Research directions in requirements engineering

FoSE 2007: Future of Software Engineering

Volumn , Issue , 2007, Pages 285-303

  Cheng, Betty H C ^a   Atlee, Joanne M ^b  

^a MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WATERLOO   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER SIMULATION; DATA ACQUISITION; PROBLEM SOLVING; SOFTWARE ENGINEERING; TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER;

RESEARCH DIRECTIONS; SOFTWARE NEEDS; TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT;

REQUIREMENTS ENGINEERING;

EID: 34748841665     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1109/FOSE.2007.17     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (187)

1. A. Alfonso, V. Braberman, N. Kicillof, and A. Olivero. Visual timed event scenarios. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Conf. on Soft. Eng. (ICSE), pages 168-177, 2004.
2. T. A. Alspaugh and A. I. Antón. Scenario networks for software specification and scenario management. Technical Report TR-2001-12, North Carolina State University at Raleigh, 2001.
3. R. Alur, K. Etessami, and M. Yannakakis. Inference of message sequence charts. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Conf. on Soft. Eng. (ICSE), pages 304-313, 2000.
4. R. Alur, T. Henzinger, G. Lafferriere, and G. Pappas. Discrete abstractions of hybrid systems. Proc. of IEEE, 88(7), July 2000.
5. C. Alves and A. Finkelstein. Challenges in COTS decision-making: a goal-driven requirements engineering perspective. In Proc. of the Int. Con. on Soft. Eng. and Know. Eng., pages 789-794, 2002.
6. V. Ambriola and V. Gervasi. Processing natural language requirements. In IEEE Int. Conf. on Auto. Soft. Eng., pages 36-45, 1997.
7. A. I. Antón. Goal-based requirements analysis. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Req. Eng. Conf. (RE), pages 136-144, 1996.
8. A. I. Antón and C. Potts. Functional paleontology: The evolution of user-visible system services. IEEE Trans. on Soft. Eng., 29(2):151-166, 2003.
9. M. Aoyama. Persona-and-scenario based requirements engineering for software embedded in digital consumer products. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Req. Eng. Conf. (RE), pages 85-94, 2005.
10. M. A. Ardis, J. A. Chaves, L. J. Jagadeesan, P. Mataga, C. Puchol, M. G. Staskauskas, and J. V. Olnhausen. A framework for evaluating specification methods for reactive systems experience report. IEEE Trans. on Soft. Eng., 22(6):378-389, 1996.
11. Y. Arimoto, M. Nakamura, and K. Futatsugi. Toward a domain description with CafeOBJ. In Proc. 23rd JSSST Convention, 2006.
12. P. Baker, P. Bristow, C. Jervis, D. King, R. Thomson, B. Mitchell, and S. Burton. Detecting and resolving semantic pathologies in UML sequence diagrams. In Proc. of ACM SIGSOFT Found, on Soft. Eng. (FSE), pages 50-59, 2005.
13. V. R. Basili. The experimental paradigm in software engineering. In Proc. of the Int. Work. on Experimental Soft. Eng. Issues: Crit. Assess, and Future Directions, pages 312. Springer-Verlag, 1993.
14. P. Bellini, R. Mattolini, and P. Nesi. Temporal logics for real-time system specification. ACM Comp. Sur., 32(1):12-42, 2000.
15. B. Berenbach. The evaluation of large, complex UML analysis and design models. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Conf. on Soft. Eng. (ICSE), pages 232-241, 2004.
16. D. Berry and E. Kamsties. Ambiguity in Requirements Specification. Perspectives on Software Requirements, chapter 2. Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2004.
17. J. Berstel, G. Roussel, S. C. Reghizzi, and P. S. Pietro. A scalable formal method for design and automatic checking of user interfaces. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Conf. on Soft. Eng. (ICSE), pages 453-462, 2001.
18. T. D. Breaux and A. I. Antón. Analyzing goal semantics for rights, permissions, and obligations. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Req. Eng. Conf. (RE), pages 177-188, 2005.
19. P. Bresciani, P. Giorgini, F. Giunchiglia, J. Mylopoulos, and A. Perini. TROPOS: an agent-oriented software development methodology. J. of Auto. Agents and Multi-Agent Sys., 8(3):203-236, 2004.
20. M. Broy. The 'grand challenge' in informatics: Engineering software-intensive systems. IEEE Computer, 39(10):72-80, 2006.
21. S. Buhne, K. Lauenroth, and K. Pohl. Modelling requirements variability across product lines. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Req. Eng. Conf. (RE), pages 41-52, 2005.
22. T. Bultan. Action language: A specification language for model checking reactive systems. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Conf. on Soft. Eng. (ICSE), pages 335-344, 2000.
23. D. Bush and A. Finkelstein. Requirements stability assessment using scenarios. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Req. Eng. Conf. (RE), pages 23-32, 2003.
24. L. A. Campbell, B. H. C. Cheng, W. E. McUmber, and R. E. K. Stirewalt. Automatically detecting and visualizing errors in UML diagrams. Req. Eng. J., 37(10):74-86, October 2002.
25. P. Carlshamre, K. Sandahl, M. Lindvall, B. Regnell, and J. N. och Dag. An industrial survey of requirements interdependencies in software product release planning. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Req. Eng. Conf. (RE), pages 84-93, 2001.
26. W. Chan, R. J. Anderson, P. Beame, S. Burns, F. Modugno, D. Notkin, and J. D. Reese. Model checking large software specifications. IEEE Trans. on Soft. Eng., 24(7):498-520, 1998.
27. F. Chantree, B. Nuseibeh, A. de Roeck, and A. Willis. Identifying nocuous ambiguities in natural language requirements. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Req. Eng. Conf. (RE), pages 59-68, 2006.
28. L. Chung, B. Nixon, E. Yu, and J. Mylopoulos. Non-functional Requirements in Software Engineering. Kluwer, 1999.
29. J. Cleland-Huang, R. Settimi, C. Duan, and X. Zou. Utilizing supporting evidence to improve dynamic requirements traceability. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Req. Eng. Conf. (RE), pages 135-144, 2005.
30. J. Cleland-Huang, G. Zemont, and W. Lukasik. A heterogeneous solution for improving the return on investment of requirements traceability. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Req. Eng. Conf. (RE), pages 230-239, 2004.
31. R. L. Cobleigh, G. S. Avrunin, and L. A. Clarke. User guidance for creating precise and accessible property specifications. In Proc. of ACM SIGSOFT Found, on Soft. Eng. (FSE), pages 208-218, 2006.
32. A. Cockburn. Writing Effective Use Cases. Addison-Wesley, 2001.
33. T. Cohene and S. Easterbrook. Contextual risk analysis for interview design. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Req. Eng. Conf. (RE), pages 95-104, 2005.
34. A. Cooper. The Inmates are Running the Asylum. Sams, 1999.
35. R. Crook, D. Ince, and B. Nuseibeh. On modelling access policies: Relating roles to their organisational context. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Req. Eng. Conf. (RE), pages 157-166, 2005.
36. R. Crook, D. C. Ince, L. Lin, and B. Nuseibeh. Security requirements engineering: When anti-requirements hit the fan. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Req. Eng. Conf. (RE), pages 203-205, 2002.
37. Cyber-Physical Systems, http://varma.ece.cmu.edu/cps, October 2006.
38. K. Czarnecki and U. W. Eisenecker. Generative Programming. Addison-Wesley, 2000.
39. C. Damas, B. Lambeau, and A. van Lamsweerde. Scenarios, goals, and state machines: a win-win partnership for model synthesis. In Proc. of ACM SIGSOFT Found. on Soft. Eng. (FSE), pages 197-207, 2006.
40. D. Damian and J. Chisan. An empirical study of the complex relationships between requirements engineering processes and other processes that lead to payoffs in productivity, quality, and risk management. IEEE Trans. on Soft. Eng., 32(7):433-453, 2006.
41. D. Damian, J. Chisan, L. Vaidyanathasamy, and Y Pal. Requirements engineering and downstream software development: Findings from a case study. Empirical Soft. Eng., 10(3):255-283, 2005.
42. D. Damian, A. Eberlein, M. Shaw, and B. Gaines. An exploratory study of facilitation in distributed requirements engineering. Req. Eng. J., 8(1):23-41, 2003.
43. D. Damian, F. Lanubile, and T. Mallardo. An empirical study of the impact of asynchronous discussions on remote synchronous requirements meetings. In Proc. of the Conf. on Fund Appr. to Soft. Eng. (FASE), pages 155-169, 2006.
44. D. Damian and D. Moitra (eds.). Global software development. IEEE Soft, special issue, 23(5), 2006.
45. D. Damian, D. Zowghi, L. Vaidyanathasamy, and Y. Pal. An industrial case study of immediate benefits of requirements engineering process improvement at the australian center for unisys software. Empirical Soft. Eng., 9(1-2):45-75, 2004.
46. D. E. Damian and D. Zowghi. The impact of stakeholders? geographical distribution on managing requirements in a multi-site organization. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Req. Eng. Conf. (RE), pages 319-330, 2002.
47. W. Damm and D. Harel. LSCs: Breathing life into message sequence charts. Form. Meth. in Sys. Des., 19(1):45-80, 2001.
48. A. Davis, O. Dieste, A. Hickey, N. Juristo, and A. M. Moreno. Effectiveness of requirements elicitation techniques: Empirical results derived from a systematic review. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Req. Eng. Conf. (RE), pages 176-185, 2006.
49. C. Denger, D. M. Berry, and E. Kamsties. Higher quality requirements specifications through natural language patterns. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Conf. on Soft.-Sci., Tech. & Eng., pages 80-90, 2003.
50. L. K. Dillon, G. Kutty, L. E. Moser, P. M. Melliar-Smith, and Y. S. Ramakrishna. A graphical interval logic for specifying concurrent systems. ACM Trans. on Soft. Eng. & Meth., 3(2):131-165, 1994.
51. L. K. Dillon and R. E. K. Stirewalt. Inference graphs: A computational structure supporting generation of customizable and correct analysis components. IEEE Trans. on Soft. Eng., 29(2):133-150, 2003.
52. J. S. Dong, C. H. Lee, Y F. Li, and H. Wang. Verifying DAML+OIL and beyond in Z/EVES. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Conf. on Soft. Eng. (ICSE), pages 201-210, 2004.
53. N. Dulac, T. Viguier, N. G. Leveson, and M.-A. D. Storey. On the use of visualization in formal requirements specification. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Req. Eng. Conf. (RE), pages 71-80, 2002.
54. M. B. Dwyer, G. S. Avrunin, and J. C. Corbett. Patterns in property specifications for finite-state verification. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Conf. on Soft. Eng. (ICSE), pages 411-420, 1999.
55. S. Easterbrook and M. Chechik. A framework for multi-valued reasoning over inconsistent viewpoints. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Conf. on Soft. Eng. (ICSE), pages 411-420, 2001.
56. S. Easterbrook, E. Yu, J. Aranda, Y. Fan, J. Horkoff, M. Leica, and R. A. Qadir. Do viewpoints lead to better conceptual models? an exploratory case study. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Req. Eng. Conf. (RE), pages 199-208, 2005.
57. C. Ebert. Understanding the product life cycle: Four key requirements engineering techniques. IEEE Soft., 23(3): 19-25, 2006.
58. G. Engels, J. M. Küster, R. Heckel, and L. Groenewegen. A methodology for specifying and analyzing consistency of object-oriented behavioral models. In Proc. of ACM SIGSOFT Found, on Soft. Eng. (FSE), pages 186-195, 2001.
59. A. Evans, J.-M. Bruel, R. France, K. Lano, and B. Rumbpe. Making UML precise. In Proc. of the OOPSLA Work. on Formalizing UML. Why? How? 1998.
60. M. Fagan. Advances in software inspections. IEEE Trans. on Soft. Eng., 12(7):744-751, 1986.
61. A. Fantechi, S. Gnesi, G. Lami, and A. Maccari. Application of linguistic techniques for use case analysis. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Req. Eng. Conf. (RE), pages 157-164, 2002.
62. M. S. Feather. Towards a unified approach to the representation of, and reasoning with, probabilistic risk information about software and its system interface. In Int. Sym. on Soft. Reliab. Eng., pages 391-402, 2004.
63. S. Fickas and M. S. Feather. Requirements monitoring in dynamic environments. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Req. Eng. Conf. (RE), pages 140-147, 1995.
64. A. Finkelstein, editor. The Future of Software Engineering. Proc. of the IEEE Int. Conf. on Soft. Eng. (ICSE), 2000.
65. R. France and B. Rumpe. Model-driven development of complex systems: A research roadmap. In Future of Software Engineering 2007. IEEE-CS Press, 2007.
66. B. Freimut, S. Hartkopf, P. Kaiser, J. Kontio, and W. Kobitzsch. An industrial case study of implementing software risk management. In Proc. of ACM SIGSOFT Found. on Soft. Eng. (FSE), pages 277-287, 2001.
67. A. Fuxman, L. Liu, M. Pistore, M. Roveri, and J. Mylopoulos. Specifying and analyzing early requirements: Some experimental results. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Req. Eng. Conf. (RE), pages 105-114, 2003.
68. R. K. Ganti, P. Jayachandran, T. F. Abdelzaher, and J. A. Stankovic. SATIRE: A softwarwe architecture for smart atTIRE. In Proc. of the Inl. Conf. on Mobile Sys., Appl., and Serv. (Mobisys), pages 110-123, 2006.
69. T. Gilb. Competitive Engineering: A Handbook for System Engineering, Requirements Engineering, and Software Engineering using Planguage. Butterworth-Heinemann, 2005.
70. P. Giorgini, F. Massacci, J. Mylopoulos, and N. Zannone. Modeling security requirements through ownership, permission and delegation. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Req. Eng. Conf. (RE), pages 167-176, 2005.
71. M. Gogolla, P. Ziemann, and S. Kuske. Towards an integrated graph based semantics for UML. In P. Bottoni and M. Minas, editors, Graph Transf. and Vis. Model. Tech., volume 72(3) of ENTCS. Elsevier, 2002.
72. A. L. Goldin and D. M. Berry. Abstfinder: A prototype abstraction finder for natural language text for use in requirements elicitation. J. Auto. Soft. Eng., 4:375-412, 1997.
73. H. Goldsby, D. Knoester, B. H. C. Cheng, P. McKinley, and C. Ofria. Digitally evolving models for dynamically adaptive systems. In IEEE Proceedings of ICSE Workshop on Software Engineering for Adaptive and Self-Managing Systems (SEAMS), Minneapolis, Minnesota, May 2007. (to appear).
74. B. Gonzalez-Baixauli, J. C. S. do Prado Leite, and J. Mylopoulos. Visual variability analysis for goal models. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Req. Eng. Conf. (RE), pages 198-207, 2004.
75. C. A. Gunter, E. L. Gunter, M. Jackson, and P. Zave. A reference model for requirements and specifications. IEEE Soft., 17(3):37-43, 2000.
76. C. B. Haley, R. C. Laney, J. D. Moffett, and B. Nuseibeh. The effect of trust assumptions on the elaboration of security requirements. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Req. Eng. Conf. (RE), pages 102-111, 2004.
77. J. Hall and L. Rapanotti. A reference model for requirements engineering. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Req. Eng. Conf. (RE), pages 181-187, 2003.
78. D. Harel. Statecharts: A visual formalism for complex systems. Sci. Comp. Prog., 8(3):231-274, 1987.
79. J. H. Hausmann, R. Heckel, and G. Taentzer. Detection of conflicting functional requirements in a use case-driven approach. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Conf. on Soft. Eng. (ICSE), pages 105-115, 2002.
80. J. D. Hay and J. M. Atlee. Composing features and resolving interactions. In Proc. of ACM SIGSOFT Found. on Soft. Eng. (FSE), pages 110-119, 2000.
81. J. H. Hayes, A. Dekhtyar, and S. K. Sundaram. Advancing candidate link generation for requirements tracing: The study of methods. IEEE Trans. on Soft. Eng., 32(1):4-19, 2006.
82. C. Heitmeyer. Applying 'Practical' formal methods to the specification and analysis of security properties. In Proc. Information Assurance in Computer Networks (MMM-ACNS 2001), LNCS 2052, St. Petersburg, Russia, May 2001. Springer-Verlag.
83. C. L. Heitmeyer, R. D. Jeffords, and B. G. Labaw. Automated consistency checking of requirements specifications. ACM Trans. on Soft. Eng. & Meth., 5(3):231-261, 1996.
84. C. L. Heitmeyer, J. Kirby, B. G. Labaw, and R. Bharadwaj. SCR*: A toolset for specifying and analyzing software requirements. In Prof. of the Int. Conf. on Comp. Aid. Verf. (CAV), pages 526-531, 1998.
85. J. Herbsleb and A. Mockus. An empirical study of speed and communication in globally distributed software development. IEEE Trans. on Soft. Eng., 29(6):481-494, 2003.
86. J. D. Herbsleb. Global software engineering: The future of socio-technical coordination. In Future of Software Engineering. IEEE-CS Press, 2007.
87. H. In, T. Rodgers, M. Deutsch, and B. Boehm. Applying WinWin to quality requirements: A case study. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Conf. on Soft. Eng. (ICSE), pages 555-564, 2001.
88. C. E. Irwin, T. Levin, J. D. Wilson, D. Shifflett, and B. Pereira. A case study in security requirements engineering for a high assurance system. In Proceedings of the 1st Symposium on Requirements Engineering for Information Security, Indianapolis, Indiana, 2001.
89. D. Jackson. Software Abstractions: Logic, Language, and Analysis. MIT Press, 2006.
90. M. Jackson. Problem Frames. Addison-Wesley, 2003.
91. M. Jackson. What can we expect from program verification? IEEE Computer, 39(10):65-71, 2006.
92. R. Janicki, D. L. Parnas, and J. Zucker. Tabular representations in relational documents. Relational methods in computer science, pages 184-196, 1997.
93. R. Jeffords and C. Heitmeyer. Automatic generation of state invariants from requirements specifications. In Proc. of ACM SIGSOFT Found, on Soft. Eng. (FSE), pages 56-69, 1998.
94. R. D. Jeffords and C. L. Heitmeyer. A strategy for efficiently verifying requirements. In Proc. of ACM SIGSOFT Found, on Soft. Eng. (FSE), pages 28-37, 2003.
95. H. Kaiya and M. Saeki. Using domain ontology as domain knowledge for requirements elicitation. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Req. Eng. Conf. (RE), pages 186-195, 2006.
96. D. B. Knoester, P. K. McKinley, B. Beckmann, and C. A. Ofria. Evolution of leader election in populations of self-replicating digital organisms. Technical Report MSU-CSE-06-35, Computer Science and Engineering, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan, December 2006.
97. S. Konrad and B. H. Cheng. Facilitating the construction of specification pattern-based properties. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Req. Eng. Conf. (RE), pages 329-338, 2005.
98. S. Konrad and B. H. C. Cheng. Real-time specification patterns. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE05), pages 372-381, St Louis, MO, USA, May 2005.
99. S. Konrad, B. H. C. Cheng, and L. A. Campbell. Object analysis patterns for embedded systems. IEEE Trans. on Soft. Eng., 30(12):970-992, 2004.
100. J. Kramer and J. Magee. Self-managed systems: An architectural challenge. In Future of Software Engineering. IEEE-CS Press, 2007.
101. S. Krishnamurthi, M. C. Tschantz, L. A. Meyerovich, and K. Fisler. Verification and change-impact analysis of access-control policies. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Conf. on Soft. Eng. (ICSE), pages 196-205, 2005.
102. T. Kuhn. The Nature and Necessity of Scientific Revolutions. University of Chicago Press, 1962. Book chapter transcribed by Andy Blunden in 1998; proofed and corrected March 2005.
103. S. Kulkarni and K. Biyani. Correctness of component-based adaptation. In Proc. of the Int. Sym. on Component-based Software Engineering (CBSE04), May 2004.
104. S. Lauesen. COTS tenders and integration requirements. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Req. Eng. Conf. (RE), pages 166-175, 2004.
105. E. Letier, J. Kramer, J. Magee, and S. Uchitel. Fluent temporal logic for discrete-time event-based models. In Proc. of ACM SIGSOFT Found. on Soft. Eng. (FSE), pages 70-79, 2005.
106. E. Letier and A. van Lamsweerde. Agent-based tactics for goal-oriented requirements elaboration. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Conf. on Soft. Eng. (ICSE), pages 83-93, 2002.
107. E. Letier and A. van Lamsweerde. Deriving operational software specifications from system goals. In Proc. of ACM SIGSOFT Found. on Soft. Eng. (FSE), pages 119-128, 2002.
108. E. Letier and A. van Lamsweerde. Reasoning about partial goal satisfaction for requirements and design engineering. In Proc. of ACM SIGSOFT Found. on Soft. Eng. (FSE), pages 53-62, 2004.
109. N. G. Leveson. Intent specifications: An approach to building human-centered specifications. IEEE Trans. on Soft. Eng., 26(1):15-35, 2000.
110. S. Liaskos, Alexei, Y Yu, E. Yu, and J. Mylopoulos. On goal-based variability acquisition and analysis. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Req. Eng. Conf. (RE), pages 76-85, 2006.
111. S. Liaskos, A. Lapouchnian, Y. Wang, Y. Yu, and S. Easterbrook. Configuring common personal software: a requirements-driven approach. In RE '05: Proceedings of the 13th IEEE International Conference on Requirements Engineering (RE'05), pages 9-18, Washington, DC, USA, 2005. IEEE Computer Society.
112. W. J. Lloyd, M. B. Rosson, and J. D. Arthur. Effectiveness of elicitation techniques in distributed requirements engineering. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Req. Eng. Conf. (RE), pages 311-318, 2002.
113. R. Lutz and I. C. Mikulski. Operational anomalies as a cause of safety-critical requirements evolution. J. of Sys. and Soft., pages 155-161, 2003.
114. R. Lutz, A. Patterson-Hine, S. Nelson, C. R. Frost, D. Tal, and R. Harris. Using obstacle analysis to identify contingency requirements on an unpiloted aerial vehicle. Req. Eng. J., 12(1):41-54, 2006.
115. J. Magee, N. Pryce, D. Giannakopoulou, and J. Kramer. Graphical animation of behavior models. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Conf. on Soft. Eng. (ICSE), pages 499-508, 2000.
116. N. Maiden and S. Robertson. Developing use cases and scenarios in the requirements process. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Conf. on Soft. Eng. (ICSE), pages 561-570, 2005.
117. N. Maiden and S. Robertson. Integrating creativity into requirements processes: Experiences with an air traffic management system. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Req. Eng. Conf. (RE), pages 105-116, 2005.
118. A. Marcus and J. Maletic. Recovering documentation-to-source-code traceability links using latent semantic indexing. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Conf. on Soft. Eng. (ICSE), pages 125-135, 2003.
119. J. McDermott and C. Fox. Using abuse case models for security requirements analysis. In Proc. of the IEEE Comp. Sec. Appl. Conf., 1999.
120. W. E. McUmber and B. H. Cheng. A general framework for formalizing UML with formal languages. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Conf. on Soft. Eng. (ICSE), pages 433-442, 2001.
121. D. L. Moody, G. Sindre, T. Brasethvik, and A. Solvberg. Evaluating the quality of information models: Empirical testing of a conceptual model quality framework. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Conf. on Soft. Eng. (ICSE), pages 295-307, 2003.
122. A. Moreira, A. Rashid, and J. Ara-jo. Multi-dimensional separation of concerns in requirements engineering. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Req. Eng. Conf. (RE), pages 285-296, 2005.
123. C. Nentwich, W. Emmerich, A. Finkelstein, and E. Ellmer. Flexible consistency checking. ACM Trans. on Soft. Eng. & Meth., 12(1):28-63, 2003.
124. R. Neville, A. Sutcliffe, and W.-C. Chang. Optimizing system requirements with genetic algorithms. In IEEE World Congress on Computational Intelligence, pages 495-499, May 2002.
125. J. Niu, J. Atlee, and N. Day. Template semantics for model-based systems. IEEE Trans. on Soft. Eng., 29(10):866-882, 2003.
126. L. Northrup, P. Feiler, R. P. Gabriel, J. Goodenough, R. Linger, T. Longstaff, R. Kazman, M. Klein, D. Schmidt, K. Sullivan, and K. Wallnau. Ultra-Large-Scale Systems: The Software Challenge of the Future. Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon, 2006.
127. B. Nuseibeh and S. Easterbrook. Requirements engineering: a roadmap. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Conf. on Soft. Eng. (ICSE), pages 35-46, 2000.
128. B. Nuseibeh, J. Kramer, and A. Finkelstein. Viewpoints: meaningful relationships are difficult! In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Conf. on Soft. Eng. (ICSE), pages 676-683, 2003.
129. S. P. Overmyer, B. Lavoie, and O. Rambow. Conceptual modeling through linguistic analysis using LIDA. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Conf. on Soft. Eng. (ICSE), pages 401-410, 2001.
130. D. L. Parnas. Software engineering programmes are not computer science programmes. Ann. Soft. Eng., 6(1):19-37, 1999.
131. D. L. Parnas and J. Madey. Functional documents for computer systems. Sci. of Comp. Prog., 25(1):41-61, 1995.
132. D. L. Parnas and D. M. Weiss. Active design reviews: principles and practices. J. Sys. Soft., 7(4):259-265, 1987.
133. Y. Pisan. Extending requirement specifications using analogy. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Conf. on Soft. Eng. (ICSE), pages 70-76, 2000.
134. K. Pohl and T. Weyer. Documenting Variability in Requirements Artefacts. Software Product Line Engineering, chapter 5. Springer, 2005.
135. A. Porter and L. Votta. Comparing detection methods for software requirements inspections: A replication using professional subjects. Empir. Soft. Eng., 3(4):355-379, 1998.
136. C. Potts. Metaphors of intent. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Req. Eng. Conf. (RE), pages 31-39, 2001.
137. C. Potts, K. Takahashi, and A. Antón. Inquiry-based requirements analysis. IEEE Soft., 11(2):21-32, 1994.
138. S. T. Redwine, Jr. and W. E. Riddle. Software technology maturation. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Conf. on Soft. Eng. (ICSE), pages 1989-200, May 1985.
139. B. Regnell, L. Karlsson, and M. Host. An analytical model for requirements selection quality evaluation in product software development. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Req. Eng. Conf. (RE), pages 254-263, 2003.
140. M.-O. Reiser and M. Weber. Managing highly complex product families with multi-level feature trees. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Req. Eng. Conf. (RE), pages 146-155, 2006.
141. S. Robertson and J. Robertson. Mastering the Requirements Process. Addison-Wesley, 1999.
142. W. N. Robinson. Monitoring web service requirements. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Req. Eng. Conf. (RE), pages 65-74, 2003.
143. W. N. Robinson, S. D. Pawlowski, and V. Volkov. Requirements interaction management. ACM Comp. Sur., 35(2):132-190, 2003.
144. C. Rolland and N. Prakash. Matching ERP system functionality to customer requirements. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Req. Eng. Conf. (RE), pages 66-75, 2001.
145. K. Ryan. The role of natural language in requirements engineering. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Symposium on Requirements Engineering, pages 240-242, San Diego, CA, 1993. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos, CA.
146. M. Sabetzadeh and S. Easterbrook. Traceability in view-point merging: a model management perspective. In Proc. of the Int. Work. on Trace. in Emerg. Forms of Soft. Eng., pages 44-49, 2005.
147. M. Sabetzadeh and S. Easterbrook. View merging in the presence of incompleteness and inconsistency. Req. Eng. J., 11(3):174-193, 2006.
148. T. Savor and R. Seviora. An approach to automatic detection of software failures in realtime systems. In Proc. IEEE Real-Time Tech. and Appl. Sym., pages 136-147, 1997.
149. P. Sawyer, P. Rayson, and K. Cosh. Shallow knowledge as an aid to deep understanding in early phase requirements engineering. IEEE Trans. on Soft. Eng., 31(11):969-981, 2005.
150. K. Schmid. The product line mapping approach to defining and structuring product portfolios. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Req. Eng. Conf. (RE), pages 219-226, 2002.
151. R. Settimi, E. Berezhanskaya, O. BenKhadra, S. Christina, and J. Cleland-Huang. Goal-centric traceability for managing non-functional requirements. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Conf. on Soft. Eng. (ICSE), pages 362-371, 2005.
152. H. Sharp, A. Finkelstein, and G. Galal. Stakeholder identification in the requirements engineering process. In Proc. of the 10th Int. Work. on Datab. & Exp. Sys. Appl., pages 387-391, 1999.
153. M. Shaw. "Self-Healing": Softening precision to avoid brittleness. In Work. on Self-Healing Sys. (WOSS). November 2002. Position paper.
154. M. Shaw. What makes good research in software engineering? Int. Jour. of Soft. Tools for Tech. Trans., 4(1):1-7, 2002.
155. A. Silva. Requirements, domain and specifications: A viewpoint-based approach to requirements engineering. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Conf. on Soft. Eng. (ICSE), pages 94-104, 2002.
156. B. G. Silverman, M. Johns, J. Cornwell, and K. O'Brien. Human behavior models for agents in simulators and games: Part I: enabling science with PMFserv. Presence: Teleoper. Virtual Environ., 15(2):139-162, 2006.
157. G. Sindre and A. Opdahl. Templates for misuse case description. In Proc. of the Int. Work. on Req. Eng,: Found, for Soft. Qual., pages 125-136, 2001.
158. T. Sreemani and J. M. Atlee. Feasibility of model checking software requirements. In Conf. on Comp. Assur., pages 77-88. National Institute of Standards and Technology, 1996.
159. A. Sutcliffe, W.-C. Chang, and R. Neville. Evolutionary requirements analysis. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Req. Eng. Conf. (RE), pages 264-273, 2003.
160. A. Sutcliffe, S. Fickas, and M. M. Sohlberg. PC-RE a method for personal and context requirements engineering with some experience. Req. Eng. J., 11 (3):1-17, 2006.
161. A. Sutcliffe and N. Maiden. The domain theory for requirements engineering. IEEE Trans. on Soft. Eng., 24(3):174-196, 1998.
162. F. Swiderski and W. Snyder. Threat Modeling. Microsoft Press, Redmond, WA, USA, 2004.
163. A. Taleghani and J. M. Atlee. Semantic variations among UML statemachines. In ACM/IEEE Int. Conf. on Model Driven Eng. Lang. and Sys., pages 245-259, 2006.
164. J. M. Thompson, M. P. E. Heimdahl, and S. P. Miller. Specification-based prototyping for embedded systems. In Proc. of ACM SIGSOFT Found, on Soft. Eng. (FSE), pages 163-179, 1999.
165. S. Uchitel and M. Chechik. Merging partial behavioural models. In Proc. of ACM SIGSOFT Found. on Soft. Eng. (FSE), pages 43-52, 2004.
166. S. Uchitel, J. Kramer, and J. Magee. Negative scenarios for implied scenario elicitation. In Proc. of ACM SIGSOFT Found. on Soft. Eng. (FSE), pages 109-118, 2002.
167. S. Uchitel, J. Kramer, and J. Magee. Behaviour model elaboration using partial labelled transition systems. In Proc. of ACM SIGSOFT Found. on Soft. Eng. (FSE), pages 19-27, 2003.
168. S. Uchitel, J. Kramer, and J. Magee. Synthesis of behavioral models from scenarios. IEEE Trans. on Soft. Eng., 29(2):99-115, 2003.
169. S. Uchitel, J. Kramer, and J. Magee. Incremental elaboration of scenario-based specifications and behavior models using implied scenarios. ACM Trans. on Soft. Eng. & Metk, 13(1):37-85, 2004.
170. H. T. Van, A. van Lamsweerde, P. Massonet, and C. Ponsard. Goal-oriented requirements animation. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Req. Eng. Conf. (RE), pages 218-228, 2004.
171. W. M. P. van der Aalst, A. H. M. ter Hofstede, B. Kiepuszewski, and A. P. Barros. Workflow patterns. Distributed and Parallel Databases, 14(1):5-51, 2003.
172. A. van Lamsweerde. Requirements engineering in the year 00: a research perspective. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Conf. on Soft. Eng. (ICSE), pages 5-19, 2000.
173. A. van Lamsweerde. Goal-oriented requirements engineering: a guided tour. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Req. Eng. Conf. (RE), pages 249-263, 2001.
174. A. van Lamsweerde. Elaborating security requirements by construction of intentional anti-models. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Conf. on Soft. Eng. (ICSE), pages 148-157, 2004.
175. A. van Lamsweerde and E. Letier. Handling obstacles in goal-oriented requirements engineering. IEEE Trans. on Soft. Eng., 26(10):978-1005, 2000.
176. K. S. Wasson. A case study in systematic improvement of language for requirements. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Req. Eng. Conf. (RE), pages 6-15, 2006.
177. K. S. Wasson, K. N. Schmid, R. R. Lutz, and J. C. Knight. Using occurrence properties of defect report data to improve requirements. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Req. Eng. Conf. (RE), pages 253-262, 2005.
178. A. Wassyng, M. Lawford, and X. Hu. Timing tolerances in safety-critical software. In Proc. of the Int. Sym. of Form. Meth. Eur., pages 157-172, 2005.
179. M. Weber and J. Weisbrod. Requirements engineering in automotive development experiences and challenges. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Req. Eng. Conf. (RE), pages 331-340, 2002.
180. M. Weiss and B. Esfandiari. On feature interactions among web services. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Conf. on Web Serv. (ICWS), pages 88-95, 2004.
181. J. Whittle, J. Saboo, and R. Kwan. From scenarios to code: An air traffic control case study. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Conf. on Soft. Eng. (ICSE), pages 490-497, 2003.
182. J. Whittle and J. Schumann. Generating statechart designs from scenarios. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Conf. on Soft. Eng. (ICSE), pages 314-323, 2000.
183. E. Yu. Agent orientation as a modelling paradigm. Wirtschaftsinformatik, 43(3): 123-132, April 2001.
184. P. Zave. Feature interactions and formal specifications in telecommunications. IEEE Comp., 26(8):20-29, 1993.
185. P. Zave. Classification of research efforts in requirements engineering. ACM Comp. Sur., 29(4):315-321, 1997.
186. J. Zhang and B. H. C. Cheng. Specifying adaptation semantics. In Proc. of the Work. on Architecting Depend. Sys. (WADS), pages 1-7, 2005.
187. Z. Zhou, J. Zhang, P. K. McKinley, and B. H. C. Cheng. TA-LTL: Specifying adaptation timing properties in autonomic systems. In Proc. of the IEEE Work. on Eng. of Auton. Sys. (EASe), 2006.