ABSTRACT
Visual modelling languages are commonly used to support software requirements analysis and documentation. A variety of languages are available, based on different conceptual paradigms. They can be roughly divided into two main groups: goal-oriented approaches and scenario-based approaches. In the last ten years, numerous works developed case studies that illustrate the effectiveness and limitations of goal-oriented and scenario-based approaches. A few works even suggest coupling these approaches in order to capture requirements from different perspectives. However, experimental comparisons of these approaches have been rarely addressed. This paper presents the design and preliminary results of an empirical study that compares two state of the art requirements modelling methods: Use Cases, which is a scenario-based approach, and Tropos, which is a goal-oriented approach. The objective is to evaluate different levels of comprehension of requirements models expressed in both methods, as well as to estimate the time required to perform simple analysis tasks using both methods. Preliminary results show that Tropos models seem to be more comprehensible, although more time consuming, than Use Case models to novice requirements analysts.
- G. Booch, I. Jacobson, and J. Rumbaugh. The Unified Modeling Language User Guide (Second Edition). Addison-Wesley, 2005. Google ScholarDigital Library
- P. Bresciani, P. Giorgini, F. Giunchiglia, J. Mylopoulos, and A. Perini. Tropos: An Agent-Oriented Software Development Methodology. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, 8(3):203--236, July 2004. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. Castro, M. Kolp, and J. Mylopoulos. Towards requirements-driven information systems engineering: the tropos project. Information Systems, 27(6):365--389, 2002. Google ScholarDigital Library
- A. Dardenne, A. van Lamsweerde, and S. Fickas. Goal-directed requirements acquisition. Science of Computer Programming, 20(1--2):3--50, 1993. Google ScholarDigital Library
- L. M. C. Filho, V. Werneck, J. Amaral, and E. S. K. Yu. Agent/goal orientation vs object orientation for requirements engineering: A practical evaluation using an exemplar. In WER'2005, pages 123--134, 2005.Google Scholar
- E. Kavakli. Goal-oriented requirements engineering: A unifying framework. Requirements Engineering journal, 6(4):237--251, 2002.Google ScholarCross Ref
- M. Kim, S. Park, V. Sugumaran, and H. Yang. Managing requirements conflicts in software product lines: A goal and scenario based approach. Data & Knowledge Engineering, 61(3):417--432, 2007. Google ScholarDigital Library
- L. Kuzniarz, M. Staron, and C. Wohlin. An empirical study on using stereotypes to improve understanding of UML models. In 12th IEEE International Workshop on Program Comprehension (IWPC'04), pages 14--23. IEEE CS, 2004. Google ScholarDigital Library
- S. Misra, V. Kumar, and U. Kumar. Goal-oriented or scenario-based requirements engineering technique - what should a practitioner select? In Canadian Conference on Electrical and Computer Engineering, pages 2288--2292, 2005.Google ScholarCross Ref
- J. Mylopoulos. Information Modeling in the Time of the Revolution. Inf. Syst., 23(3--4):127--155, 1998. Google ScholarDigital Library
- B. Nuseibeh and S. Easterbrook. Requirements Engineering: a roadmap. In Proceedings of the Conference on The Future of Software Engineering (ICSE'00), pages 35--46, 2000. Google ScholarDigital Library
- F. Ricca, M. Di Penta, M. Torchiano, P. Tonella, and M. Ceccato. The role of experience and ability in comprehension tasks supported by UML stereotypes. In Proceedings of the 29th International Conference on Software engineering (ICSE'2007), pages 375--384. IEEE Computer Society, 2007. Google ScholarDigital Library
- C. Rolland, G. Grosz, and R. Kla. Experience with goal-scenario coupling in requirements engineering. In Proceedings of IEEE International Symposium on Requirements Engineering, pages 74--81, 1999. Google ScholarDigital Library
- A. Sutcliffe. Scenario-based requirements engineering. In Proceedings of the 11th IEEE International Conference on Requirements Engineering (RE'2003), pages 320--329, 2003. Google ScholarDigital Library
- A. van Lamsweerde. Requirements engineering in the year 00: a research perspective. In Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Software engineering (ICSE'2000), pages 5--19, 2000. Google ScholarDigital Library
- A. van Lamsweerde. Goal-oriented requirements enginering: a roundtrip from research to practice {enginering read engineering}. In Proceedings of the 12th IEEE International Conference on Requirements Engineering (RE'2004), pages 4--7, 2004. Google ScholarDigital Library
- C. Wohlin, P. Runeson, M. Höst, M. Ohlsson, B. Regnell, and A. Wesslén. Experimentation in Software Engineering - An Introduction. Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2000. Google ScholarDigital Library
- E. Yu. Modelling Strategic Relationships for Process Reengineering. PhD thesis, University of Toronto, Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto, 1995. Google ScholarDigital Library
Index Terms
- An empirical study of requirements model understanding: Use Case vs. Tropos models
Recommendations
Comparing the comprehensibility of requirements models expressed in Use Case and Tropos: Results from a family of experiments
Context: Over the years, several modeling languages for requirements have been proposed. These languages employ different conceptual approaches, including scenario-based and goal-oriented ones. Empirical studies providing evidence about requirements ...
A controlled experiment to evaluate the understandability of KAOS and i* for modeling Teleo-Reactive systems
A novel method to model software requirements for Teleo-Reactive systems using i*.A novel method to model software requirements for Teleo-Reactive systems using KAOS.i* notation has higher understandability level for modeling Teleo-Reactive systems than ...
Software requirements prioritization and selection using linguistic tools and constraint solvers--a controlled experiment
Implementing the entire set of requirements for a software system is often not feasible owing to time and resource limitations. A key driver for successful delivery of any software system is the ability to prioritize the large number of requirements. ...
Comments