Search Results Heading

MBRLSearchResults

mbrl.module.common.modules.added.book.to.shelf
Title added to your shelf!
View what I already have on My Shelf.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to add the title to your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
    Done
    Filters
    Reset
  • Discipline
      Discipline
      Clear All
      Discipline
  • Is Peer Reviewed
      Is Peer Reviewed
      Clear All
      Is Peer Reviewed
  • Reading Level
      Reading Level
      Clear All
      Reading Level
  • Content Type
      Content Type
      Clear All
      Content Type
  • Year
      Year
      Clear All
      From:
      -
      To:
  • More Filters
      More Filters
      Clear All
      More Filters
      Item Type
    • Is Full-Text Available
    • Subject
    • Publisher
    • Source
    • Donor
    • Language
    • Place of Publication
    • Contributors
    • Location
10,730 result(s) for "Requirements engineering."
Sort by:
A systematic literature review of requirements engineering education
Requirements engineering (RE) has established itself as a core software engineering discipline. It is well acknowledged that good RE leads to higher quality software and considerably reduces the risk of failure or budget-overspending of software development projects. It is of vital importance to train future software engineers in RE and educate future requirements engineers to adequately manage requirements in various projects. To this date, there exists no central concept of what RE education shall comprise. To lay a foundation, we report on a systematic literature review of the field and provide a systematic map describing the current state of RE education. Doing so allows us to describe how the educational landscape has changed over the last decade. Results show that only a few established author collaborations exist and that RE education research is predominantly published in venues other than the top RE research venues (i.e., in venues other than the RE conference and journal). Key trends in RE instruction of the past decade include involvement of real or realistic stakeholders, teaching predominantly elicitation as an RE activity, and increasing student factors such as motivation or communication skills. Finally, we discuss open opportunities in RE education, such as training for security requirements and supply chain risk management, as well as developing a pedagogical foundation grounded in evidence of effective instructional approaches.
Empirical research on requirements quality: a systematic mapping study
Research has repeatedly shown that high-quality requirements are essential for the success of development projects. While the term “quality” is pervasive in the field of requirements engineering and while the body of research on requirements quality is large, there is no meta-study of the field that overviews and compares the concrete quality attributes addressed by the community. To fill this knowledge gap, we conducted a systematic mapping study of the scientific literature. We retrieved 6905 articles from six academic databases, which we filtered down to 105 relevant primary studies. The primary studies use empirical research to explicitly define, improve, or evaluate requirements quality. We found that empirical research on requirements quality focuses on improvement techniques, with very few primary studies addressing evidence-based definitions and evaluations of quality attributes. Among the 12 quality attributes identified, the most prominent in the field are ambiguity, completeness, consistency, and correctness. We identified 111 sub-types of quality attributes such as “template conformance” for consistency or “passive voice” for ambiguity. Ambiguity has the largest share of these sub-types. The artefacts being studied are mostly referred to in the broadest sense as “requirements”, while little research targets quality attributes in specific types of requirements such as use cases or user stories. Our findings highlight the need to conduct more empirically grounded research defining requirements quality, using more varied research methods, and addressing a more diverse set of requirements types.
Strategies to manage quality requirements in agile software development: a multiple case study
Agile methods can deliver software that fulfills customer needs rapidly and continuously. Quality requirements (QRs) are important in this regard; however, detailed studies on how companies applying agile methods to manage QRs are limited, as are studies on the rationale for choosing specific QR management practices and related challenges. The aim of this study was to address why practitioners manage QRs as they do and what challenges they face. We also analyzed how existing practices mitigate some of the found challenges. Lastly, we connect the contextual elements of the companies with their practices and challenges. We conducted 36 interviews with practitioners from four companies of varying sizes. Since each company operates in different domains, comparing QR management strategies and related challenges in different contexts was possible. We found that the companies apply proactive, reactive, and interactive strategies to manage QRs. Additionally, our study revealed 40 challenges in six categories that companies applying agile methods may face in QR management. We also identified nine contextual elements that affect QR management practice choices and which, importantly, can explain many related challenges. Based on these findings, we constructed a theoretical model about the connection between context, QR management practices, and challenges. Practitioners in similar contexts can learn from the practices identified in this study. Our preliminary theoretical model can help other practitioners identify what challenges they can expect to face in QR management in different developmental contexts as well as which practices to apply to mitigate these challenges.
Recommendation systems-based software requirements elicitation process—a systematic literature review
Requirements elicitation is one of the fundamental sub-processes of requirements engineering which is used to find the needs of stakeholders. There are several activities in this sub-process, i.e., identification of stakeholders and their requirements, software requirements prioritization, and analysis. Recommendation systems have been intertwined with the requirements elicitation process to predict the stakeholders’ requirements based on their preferences for functional and non-functional requirements. A number of systematic literature reviews (SLRs) have been carried out in the area of requirements elicitation. These SLRs do not support the applications of the recommendation systems during the requirements elicitation process. To deal with this issue, we present an SLR on recommendation systems-based software requirements elicitation processes, from 2009 to 2022, undertaking four research questions: (a) What are the different activities of the software requirements elicitation methods? (b) What are the applications of recommendation systems in the identification of the software requirements? (c) How the recommendation systems can facilitate the identification of stakeholders in the requirements elicitation process? (d) What are the ways to automate the selection of requirements elicitation techniques? The aim of this study is to identify the research gaps in the area of recommendation systems-based requirements elicitation processes and suggest future research directions.
Requirements management in DevOps environments: a multivocal mapping study
Attention is currently being focused on DevOps, which aims to reduce software development time by means of close collaboration between the development and operations areas. However, little effort has been made to determine the role of requirements management in DevOps. The objective of this study is to help both researchers and practitioners by providing an overview of the best practices regarding requirements engineering in DevOps and identifying which areas still need to be investigated. A multivocal mapping study has, therefore, been carried out in order to study which methodologies, techniques and tools are used to support requirements management in DevOps environments. After applying the review protocol, 37 papers from formal literature and 14 references from grey literature were selected for analysis. The general conclusions obtained after analysing these papers were that, within DevOps, more attention should be paid to: (1) the reuse of requirements in order to identify systems and software artefacts that can serve as a basis for the specification of new projects; (2) the communication of requirements between the different areas of an organisation and the stakeholders of a project; (3) the traceability of requirements in order to identify the relationship with other requirements, artefacts, tasks and processes; (4) non-functional requirements in order to identify the requirements of the operations area in the early phases of a project; and finally (5) specific requirements tools that should be seamlessly integrated into the DevOps toolchain. All these issues must be considered without ignoring the agile and continuous practices of development, operations and business teams. More effort must also be made to validate new methodologies in industry so as to assess and determine their strengths and weaknesses.
A natural language-based method to specify privacy requirements: an evaluation with practitioners
Organisations are becoming concerned with effectively dealing with privacy-related requirements. Existing Requirements Engineering methods based on structured natural language suffer from several limitations both in eliciting and specifying privacy requirements. In our previous study, we proposed a structured natural-language approach called the “Privacy Criteria Method” (PCM), which demonstrates potential advantages over user stories. Our goal is to present a PCM evaluation that focused on the opinions of software practitioners from different companies on PCM’s ability to support the specification of privacy requirements and the quality of the privacy requirements specifications produced by these software practitioners. We conducted a multiple case study to evaluate PCM in four different industrial contexts. We gathered and analysed the opinions of 21 practitioners on PCM usage regarding Coverage, Applicability, Usefulness, and Scalability. Moreover, we assessed the syntactic and semantic quality of the PCM artifacts produced by these practitioners. PCM can aid developers in elaborating requirements specifications focused on privacy with good quality. The practitioners found PCM to be useful for their companies’ development processes. PCM is considered a promising method for specifying privacy requirements. Some slight extensions of PCM may be required to tailor the method to the characteristics of the company.
Organisation and communication problems in automotive requirements engineering
Project success in the automotive industry is highly influenced by requirements engineering (RE), for which communication and organisation structure play a major role, much due to the scale and distribution of these projects. However, empirical research is scarce on these aspects of automotive RE and warrants closer examination. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to identify problems or challenges in automotive RE with respect to communication and organisation structure. Using a multiple-case study approach, we collected data via 14 semi-structured interviews at one car manufacturer and one supplier. We tested our findings from the case study with a questionnaire distributed to practitioners in the automotive industry. Our results indicate that it is difficult but increasingly important to establish communication channels outside the fixed organisation structure and that responsibilities are often unclear. Product knowledge during early requirements elicitation and context knowledge later on is lacking. Furthermore, abstraction gaps between requirements on different abstraction levels leads to inconsistencies. For academia, we formulate a concrete agenda for future research. Practitioners can use the findings to broaden their understanding of how the problems manifest and to improve their organisations.
A method for evaluating rigor and industrial relevance of technology evaluations
One of the main goals of an applied research field such as software engineering is the transfer and widespread use of research results in industry. To impact industry, researchers developing technologies in academia need to provide tangible evidence of the advantages of using them. This can be done trough step-wise validation, enabling researchers to gradually test and evaluate technologies to finally try them in real settings with real users and applications. The evidence obtained, together with detailed information on how the validation was conducted, offers rich decision support material for industry practitioners seeking to adopt new technologies and researchers looking for an empirical basis on which to build new or refined technologies. This paper presents model for evaluating the rigor and industrial relevance of technology evaluations in software engineering. The model is applied and validated in a comprehensive systematic literature review of evaluations of requirements engineering technologies published in software engineering journals. The aim is to show the applicability of the model and to characterize how evaluations are carried out and reported to evaluate the state-of-research. The review shows that the model can be applied to characterize evaluations in requirements engineering. The findings from applying the model also show that the majority of technology evaluations in requirements engineering lack both industrial relevance and rigor. In addition, the research field does not show any improvements in terms of industrial relevance over time.