Handling non-canonical software requirements based on Annotated Predicate Calculus

Knowledge and Information Systems

Volumn 11, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 85-104

  Mu, Kedian ^a   Jin, Zhi ^b   Lu, Ruqian ^b   Peng, Yan ^c  

^a PEKING UNIVERSITY   (China)

^b CHINESE ACADEMY OF SCIENCES   (China)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CHINESE ACADEMY OF SCIENCES   (China)

Author keywords

Incompleteness; Inconsistency; Paraconsistent logic; Redundancy; Software requirements; Vagueness

Indexed keywords

REDUNDANCY; REQUIREMENTS ENGINEERING;

INCOMPLETENESS; INCONSISTENCY; PARACONSISTENT LOGIC; SOFTWARE REQUIREMENTS; VAGUENESS;

CALCULATIONS;

EID: 33845268653     PISSN: 02191377     EISSN: 02193116     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10115-006-0021-y     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Belnap N (1977) A useful four-valued logic. In: Dunn M, Epstein G (eds) Modern uses of multi-valued logics. Reidel Publishing Co., pp 8-37
2. Bouhoula A (2000) Simultaneous checking of completeness and ground conuence. In: Proceedings of the 15th IEEE international conference on automated software engineering (ASE00), pp 143-153
3. Bowman H, Steen M, Boiten M, Derrick J (2002) A formal framework for viewpoint consistency. Formal Methods Syst Des 21 (2): 111-166
4. Chechik M, Devereux B, Easterbrook S (2001) Efficient multiple-valued model checking using lattice representations. In: Proceedings of the international conference on concurrency theory. Aalborg, Denmark, pp 21-24
5. Davis A (1993) Software requirements: Objects, functions, and states. PTR Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ
6. Easterbrook S, Chechik M (2001a) 2nd international workshop on living with inconsistency. Softw Eng Notes 26 (6): 76-78
7. Easterbrook S, Chechik M (2001b) A framework for multi-valued reasoning over inconsistent viewpoints. In: Proceedings of international conference on software engineering (ICSE'01), Toronto, Canada, pp 411-420
8. Easterbrook S, Nuseibeh B (1995) Managing inconsistencies in an evolving specification. In: Proceedings of the second international symposium on requirements engineering (RE95), pp 48-55
9. Finkelstein A, Gabbay D, Hunter A, Kramer J, Nuseibeh B (1994) Inconsistency handling in multiperspective specifications. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 20 (8): 569-578
10. Ginsberg M (1988) Multivalued logics: A uniform approach to reasoning in AI. Comput Intell 4: 265-316
11. Hunter A, Nuseibeh B (1998) Managing inconsistent specification. ACM Trans Softw Eng Methodol 7 (4): 335-367
12. Jackson M (1995) Software Requirements and specifications: A lexicon of ractice, principles and prejudices. Addison Wesley, UK
13. Kaiya H, Horai H, Saeki M (2002) Agora: Attributed goal-oriented requirements analysis method. In: Proceedings of the tenth IEEE joint international requirements engineering conference (RE02), pp 13-22
14. Kifer M, Lozinskii E (1992) A logic for reasoning with inconsistency. J Automat Reason 9 (2): 179-215
15. Lamsweerde A, Letier E (2000) Handling obstacles in goal-driven requirements engineering. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 26 (10): 978-1005
16. Leveson N (2000) Completeness in formal specification language design for process-control systems. In: Proceedings of the third workshop on formal methods in software practice, pp 75-87
17. Liberatore P (2005) Redundancy in logic i: Cnf propositional formulae. Artif Intell 163 (2): 203-232
18. Matthew S, Leveson G, Heimdahl M, Melhart B (1991) Software requirements analysis for real-time process-control systems. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 17 (3): 241-258
19. Mu K, Jin Z, Lu R, Liu W (2005a) Measuring inconsistency in requirements specifications. In: Godo L (ed) Proceedings of ECSQARU2005. LNCS, vol 3571. Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg, pp 440-451
20. Mu K, Jin Z, Lu R (2005b) Inconsistency-based strategy for clarifying vague software requirements. In: Zhang S, Jarvis R (eds) AI2005: Advances in artificial intelligence, The 18th Australian joint conference on artificial intelligence, LNCS, vol 3809. Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 39-48
21. Mylopoulos J, Chung L, Yu E (1999) From object-oriented to goal-oriented requirements analysis. Commun ACM 42 (1): 31-37
22. Sheldon F, Kim H, Zhou Z (2001) A case study: Validation of guidance control software requirements for completeness, consistency and fault tolerance. In: Proceedings of the 2001 Pacific Rim international symposium on dependable computing (PRDC 2001), pp 311-318
23. Spanoudakis G, Finkelstein A (1997) Reconciling requirements: A method for managing interference, inconsistency and conflict. Ann Softw Eng 3: 433-457
24. Spanoudakis G, Zisman A (2001) Inconsistency management in software engineering: Survey and open research issues. In: Chang SK (ed) Handbook of software engineering and knowledge engineering. World Scientific, Singapore, pp 329-380
25. Zowghi D, Gervasi V (2003) On the interplay between consistency, completeness, and correctness in requirements evolution. Inf Softw Technol 45 (14): 993-1009