text stringlengths 171 3.14k | source stringclasses 1
value |
|---|---|
Requirements Contracts: Definition, Design, and Analysis Ivan J. Jureta Fonds de la Recherche Scientifique-FNRS, Brussels, Belgium, Universit´ e de Namur, Belgium, STEMCELL Technologies Inc., Vancouver, Canada ivan@ivanjureta. com,http://ivanjureta. com April 30, 2021 Abstract What are the necessary and sufficient conditio... | 2104.14110v1.pdf |
6 Solution 13 6. 1 Departure............................... 14 6. 2 Network................................ 14 6. 3 Nodes and Links........................... 14 6. 4 Roles.................................. 15 6. 5 Roles and Parties........................... 15 6. 6 Right to Request........................... 15 6. 7 ... | 2104.14110v1.pdf |
fulfil. It must say why a system is needed, based on current or foreseen condi-tions” [54]. Brooks claimed that “[the] hardest single part of building a software system is deciding precisely what to build” [11]. Zave wrote that “Requirements engineering is the branch of software engineering concerned with the real-world... | 2104.14110v1.pdf |
the software-to-be becomes an assumption” [59]. A goal for van Lamsweerde is exactly what Jackson called requirements (see above): “A goal is an objective the system under consideration should achieve. Goal formulations thus refer to intended properties to be ensured; they are optative statements as opposed to indicati... | 2104.14110v1.pdf |
if my requirement is satisfied, and you will if there is something you get out of it, i. e., there is some transfer of value to you for satisfying that requirement. Finally, you should be confident enough that you will be able to satisfy my requirement through effort that you can invest, given the value that you expect. T... | 2104.14110v1.pdf |
and economic ones with it. One of the interesting, and I believe constructive consequences is that we need to have a broader and richer discussion in Re-quirements Engineering research, one which does not set aside economic and contractual relationships and constraints that affect so many parameters of how the engineeri... | 2104.14110v1.pdf |
This important and general conceptualisation of the aim in Requirements Engineering is most clearly formulated in Zave & Jackson's “Four dark corners of requirements engineering” [64] mentioned in Section 2. Their view, denoted ZJ hereafter, is echoed in some of the most influential research in the field, which both prec... | 2104.14110v1.pdf |
not matter in the Default Requirements Problem, or that there is a lot to say about that problem even without considering the two other dimensions. Neither of these positions is satisfactory. To see why, we need to consider three central, recurrent questions in Requirements Engineering: 1. How to decide the relative im... | 2104.14110v1.pdf |
website and mobile application development. The presentation con-tained slides stating that Accenture's staff consisted of '800 [e]xperts' who comprised '[t]he best talent in the world. ' The presentation also stated '[w]e've got the skills you need to win' and that Accenture would 'put the right team on the ground [fro... | 2104.14110v1.pdf |
prioritise requirements which may be more difficult to satisfy, but could generate higher benefits, while they may think about this in another way if they can claim some of these benefits, as in case B. In short, we cannot do requirements prioritisation while ignoring the con-tract. If you do, as Hertz did, you take on sub... | 2104.14110v1.pdf |
to confer the role of requirements to propositions. Another contract may ask that some evidence should be given for the acceptability of requirements, and it would have to define what counts as evidence. A third contract might say that any proposition given up to a specific date can be given the role of requirement, but ... | 2104.14110v1.pdf |
5. 3 Rationale for Economic Relationships It may seem from the above that there are two ideas that I am tying to the con-cept of requirement, one being that there must be a contract, and the other that there must be some economic relationships, some expectations and exchange of value between the parties involved. These... | 2104.14110v1.pdf |
Finally, then, we do not have promises going in one direction only. Those asking for pto be satisfied need to promise, at the very least, that value will be given to those who promise to satisfy p, i. e., to perceive that satisfying pis a requirement for them. But don't we have promises when, for example, I ask you to g... | 2104.14110v1.pdf |
6. 1 Departure This approach to defining how a proposition gets to be called a requirement is different from related work mentioned so far in this paper. There is no need to be concerned with grammatical mood, speech acts, or where the proposition appears in the refinement tree. The concept of requirement is separated fro... | 2104.14110v1.pdf |
node describes: expectations to be had, actions to be executed, or outcomes to occur. 6. 4 Roles Each expectation, action, and outcome is associated with a role. Roles are placeholders for parties who will fill them when an actual Requirements Contract is enacted. Moreover, roles shown in Figure 6. 5 are merely one way ... | 2104.14110v1.pdf |
Expectation, right, obligation, action, or outcome V VQ V VV Q QVVVM Q Q QMM MMQ Q Symbols Necessary for Expect value from requirements being satisfied ERAccept the Right to Request Rt RAccept the Obligation to remunerate satisfaction Ot RS Accept the Obligation to remunerate validation Ot RVKR, RRExercise the Right to... | 2104.14110v1.pdf |
6. 8 Obligation to Validate Same applies to validation, in that one needs to expect value from doing it ( EV) and know at least some of what they are getting themselves into (the right to request needs to be exercised), in order to accept the corresponding obligation (Ot V). In addition, to accept the obligation to sat... | 2104.14110v1.pdf |
SP, and the product itself PP. (The difference between SPand PPis that the former is the blueprint of the thing, and the latter the thing itself. ) KP,RP,SP,PPare the outputs of the investment to satisfy the requirements. In order to discharge the obligation to validate the product ( A(Ot V) ), the party who accepted to... | 2104.14110v1.pdf |
There is a party which expects value EPbecause it invests its own resources to satisfy requirements by designing, making, and delivering a product to the party which had requirements in the first place. There is a party which expects value EVbecause it invests its own resources in evaluating if the product satisfies requ... | 2104.14110v1.pdf |
Assumption 2 Each party in the contract will make decisions which it per-ceives as maximising the value that she will actually receive after exercising the rights and discharging the obligations that she accepted by accepting the Require-ments Contract. The objective functions of the parties, provided that there are th... | 2104.14110v1.pdf |
The party believes that each incremental unit of expected cost adds more than that in expected benefits: there is a gain to be made by taking on more expected costs, that is, the following is true: ∆E(BR) ∆E(CR)>1 (17) If so, then maximising expected value means deciding to invest more, up to some limit which is private... | 2104.14110v1.pdf |
Due to Equation 4, we can rewrite this as follows: ∆E(BR) ∆(E(BP) +E(BV))<1,∆E(BP) ∆E(CP)>1,and∆E(BV) ∆E(CV)>1 (22) The above shows a conflict of interest: interests of the Maker and Evaluator are to increase costs in order to increase their benefits more, while this isn't in the interest of the Requester. This only scra... | 2104.14110v1.pdf |
FGH A 0+ +--ΔE(BR) ΔE(CR) Decrease of expected cost goes together with decrease in expected benefits Reduction of expected cost goes together with increase in expected benefits Increase of expected cost goes together with increase in expected benefots Decrease of expected cost goes together with increase in expected bene... | 2104.14110v1.pdf |
Hunt, Ron Jeffries, Jon Kern, Brian Marick, Robert C. Martin, Steve Mel-lor, Ken Schwaber, Jeff Sutherland, and Dave Thomas. Manifesto for agile software development, 2001. [5] Patrik Berander and Anneliese Andrews. Requirements prioritization. In Engineering and managing software requirements, pages 69-94. Springer, 200... | 2104.14110v1.pdf |
[16] Anne Dardenne, Axel Van Lamsweerde, and Stephen Fickas. Goal-directed requirements acquisition. Science of computer programming, 20(1):3-50, 1993. [17] Robert Darimont and Axel Van Lamsweerde. Formal refinement patterns for goal-driven requirements elaboration. ACM SIGSOFT Software Engi-neering Notes, 21(6):179-190... | 2104.14110v1.pdf |
[28] Constance L Heitmeyer, Ralph D Jeffords, and Bruce G Labaw. Automated consistency checking of requirements specifications. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology (TOSEM), 5(3):231-261, 1996. [29] Andrea Herrmann and Maya Daneva. Requirements prioritization based on benefit and cost prediction: An ag... | 2104.14110v1.pdf |
[39] Ivan J Jureta, Alexander Borgida, Neil A Ernst, and John Mylopoulos. The requirements problem for adaptive systems. ACM Transactions on Management Information Systems (TMIS), 5(3):1-33, 2014. [40] Ivan J Jureta and St´ ephane Faulkner. Clarifying goal models. In Tutori-als, posters, panels and industrial contribut... | 2104.14110v1.pdf |
[51] Balasubramaniam Ramesh and Matthias Jarke. Toward reference models for requirements traceability. Software Engineering, IEEE Transactions on, 27(1):58-93, 2001. [52] Norman Riegel and Joerg Doerr. A systematic literature review of require-ments prioritization criteria. In International Working Conference on Re-qui... | 2104.14110v1.pdf |
[64] Pamela Zave and Michael Jackson. Four dark corners of requirements en-gineering. ACM transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology (TOSEM), 6(1):1-30, 1997. 29 | 2104.14110v1.pdf |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.