Handling inconsistency in distributed software requirements specifications based on prioritized merging

Fundamenta Informaticae

Volumn 91, Issue 3-4, 2009, Pages 631-670

  Mu, Kedian ^a   Liu, Weiru ^b   Jin, Zhi ^c   Lu, Ruqian ^d   Yue, Anbu ^b   Bell, David ^b  

^a PEKING UNIVERSITY   (China)

^b QUEEN'S UNIVERSITY BELFAST   (United Kingdom)

^c Peking University   (China)

^d CHINESE ACADEMY OF SCIENCES   (China)

Author keywords

Inconsistency; Local Prioritization; Prioritized Merging; Requirements Engineering

Indexed keywords

CONSISTENT SUBSET; DISTRIBUTED DEVELOPMENT; DISTRIBUTED SOFTWARE; INCONSISTENCY; INCONSISTENCY HANDLING; LOCAL PRIORITIZATION; PRIORITIZATION; PRIORITIZED MERGING; PRIORITY VECTOR; RELATIVE PRIORITIES; REQUIREMENTS SPECIFICATIONS; SOFTWARE REQUIREMENTS SPECIFICATIONS;

COMPUTER SOFTWARE; MERGING; REQUIREMENTS ENGINEERING;

SPECIFICATIONS;

EID: 67651236914     PISSN: 01692968     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3233/FI-2009-0062     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. CHAOS: Software Development Report by the Standish Group. Avaiable online at http://www.standishgroup.com/chaos.html (1995).
2. Ibanez, M.: European user survey analysis. Tech. rep. ESI report TR95104. Euro- pean Software Institute, Zamudio, Spain. http://www.esi.es (1996).
3. Davis, A.M.: Software Requirements:Objects,Functions, and States. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:PTR Prentice Hall (1993).
4. Leffingwell, D.: Calculating the return on investment from more effective require- ments management. American Programmer 10 (1997).
5. Leffingwell, D. Widrig, D.: Managing Software Requirements: A Use Case Approach. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley (2003)
6. Finkelsetin, A., J.Kramer, B.Nuseibeh, L.Finkelstein, M.Goedick, "Viewpoints: A Framework for Integrating Multiple Perspectives in System Development", International Journal of Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering, 2(1):31-58,1992.
7. Kotonya, G., I.Sommerville: Viewpoints for requirements definition. IEE Software Eng.Journal 7 (1992) 375-387.
8. Andrade, J., Ares, J., Garcia, R., Pazos, J., Rodriguez, S., Silva, A.: A methodolog ical framework for viewpoint-oriented conceptual modeling. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 30 (2004) 282-294.
9. Nuseibeh, B., Kramer, J., Finkelstein, A.: Viewpoints: meaningful relationships are difficult! In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Software Engineering. IEEE CS Press (2003) 676-681.
10. Gervasi, V., D.Zowghi: Reasoning about inconsistencies in natural language re quirements. ACM Transaction on Software Engineering and Methodologies 14 (2005) 277-330.
11. Hunter, A., B.Nuseibeh: Managing inconsistent specification. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology 7 (1998) 335-367.
12. Zowghi, D., Gervasi, V.: On the interplay between consistency, completeness, and correctness in requirements evolution. Information and Software Technology 45 (2003) 993-1009.
13. Nuseibeh, B., Easterbrook, S., Russo, A.: Leveraging inconsistency in software development. IEEE Computer 33 (2000) 24-29.
14. Nuseibeh, B., S.Easterbrook, A.Russo: Making inconsistency respectable in software development. Journal of Systems and Software 58 (2001) 171-180.
15. Gabbay, D., Hunter, A.: Making inconsistency respectable 2:meta-level handling of inconsistent data. In: ECSQARU93,LNCS. Volume 747. Springer (1993) 129-136.
16. Finkelstein, A., Gabbay, D., Hunter, A., Kramer, J., Nuseibeh, B.: Inconsistency handling in multiperspective specifications. IEEE Trans. on Software Engineering 20 (1994) 569-578.
17. Wiegers, K.: First things first:prioritizing requirements. Software Development 7 (1999) 48-53.
18. Davis, A.: Just Enough Requirements Management:Where Software Development Meets Marking. Dorset House (2005)
19. Delgrande, J., Dubois, D., Lang, J.: Iterated revision as priorited merging. In: KR 06. (2006) 210-220.
20. Yue, A., Liu, W., Hunter, A.: Approaches to constructiing a stratified merged knowledge base. In: EC-SQARU2007,LNCS. (2007).
21. Wiegers, K.E.: Software Requirements,2nd ed. Microsoft Press (2003).
22. Karlsson, J., Ryan, K.: A cost-value approach for prioritizing requirements. IEEE Software 14 (1997) 67-74.
23. Pardee, J.: To Satisfy and Delight Your Customer:How to Manage for Customer Value. New York:Dorset House Publishing (1996).
24. Spanoudakis, G., Finkelstein, A., Till, D.: Overlaps in requirements engineering. Automated Software Engineering 6 (1999) 171-198.
25. Benferhat, S., Cayrol, C., Dobois, D., Lang, J., Prade, H.: Inconsistency manage- ment and prioritized syntax-based entailment. In: Proceedings of IJCAI93. (1993) 640-647.
26. Brewka, G.: A rank-based description language for qualitative preferences. In: Proc. of ECAI'04. (2004) 303-307.
27. Brewka, G.: Preferred subtheories: an extended logical framework for default rea- soning. In: Proc. of IJCAI 1989. (1989) 1043-1048.
28. Nebel, B.: Belief revision and default reasoning: Syntax-based approaches. In: Proc. of KR91. (1991) 417-428.
29. Lehmann, D.: Another perspective on default reasoning. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence 15 (1995) 61-82.
30. Mu, K., Jin, Z.: Identifying acceptable common proposals for handling inconsistent software requirements. In: FORTE2007, LNCS4754. (2007) 296-308.
31. Lang, J.: From logical preference representation to combinatorial vote. In: Proceedings of 8th International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning. Morgan Kaufmann (2002) 277-288.
32. Mu, K., Liu, W., Jin, Z., Lu, R., Yue, A., Bell, D.: A merging-based approach to handling inconsistency in locally prioritized software requirements. In: KSEM2007, LNCS4798. (2007)10-114.
33. Lin, J.: Integration of weighted knowledge bases. Artificial Intelligence 83 (1996) 363-378.
34. Easterbrook, S., M.Chechik: A framework for multi-valued reasoning over inconsistent viewpoints. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE'01), Toronto, Canada (2001) 411-420.
35. Barragáns Martínez, A. B, J. P. Arias, A.F. Vilas, J.G. Duque, M.L. Nores, R.P.D. Redondo, Y.B. Fernández: On the interplay between inconsistency and incompleteness in multi-perspective requirements specification. Information and Software Technology 50(2008) 296-321.
36. Ryan, L. O.: "Efficient algorithms for clause learning sat solvers",Masters Thesis, Simon Fraser University, 2004.
37. Bird. R., and Hinze, R.:"Functional pearl:Trouble shared is trouble halved", Proc. of the 2003 ACM SIGPLAN Workshop on Haskell, pp. 1-6, 2003.
38. Grover, C., Brew, C., Moens, M., and Manandhar,S.: "Priority union and generalization in dsicourse grammar". Proc. of the 32nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 17-24, 1994.
39. Malouf,R.: Maximal consistent subsets,Computational Linguistics, vol.33, no.2,pp.153-160,2007.
40. Robinson, W.N.: Negotiation behavior during requirements specification. In: ICSE1990, 268-276.
41. Robinson, W.N., Volkov, V.: Supporting the negotiation life cycle. Communications of the ACM 41 (1998) 95-102
42. Wooldridge, M., and Parsons, S.: Languages for negotiation. In Proceedings of ECAI2000, 393-397. 2000.
43. Sierra,C., Jennings, N., Noriega, P., and Parsons, S.: A framework for argumentation-based negotiation. In Intelligent Agents IV (LNAI Vol. 1365)(1998)177-192.