Requirements Engineering Sample Clauses
Requirements Engineering. The ADVANCE7 project (along with the Deploy project, covered in the next section) is based around the Rodin tool and the Event-B formalism. ADVANCE extended Rodin to allow for FMI co-simulation between Event-B models and arbitrary FMUs. The Rodin tool supports ProR for managing textual requirements including hierarchies and links. The tool is now part of the Eclipse incubator program. The COMPASS8 project developed an approach for the development of Architectural Frameworks (COMPASS Architectural Framework Framework - CAFF). This was used to develop guidelines for SoS requirements modelling 9 called SoS-ACRE. Although the CAFF is agnostic with respect to modelling language, the guidelines were realised in SysML and insight from this fed into the SysML guidance given in Deliverable D3.1a [FGPP15]. The SPEEDS10 project developed a Contract Specification Language (CSL), allowing col- laborating teams to define requirements and promises about the components that their team is developing. This was extended in the DANSE11 project to become the Goal and Contract Specification Language (GCSL), which permits architectural aspects to be captured in OCL12 (Object Constraint Language) notation. DANSE methodology docu- ments13 advocate formalising requirements late in the architectural design workflow. The TOPCASED project included TOPCASED-Req, a solution to manage requirement traceability in model for aviation, following the DO-178B lifecycle. The AGeSys14 Project improved TOPCASED-Req to move away focus on the whole requirements lifecycle as 7▇▇▇▇://▇▇▇.▇▇▇▇▇▇▇-▇▇▇.▇▇/ 8▇▇▇▇://▇▇▇.▇▇▇▇▇▇▇-▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇.▇▇/ 9▇▇▇▇://▇▇▇.▇▇▇▇▇▇▇-▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇.▇▇/Project/Deliverables/D211.pdf ▇▇▇▇▇.▇▇▇▇▇▇.▇▇.▇▇▇ 11▇▇▇▇://▇▇▇▇▇-▇▇.▇▇/ ▇▇▇▇▇.▇▇▇.▇▇▇/▇▇▇▇/▇▇▇ 13▇▇▇▇://▇▇▇▇▇-▇▇.▇▇/home/pdf/danse_d4.3_methodology_v2.pdf 14▇▇▇▇://▇▇▇.▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇-▇▇▇▇▇▇.▇▇▇/sites/default/files/encart_html/index.html#1 a new tool called becomes ReqCycle. TOPCASED and ReqCycle now form part of the PolarSys15 open-source tools for embedded systems. The META tool being developed under DARPA AVM (Adaptive Vehicle Make) pro- gramme makes use of the CyPhyML meta language. In terms of requirements they focus on “executable requirements” that are quantifiable tests that can be automatically checked against models or implementations. This has been demonstrated in OpenModelica. The ENOSYS16 project targeted design space exploration for FPGA design, using the ▇▇▇▇▇ UML profile for high-level specification. The Modelio tool was used i...
Requirements Engineering. 6.6.2 SLA Negotiation 6.6.3 SLA Agreement 6.6.4 SLA Monitoring 6.6.5 SLA Expiration
Requirements Engineering. STATE-OF-THE-ART The overall goal of this section is to provide an overview of the state of the art in recommendation and decision technologies for requirements engineering. This overview will be adapted/extended within the scope of the first two years of OpenReq. Thereafter, we plan to transfer our documentation of OpenReq research results and related work into a corresponding journal publication (the concrete journal is not yet decided). In the following subsections we provide an overview of the state-of-the-art research that exists related to recommendation and decision technologies in requirements engineering. In the context of each subsection, we also discuss OpenReq research goals related to the advancement of the existing state-of-the-art.
Requirements Engineering. Requirements Engineering (RE) can be considered as one of the most critical phases in software development processes. Incomplete, low-quality, and suboptimally prioritized requirements can lead to cost explosions and often to the cancellation of a software project [LEF1997]. A major reason is that stakeholders in software projects often take suboptimal decisions. For example, highly relevant requirements are implemented in late releases. Such decisions trigger, for example, opportunity costs since the earlier the software is applicable, the earlier business processes can be supported more efficiently. The reasons for suboptimal decisions are manifold. For example, the relevance of a requirement could have been underestimated simply due to the lack of decision-relevant knowledge of stakeholders who are in charge of prioritizing and release planning. The reason behind this could be a low degree of knowledge exchange between stakeholders. For similar reasons, the quality of individual requirements could have been overestimated. Due to anchoring effects [SFL+2015], the opinion of one stakeholder can have an influence on the opinions of other stakeholders. Polarization effects [ARF2018] can lead to situations where groups take decisions that are riskier compared to the riskiness of decisions taken by individual stakeholders. Such decision biases can be regarded as a major obstacle for high-quality decision making [FBS+2018].
Requirements Engineering. Service Level Agreement Staff forms together with the CRM Staff a team and decide on who is the requirements engineering agent. This agent gets in contact with the customer and defines customer requirements. This person needs to be an expert concerning the service offered by the company, to match customer requirements with existing services or to define if required services are possible to be delivered in commercial and technical view. A close cooperation with the Service Design Process, CRM and all Operation Processes is necessary.
Requirements Engineering. Traditionally, software engineering divides requirements in two categories: functional requirements (what the system should do) and non-functional requirements (performance, quality of service, etc.). In the areas of adaptive and open-ended systems, both functional and non-functional requirements are better expressed in terms of “goals” [MCY99]. A goal, in most general terms, represent a desirable state of the affairs that an entity, that is a software component or software system, aims to achieve. In ASCENS we propose SOTA for capturing and specifying the requirements of autonomic sys- tems. SOTA is an extension of existing goal-oriented requirements engineering approaches that in- tegrates elements of dynamical systems modeling to account for the general needs of dynamic self- adaptive systems and components. SOTA, which stands for “state of the affairs”, models the entities of a self-adaptive system as n- dimensional space S, with each dimension representing a specific aspect of the current situation of the entity/ensemble and of its operational environment. As an entity executes, its position in S changes either due to its specific actions of or because of the dynamics of environment. Thus, we can generally see this evolution of the system as a movement in S. In this context, a goal in SOTA can be expressed in terms of a specific state of the affairs to aim for, that is, a specific point or a specific area in S which the entity or the system as a whole should try to reach, despite the fact that external contingencies can move the trajectory farther from the goal. Along this lines, the activity of requirements engineering for self-adaptive systems in SOTA im- plies: (i) identifying the dimensions of the SOTA space, which means modeling the relevant infor- mation that a system/entity has to collect to become aware of its location in such space, a necessary condition to recognize whether it is correctly behaving and adapt its actions whenever necessary; (ii) identifying the set of goals for each entity and for the system as a whole, which also implies identi- fying when specific goals gets activated and any possible constraint on the trajectory to be followed while trying to achieve such goals. The SOTA modeling approach is very useful to understand and model the functional and adap- tation requirements, and to check the correctness of such specifications (as described in [AZ12]). However, when a designer considers the actual design of the system, SOTA ...
Requirements Engineering. Traditionally, software engineering divides requirements in two categories: functional requirements (what the system should do) and non-functional requirements (performance, quality of service, etc.). In the areas of adaptive and open-ended systems, both functional and non-functional requirements are better expressed in terms of “goals” [MCY99]. A goal, in most general terms, represent a desirable state of the affairs that an entity, that is a software component or software system, aims to achieve. In ASCENS we propose SOTA for capturing and specifying the requirements of autonomic sys- tems. SOTA is an extension of existing goal-oriented requirements engineering approaches that in- tegrates elements of dynamical systems modeling to account for the general needs of dynamic self- adaptive systems and components. SOTA models the entities of a self-adaptive system as n-dimensional space S, with each dimension representing a specific aspect of the current situation of the entity/ensemble and of its operational environment. As an entity executes, its position in S changes either due to its specific actions of or because of the dynamics of environment. Thus, we can generally see this evolution of the system as a movement in S. 1UML website: ▇▇▇▇://▇▇▇.▇▇▇.▇▇▇/ 2BPMN website: ▇▇▇▇://▇▇▇.▇▇▇.▇▇▇/spec/BPMN/2.0/ 3SPEM website: ▇▇▇▇://▇▇▇.▇▇▇.▇▇▇/spec/SPEM/2.0/ In this context, a goal in SOTA can be expressed in terms of a specific state of the affairs to aim for, that is, a specific point or a specific area in S which the entity or the system as a whole should try to reach, despite the fact that external contingencies can move the trajectory farther from the goal. Along this lines, the activity of requirements engineering for self-adaptive systems in SOTA im- plies: (i) identifying the dimensions of the SOTA space, which means modeling the relevant infor- mation that a system/entity has to collect to become aware of its location in such space, a necessary condition to recognize whether it is correctly behaving and adapt its actions whenever necessary; (ii) identifying the set of goals for each entity and for the system as a whole, which also implies identi- fying when specific goals gets activated and any possible constraint on the trajectory to be followed while trying to achieve such goals. The SOTA modeling approach is very useful to understand and model the functional and adap- tation requirements, and to check the correctness of such specifications (as descr...