Designinig Coordination among Human and Software Agents

The goal of this paper is to propose a new methodology for designing coordination between human angents and software agents and, ultimately, among software agents. The methodology is based on two key ideas. The first is that coordination should be designed in steps, according to a precise software engineering methodology, and starting from the specification of early requirements. The second is that coordination should be modeled as dependency between actors. Two actors may depend on one another because they want to achieve goals, acquire resources or execute a plan. The methodology used is based on Tropos, an agent oriented software engineering methodology presented in earlier papers. The methodology is presented with the help of a case study

Fast Production and Flexible Maintenance of Schedule for Space Applications

This paper presents an overview of a software system named O-OSCAR for schedule production and management in space applications. The main features of the architecture are presented and some aspects of the current application to project management are discussed

Theory of Regulatory Compliance for Requirements Engineering

Regulatory compliance is increasingly being addressed in the practice of requirements engineering as a main stream concern. This paper points out a gap in the theoretical foundations of regulatory compliance, and presents a theory that states (i) what it means for requirements to be compliant, (ii) the compliance problem, i.e., the problem that the engineer should resolve in order to verify whether requirements are compliant, and (iii) testable hypotheses (predictions) about how compliance of requirements is verified. The theory is instantiated by presenting a requirements engineering framework that implements its principles, and is exemplified on a real-world case study.Comment: 16 page

Formalization and Validation of Safety-Critical Requirements

The validation of requirements is a fundamental step in the development process of safety-critical systems. In safety critical applications such as aerospace, avionics and railways, the use of formal methods is of paramount importance both for requirements and for design validation. Nevertheless, while for the verification of the design, many formal techniques have been conceived and applied, the research on formal methods for requirements validation is not yet mature. The main obstacles are that, on the one hand, the correctness of requirements is not formally defined; on the other hand that the formalization and the validation of the requirements usually demands a strong involvement of domain experts. We report on a methodology and a series of techniques that we developed for the formalization and validation of high-level requirements for safety-critical applications. The main ingredients are a very expressive formal language and automatic satisfiability procedures. The language combines first-order, temporal, and hybrid logic. The satisfiability procedures are based on model checking and satisfiability modulo theory. We applied this technology within an industrial project to the validation of railways requirements

Mining and searching app reviews for requirements engineering: Evaluation and replication studies

App reviews provide a rich source of feature-related information that can support requirement engineering activities. Analysing them manually to find this information, however, is challenging due to their large quantity and noisy nature. To overcome the problem, automated approaches have been proposed for ‘feature-specific analysis’. Unfortunately, the effectiveness of these approaches has been evaluated using different methods and datasets. Replicating these studies to confirm their results and to provide benchmarks of different approaches is a challenging problem. We address the problem by extending previous evaluations and performing a comparison of these approaches. In this paper, we present two empirical studies. In the first study, we evaluate opinion mining approaches; the approaches extract features discussed in app reviews and identify their associated sentiments. In the second study, we evaluate approaches searching for feature-related reviews. The approaches search for users’ feedback pertinent to a particular feature. The results of both studies show these approaches achieve lower effectiveness than reported originally, and raise an important question about their practical use

From Informal Safety-Critical Requirements to Property-Driven Formal Validation

Most of the efforts in formal methods have historically been devoted to comparing a design against a set of requirements. The validation of the requirements themselves, however, has often been disregarded, and it can be considered a largely open problem, which poses several challenges. The first challenge is given by the fact that requirements are often written in natural language, and may thus contain a high degree of ambiguity. Despite the progresses in Natural Language Processing techniques, the task of understanding a set of requirements cannot be automatized, and must be carried out by domain experts, who are typically not familiar with formal languages. Furthermore, in order to retain a direct connection with the informal requirements, the formalization cannot follow standard model-based approaches. The second challenge lies in the formal validation of requirements. On one hand, it is not even clear which are the correctness criteria or the high-level properties that the requirements must fulfill. On the other hand, the expressivity of the language used in the formalization may go beyond the theoretical and/or practical capacity of state-of-the-art formal verification. In order to solve these issues, we propose a new methodology that comprises of a chain of steps, each supported by a specific tool. The main steps are the following. First, the informal requirements are split into basic fragments, which are classified into categories, and dependency and generalization relationships among them are identified. Second, the fragments are modeled using a visual language such as UML. The UML diagrams are both syntactically restricted (in order to guarantee a formal semantics), and enriched with a highly controlled natural language (to allow for modeling static and temporal constraints). Third, an automatic formal analysis phase iterates over the modeled requirements, by combining several, complementary techniques: checking consistency; verifying whether the requirements entail some desirable properties; verify whether the requirements are consistent with selected scenarios; diagnosing inconsistencies by identifying inconsistent cores; identifying vacuous requirements; constructing multiple explanations by enabling the fault-tree analysis related to particular fault models; verifying whether the specification is realizable

Towards interoperability of i* models using iStarML

Goal-oriented and agent-oriented modelling provides an effective approach to the understanding of distributed information systems that need to operate in open, heterogeneous and evolving environments. Frameworks, firstly introduced more than ten years ago, have been extended along language variants, analysis methods and CASE tools, posing language semantics and tool interoperability issues. Among them, the i* framework is one the most widespread. We focus on i*-based modelling languages and tools and on the problem of supporting model exchange between them. In this paper, we introduce the i* interoperability problem and derive an XML interchange format, called iStarML, as a practical solution to this problem. We first discuss the main requirements for its definition, then we characterise the core concepts of i* and we detail the tags and options of the interchange format. We complete the presentation of iStarML showing some possible applications. Finally, a survey on the i* community perception about iStarML is included for assessment purposes.Preprin

Design thinking and acceptance requirements for designing gamified software.

Gamification is increasingly applied to engage people in performing tool-supported collaborative tasks. From previous experiences we learned that available gamification guidelines are not sufficient, and more importantly that motivational and acceptance aspects need to be considered when designing gamified software applications. To understand them, stakeholders need to be involved in the design process. This paper aims to (i) identify key requirements for designing gamified solutions, and (ii) understand if existing methods (partially fitting those requirements) can be selected and combined to provide a comprehensive gamification design method. We discuss a set of key requirements for a suitable gamification design method. We illustrate how to select and combine existing methods to define a design approach that fits those requirements using Design Thinking and the Agon framework. Furthermore, we present a first empirical evaluation of the integrated design method, with participants including both requirements analysts and end-users of the gamified software. Our evaluation offers initial ideas towards a more general, systematic approach for gamification design