Browsing by Subject "Requirements engineering"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Publication
    Open Access
    Evaluating different i*-based approaches for selecting functional requirements while balancing and optimizing non-functional requirements: a controlled experiment
    (Elsevier, 2019-02-01) Zubcoff, José Jacobo; Garrigós, Irene; Casteleyn, Sven; Mazón, José Norberto; Aguilar, José Alfonso; Gomariz Castillo, Francisco; Geografía
    Context: A relevant question in requirements engineering is which set of functional requirements (FR) to prioritize and implement, while keeping non-functional requirements (NFR) balanced and optimized. Objective: We aim to provide empirical evidence that requirement engineers may perform better at the task of selecting FRs while optimizing and balancing NFRs using an alternative (automated) i ∗ post-processed model, compared to the original i ∗ model. Method: We performed a controlled experiment, designed to compare the original i ∗ graphical notation, with our post-processed i ∗ visualizations based on Pareto efficiency (a tabular and a radar chart visualization). Our experiment consisted of solving different exercises of various complexity for selecting FRs while balancing NFR. We considered the efficiency (time spent to correctly answer exercises), and the effectiveness (regarding time: time spent to solve exercises, independent of correctness; and regarding correctness of the answer, independent of time). Results: The efficiency analysis shows it is 3.51 times more likely to solve exercises correctly with our tabular and radar chart visualizations than with i ∗ . Actually, i ∗ was the most time-consuming (effectiveness regarding time), had a lower number of correct answers (effectiveness regarding correctness), and was affected by complexity. Visual or textual preference of the subjects had no effect on the score. Beginners took more time to solve exercises than experts if i ∗ is used (no distinction if our Pareto-based visualizations are used). Conclusion: For complex model instances, the Pareto front based tabular visualization results in more correct answers, compared to radar chart visualization. When we consider effectiveness regarding time, the i ∗ graphical notation is the most time consuming visualization, independent of the complexity of the exercise. Finally, regard- ing efficiency, subjects consume less time when using radar chart visualization than tabular visualization, and even more so compared to the original i ∗ graphical notation.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Publication
    Open Access
    Requirements engineering tools: an evaluation
    (IEEE, Computer Society, 2021-04-19) Carrillo de Gea, Juan Manuel; Ebert, Christof; Hosni, Mohamed; Vizcaíno, Aurora; Nicolás, Joaquín; Fernández Alemán, José Luis; Informática y Sistemas
    If you don't know where you are going, any road will get you there." Alice from Alice in Wonderland was told this obvious piece of wisdom when she asked for directions. We all know this wisdom from navigating through the fog of insufficient requirements when working on projects. Clear goals can be achieved; unclear goals are sure to be missed. Requirements engineering (RE) is the disciplined and systematic approach (i.e., "engineering") for elicitation, documentation, analysis, agreement, verification, and management of requirements while considering market, technical, and economic goals. "Disciplined" is about culture, and "systematic" demands process and tools, which is our focus here.