A Systematic Classification and Analysis of NFRs

The main agenda of Requirements Engineering (RE) is the development of tools, techniques and languages for the elicitation, specification, negotiation, and validation of software requirements. However, this development has traditionally been focused on functional requirements (FRs), rather than non-functional requirements (NFRs). Consequently, NFR approaches developed over the years have been fragmental and there is a lack of clear understanding of the positions of these approaches in the RE process. This paper provides a systematic classification and analysis of 89 NFR approaches

Explainability as a non-functional requirement: challenges and recommendations

Software systems are becoming increasingly complex. Their ubiquitous presence makes users more dependent on their correctness in many aspects of daily life. As a result, there is a growing need to make software systems and their decisions more comprehensible, with more transparency in software-based decision making. Transparency is therefore becoming increasingly important as a non-functional requirement. However, the abstract quality aspect of transparency needs to be better understood and related to mechanisms that can foster it. The integration of explanations into software has often been discussed as a solution to mitigate system opacity. Yet, an important first step is to understand user requirements in terms of explainable software behavior: Are users really interested in software transparency and are explanations considered an appropriate way to achieve it? We conducted a survey with 107 end users to assess their opinion on the current level of transparency in software systems and what they consider to be the main advantages and disadvantages of embedded explanations. We assess the relationship between explanations and transparency and analyze its potential impact on software quality. As explainability has become an important issue, researchers and professionals have been discussing how to deal with it in practice. While there are differences of opinion on the need for built-in explanations, understanding this concept and its impact on software is a key step for requirements engineering. Based on our research results and on the study of existing literature, we offer recommendations for the elicitation and analysis of explainability and discuss strategies for the practice. © 2020, The Author(s)

AN INFORMATION MODEL IN THE DOMAIN OF DISASSEMBLY PLANNING FOR SUSTAINABLE MANUFACTURING

Disassembly, a process of separating the End of Life (EOL) product into discrete components for re-utilizing their associated residual values, is an important part for the sustainable manufacturing. This work focuses on the modeling of the disassembly planning related information, and develops a Disassembly Information Model (DIM) based on an extensive investigation of various informational aspects of the disassembly planning. The developed Disassembly Information Model, which represents an appropriate systematization and classification of the products, processes, uncertainties and degradations related information, follows a layered modeling methodology. In this layered configuration, the DIM is subdivided into three distinct layers with an intent to separate general knowledge into different levels of abstractions, and to reach a balance between information reusability and information usability. The performance evaluation of the DIM (usability and reusability) is accessed by successful implementations of the DIM model into two prototype software applications in the domain of disassembly planning. The first application, called the Disassembly Sequence Generator (DSG), identifies the optimal disassembly sequence using a CAD based searching algorithm and a disassembly Linear Programming (LP) model. The searching process results in an AND/OR graph, which represents all the feasible disassembly sequences of a specific EOL product; whereas the LP model takes the AND/OR graph as an input and determines the economically optimal process sequence among all the possibilities. The second application is called the Adaptive Disassembly Planning (ADP), which further takes the EOL product uncertainty and degradation issues into consideration. In order to address these issues, fuzzy logic and Bayesian Network methodologies are used to develop a Disassembly Decision Network (DDN), which adaptively generates the optimal disassembly sequence based on the current available information. This research work is the first attempt to develop a comprehensive Information Model in the domain of disassembly planning. The associated modeling methodology that has been developed in this research is generic and scalable, and it could be widely adopted in other engineering domains, like product assembly, production planning, etc. The ultimate objective of this work is to standardize the DIM into a reference model that will be acknowledged and agreed upon by the sustainable manufacturing community

Inclusión de servicios en aplicaciones basados en patrones de usabilidad : Caso UNDO/REDO

Los patrones de usabilidad son un aspecto central en el desarrollo de software, pues estos son los encargados de sentar las bases de un conjunto de principios validados y establecidos para la creación de una apropiada interfaz de usuario. En este sentido el esfuerzo por desarrollar un modelo de patrones de usabilidad esta justificado y permite sumar una instancia mas al proceso de automatización en el desarrollo de software. En esta tesis doctoral se propone un mecanismo que ha evolucionado desde los patrones hasta una arquitectura de usabilidad, detallando el proceso evolutivo que ha llevado el mismo, define en detalle el patrón de usabilidad UNDO/REDO y construye los cimientos para extender este modelo a otros patrones de usabilidad.Usability patterns are a central aspect of software development, as these are responsible for laying the foundations of a set of validated and established principles for creating an appropriate user interface. In this sense the effort to develop a model of usability patterns is justified and can then add another instance to process automation in software. This PhD thesis proposes a mechanism that has evolved from an architecture patterns to usability, detailing the evolutionary process that has led it defines in detail the usability pattern UNDO/REDO and builds the foundation for extending this model to other usability patterns.La tesis contó con la doble dirección de la Dr. Patricia Pesado (UNLP) y del Prof. Oscar Dieste (UPM).Facultad de Informátic

Reusable Knowledge for Satisficing Usability Requirements

Abstract. Usability is becoming increasingly recognized as being an important factor in the acceptance of systems by end users. Usability requirements can be considered to be requirements that capture the usability goals and associated measures for a system under development. In order to ensure usable systems we must ensure identification of appropriate requirements regarding these critical aspects of systems. However, a number of difficulties exist, for example it may be difficult to quantify and precisely specify these qualities in software systems. There is a basic need for systematic approaches to reason, model and analyze usability from the early stages of the software development. Furthermore, it is necessary to develop a usable ontology or classification of measurable aspects of usability that can be used to aid in the specification of usability requirements. These ontologies should be represented in a way that facilitates their use as guidelines for the requirements elicitation process. This work builds on review of literature in the area of humancomputer interaction and the emerging field of usability engineering in developing a catalog of aspects of usability that can be considered during requirements gathering. This catalogue is used to guide the requirements engineer through alternatives for achieving usability. The approach is based on the use of the i* framework, having usability modeled as a special type of goal. We show how usability can be modelled through different viewpoints with different alternatives for operationalizing it. An example in the health care domain is used to illustrate. 1

Combining SOA and BPM Technologies for Cross-System Process Automation

This paper summarizes the results of an industry case study that introduced a cross-system business process automation solution based on a combination of SOA and BPM standard technologies (i.e., BPMN, BPEL, WSDL). Besides discussing major weaknesses of the existing, custom-built, solution and comparing them against experiences with the developed prototype, the paper presents a course of action for transforming the current solution into the proposed solution. This includes a general approach, consisting of four distinct steps, as well as specific action items that are to be performed for every step. The discussion also covers language and tool support and challenges arising from the transformation

Mapping Study about Usability Requirements Elicitation

[EN] The HCI community has developed guidelines and recommendations for improving the usability system that are usually applied at the last stages of the software development process. On the other hand, the SE community has developed sound methods to elicit functional requirements in the early stages, but usability has been relegated to the last stages together with other nonfunctional requirements. Therefore, there are no methods of usability requirements elicitation to develop software within both communities. An example of this problem arises if we focus on the Model-Driven Development paradigm, where the methods and tools that are used to develop software do not support usability requirements elicitation. In order to study the existing publications that deal with usability requirements from the first steps of the software development process, this work presents a mapping study. Our aim is to compare usability requirements methods and to identify the strong points of each oneThis work has been developed with the support of MICINN (PROS-Req TIN2010-19130-C02-02), UV (UV-INV-PRECOMP12-80627), GVA (ORCA PROMETEO/2009/015), and co-financed with ERDF. We acknowledge the support of the ITEA2 Call 3 UsiXML (20080026) and funding by the MITYC (TSI-020400-2011-20)Ormeño Ayala, YI.; Panach Navarrete, JI. (2013). Mapping Study about Usability Requirements Elicitation. Springer. 672-687. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-38709-8_43S672687Publish or Perish, http://www.harzing.comAcerbis, R., Bongio, A., Brambilla, M., Butti, S.: WebRatio 5: An Eclipse-Based CASE Tool for Engineering Web Applications. In: Baresi, L., Fraternali, P., Houben, G.-J. (eds.) ICWE 2007. LNCS, vol. 4607, pp. 501–505. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)Akoumianakis, D., Katsis, A., Vidakis, N.: Non-functional User Interface Requirements Notation (NfRn) for Modeling the Global Execution Context of Tasks. In: Coninx, K., Luyten, K., Schneider, K.A. (eds.) TAMODIA 2006. LNCS, vol. 4385, pp. 259–274. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)Ameller, D., Franch, X., Cabot, J.: Dealing with Non-Functional Requirements in Model-Driven Development. In: 18th IEEE International Conference on Requirements Engineering (RE), Sydney, NSW, pp. 189–198 (2010)Bass, L., John, B.: Linking Usability to Software Architecture Patterns through General Scenarios. Journal of Systems and Software 66(3), 187–197 (2003)Creissac Campos, J., Harrison, M.D.: Systematic Analysis of Control Panel Interfaces Using Formal Tools. In: Graham, T.C.N. (ed.) DSV-IS 2008. LNCS, vol. 5136, pp. 72–85. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)Carrizo, D., Dieste, O., Juristo, N.: Study of Elicitation Techniques Adequacy. In: 11th Workshop on Requirements Engineering, Spain, Barcelona, pp. 104–114 (2008)Cronholm, S., Bruno, V.: Do you Need General Principles or Concrete Heuristics?: A Model for Categorizing Usability Criteria. In: 20th Australasian Conference on Computer-Human Interaction: Designing for Habitus and Habitat. ACM, Cairns (2008)Cysneiros, L.M., Leite, J.C.S.P.: Nonfunctional Requirements: from Elicitation to Conceptual Models. IEEE Trans. on Softw. Eng. 30(5), 328–350 (2004)Cysneiros, L.M., Werneck, V.M., Kushniruk, A.: Reusable Knowledge for Satisficing Usability Requirements. In: 13th IEEE International Conference on Requirement Engineering, pp. 463–464. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC (2005)Chung, L., do Prado Leite, J.C.S.: On Non-Functional Requirements in Software Engineering. In: Borgida, A.T., Chaudhri, V.K., Giorgini, P., Yu, E.S. (eds.) Conceptual Modeling: Foundations and Applications. LNCS, vol. 5600, pp. 363–379. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)Daniel, S., Rita de Almeida, P., Isbela, M.: OOHDM-Web: An Environment for Implementation of Hypermedia Applications in the WWW. SIGWEB Newsl. 8(2), 18–34 (1999)Dieste, O., Lopez, M., Ramos, F.: Updating a Systematic Review about Selection of Software Requirements Elicitation Techniques. In: 11th Workshop in Requirements Engineering, Barcelona, Spain (2008)Doerr, J., Kerkow, D., Koenig, T., Olsson, T., Suzuki, T.: Non-functional Requirements in Industry - Three Case Studies Adopting an Experience-based NFR Method. In: 13th IEEE International Conference on Requirements Engineering, Washington, DC, USA, pp. 373–384 (2005)Escalona, M.J., Arag, G.: NDT. A Model-Driven Approach for Web Requirements. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 34(3), 377–390 (2008)Escalona, M.J., Koch, N., Filipe, J., Cordeiro, J., Pedrosa, V.: Metamodeling the Requirements of Web Systems Web Information Systems and Technologies, vol. 1, pp. 267–280. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)Fatwanto, A., Boughton, C.: Analysis, Specification and Modeling of Non-Functional Requirements for Translative Model-Driven Development. In: International Conference on Computational Intelligence and Security, Washington, DC, USA, pp. 405–410 (2008)Fernandez, A., Insfran, E., Abrahão, S.: Usability Evaluation Methods for the Web: A Systematic Mapping Study. Information and Software Technology 53(8), 789–817 (2011)Fleiss, J.L.: Statistical Methods for Rates and Proportions. John Wiley & Sons, New York (1981)Folmer, E., Bosch, J.: Architecting for usability: A Survey. Journal of Systems and Software 70(1), 61–78 (2004)Grosse-Wentrup, D., Stier, A., Hoelscher, U., Dössel, O., Schlegel, W.C.: Supporting Tool for Usability Specifications. In: World Congress on Medical Physic and Biomedical Engineering, Munich, Germany, pp. 845–847. Springer (2009)Henninger, S.: A Methodology and Tools for Applying Context-specific Usability Guidelines to Interface Design. Journal Interacting with Computers 12(3), 225–243 (2000)Journal Citation Reports, http://ip-science.thomsonreuters.comJokela, T., Koivumaa, J., Pirkola, J., Salminen, P., Kantola, N.: Methods for Quantitative Usability Requirements: A Case Study on the Development of the User Interface of a Mobile Phone. Personal Ubiquitous Comput. 10(6), 345–355 (2006)Jokela, T., Seffah, A., Gulliksen, J., Desmarais, M.C.: 8 Guiding Designers to the World of Usability: Determining Usability Requirements Through Teamwork, vol. 8, pp. 127–145. Springer, Netherlands (2005)Juristo, N.: Impact of Usability on Software Requirements and Design, pp. 55–77. Springer (2009)Juristo, N., Moreno, A.M., Sánchez, M.I.: Guidelines for Eliciting Usability Functionalities. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 33(11), 744–758 (2007)Kitchenham, B.: Procedures for Performing Systematic Reviews. Technical Report TR/SE-0401 (2004)Kitchenham, B.A., Charters, S.: Guidelines for performing Systematic Literature Reviews in Software Engineering. EBSE Technica Report (2007)Lauesen, S., Younessi, H.: Six styles for usability requirements. In: REFSQ 1998 (1998)MacLean, A., Young, R.M., Bellotti, V.M.E., Moran, T.P.: Questions, Options, and Criteria: Elements of Design Space Analysis. Human-Computer Interaction 6(3), 201–250 (1996)Martinie, C., Palanque, P., Winckler, M., Conversy, S.: DREAMER: A Design Rationale Environment for Argumentation, Modeling and Engineering Requirements. In: 28th International Conference on Design of Communication, Säo Paulo, Brazil (2010)Mehwish, R., Emilia, M., Ewan, T.: A Systematic Review of Software Maintainability Prediction and Metrics, pp. 367–377. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC (2009)Mellado, D., Blanco, C., Sánchez, L.E., Fernandez, E.: A Systematic Review of Security Requirements Engineering. Comput. Stand. Interfaces 32(4), 153–165 (2010)Nguyen, Q.L.: Non-Functional Requirements Analysis Modeling for Software Product Lines. In: ICSE Workshop on Modeling in Software Engineering, Washington, DC, USA, pp. 56–61 (2009)Nielsen, J.: Usability Engineering. Morgan Kaufmann (1993)Panach, J.I., España, S., Moreno, A.M., Pastor, Ó.: Dealing with Usability in Model Transformation Technologies. In: Li, Q., Spaccapietra, S., Yu, E., Olivé, A. (eds.) ER 2008. LNCS, vol. 5231, pp. 498–511. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)Panach, J.I., España, S., Pederiva, I., Pastor, O.: Capturing Interaction Requirements in a Model Transformation Technology Based on MDA. Journal of Universal Computer Science (JUCS) 14(9), 1480–1495 (2007)Pastor, O., Molina, J.: Model-Driven Architecture in Practice. Springer (2007)Paterno, F.: Model-based Tools for Pervasive Usability. Interacting with Computers 17(3), 291–315 (2004)Refworks, http://www.refworks.com/Röder, H.: Using Interaction Requirements to Operationalize Usability. In: ACM Symposium on Applied Computing, Sierre, Switzerland (2010)Sajedi, A., Mahdavi, M., Pourshirmohammadi, A., Nejad, M.M.: Fundamental Usability Guidelines for User Interface Design. In: International Conference on Computational Sciences and Its Applications, ICCSA, Washington, DC, USA, pp. 106–113 (2008)Shehata, M., Eberlein, A., Fapojuwo, A.O.: A Taxonomy for Identifying Requirement Interactions in Software Systems. Comput. Netw. 51(2), 398–425 (2007)Sindhgatta, R., Thonse, S.: Functional and Non-functional Requirements Specification for Enterprise Applications. In: Bomarius, F., Komi-Sirviö, S. (eds.) PROFES 2005. LNCS, vol. 3547, pp. 189–201. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)Soares, M.S., Vrancken, J.L.M.: Model-Driven User Requirements Specification using SysML. Journal of Software 3(6), 57–68 (2008)Sutcliffe, A.G., Kurniawan, S., Jae-Eun, S.: A Method and Advisor Tool for Multimedia User Interface Design. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Stud. 64(4), 375–392 (2006)Sutcliffe Alistair, G., Michele, R.: Experience with SCRAM, a SCenario Requirements Analysis Method. In: 3rd International Conference on Requirements Engineering: Putting Requirements Engineering to Practice, pp. 164–171. IEEE Computer Society (1998)Svensson, B., Gorschek, T., Regnell, B., Torkar, R., Shahrokni, A., Feldt, R.: Quality Requirements in Industrial Practice - An Extended Interview Study at Eleven Companies. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 38(4), 923–935 (2012)Svensson, R.B., Höst, M., Regnell, B.: Managing Quality Requirements: A Systematic Review. In: 36th EUROMICRO Conference on Software Engineering and Advanced Applications (SEAA), pp. 261–268 (2010)Yi, L., Zhiyi, M., Weizhong, S.: Integrating Non-functional Requirement Modeling into Model Driven Development Method. In: 17th Asia Pacific Software Engineering Conference, Beijing, China (2010