis. IEEE Transactions Software Engineering 29(6), 495–509 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Yu, E.: Modeling strategic actor relationships for process reengineering. PhD Thesis, University of Toronto (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  54. Yu, Y., do Prado, J.C.S., Mylopoulos, J.: From goals to aspects: discovering aspects from requirements goal models. In: International. RE Conference, pp. 38–47 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  55. Zave, P., Jackson, M.: Four dark corners of requirements engineering. ACM TOSEM 6(1), 1–30 (1997)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, M5S 3G4, Canada

    Nan Niu & Steve Easterbrook

Authors
  1. Nan Niu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Steve Easterbrook
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Awais Rashid Mehmet Aksit

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2007 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Niu, N., Easterbrook, S. (2007). Analysis of Early Aspects in Requirements Goal Models: A Concept-Driven Approach. In: Rashid, A., Aksit, M. (eds) Transactions on Aspect-Oriented Software Development III. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 4620. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-75162-5_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-75162-5_3

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-75161-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-75162-5

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics