Abstract
Context and motivation. Traceability is an essential part of quality assurance tasks for software maintainability, validation, and verification. However, the effort required to create and maintain traces is still high compared to their benefits. Problem. Some authors have proposed traceability tools to address this challenge, yet some of those tools require historical traceability data to generate traces, representing an entry barrier to software development teams that do not do traceability. Another common requirement of existing traceability tools is the scope of artefacts to be traced, hindering the adaptability of traceability tools in practice. Principal ideas. Motivated by the mentioned challenges, in this paper we propose OntoTraceV2.0: a tool for supporting trace generation of arbitrary software artefacts without depending on historical traceability data. The architecture of OntoTraceV2.0 integrates ontology-based automatic reasoning to facilitate adaptability for tracing arbitrary artefacts and natural language processing for discovering traces based on text-based similarity between artefacts. We conducted a quasi-experiment with 36 subjects to validate OntoTraceV2.0 in terms of efficiency, effectiveness, and satisfaction. Contribution. We found that OntoTraceV2.0 positively affects the subjects’ efficiency and satisfaction during trace generation compared to a manual approach. Although the subjects’ average effectiveness is higher using OntoTraceV2.0, we observe no statistical difference with the manual trace generation approach. Even though such results are promising, further replications are needed to avoid certain threats to validity. We conclude the paper by analysing the experimental results and limitations we found, drawing on future challenges, and proposing the next research endeavours.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Notice that this question can also be written as: having selected a EDG model element \(t_{a} \in T_{a}\), which is the set of possible user story parts \(PS_{a} \subseteq S_{a}\) to trace? However, we use the source-to-target variant instead of target-to-source variant for simplicity.
- 2.
- 3.
To facilitate further replications, all material related to the experimental objects, demographics, and results can be found at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7360221.
References
Charalampidou, S., Ampatzoglou, A., Karountzos, E., Avgeriou, P.: Empirical studies on software traceability: a mapping study. J. Softw. Evol. Process 33 (2021)
Cleland-Huang, J., Gotel, O., Zisman, A.: Software and Systems Traceability. Springer, London (2012)
Antoniol, G., Canfora, G., de Lucia, A.: Maintaining traceability during object-oriented software evolution: a case study. In: IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance - 1999 (ICSM 1999), pp. 211–219 (1999)
Sundaram, S.K., Hayes, J.H., Dekhtyar, A., Holbrook, E.A.: Assessing traceability of software engineering artifacts. Requir Eng. 15, 313–335 (2010)
Lin, J., Liu, Y., Zeng, Q., Jiang, M., Cleland-Huang, J.: Traceability transformed: generating more accurate links with pre-trained BERT models. In: 2021 IEEE/ACM 43rd International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE), pp. 324–335. IEEE (2021)
Maro, S., Steghofer, J.-P.: Capra: a configurable and extendable traceability management tool. In: 2016 IEEE 24th International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE), pp. 407–408. IEEE (2016)
Nagano, S., Ichikawa, Y., Kobayashi, T.: Recovering traceability links between code and documentation for enterprise project artifacts. In: 2012 IEEE 36th Annual Computer Software and Applications Conference, pp. 11–18. IEEE (2012)
Guo, J., Cleland-Huang, J., Berenbach, B.: Foundations for an expert system in domain-specific traceability. In: 2013 21st IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE), pp. 42–51. IEEE (2013)
Javed, M.A., UL Muram, F., Zdun, U.: On-Demand automated traceability maintenance and evolution. In: Capilla, R., Gallina, B., Cetina, C. (eds.) ICSR 2018. LNCS, vol. 10826, pp. 111–120. Springer, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-90421-4_7
Narayan, N., Bruegge, B., Delater, A., Paech, B.: Enhanced traceability in model-based CASE tools using ontologies and information retrieval. In: 2011 4th International Workshop on Managing Requirements Knowledge, pp. 24–28. IEEE (2011)
Javed, M.A., Stevanetic, S., Zdun, U.: Towards a pattern language for construction and maintenance of software architecture traceability links. In: Proceedings of the 21st European Conference on Pattern Languages of Programs, pp. 1–20. ACM, New York (2016)
Huaqiang, D., Hongxing, L., Songyu, X., Yuqing, F.: The research of domain ontology recommendation method with its applications in requirement traceability. In: 2017 16th International Symposium on Distributed Computing and Applications to Business, Engineering and Science (DCABES), pp. 158–161. IEEE (2017)
Hayashi, S., Yoshikawa, T., Saeki, M.: Sentence-to-code traceability recovery with domain ontologies. In: 2010 Asia Pacific Software Engineering Conference, pp. 385–394. IEEE (2010)
Guo, J., Cheng, J., Cleland-Huang, J.: Semantically enhanced software traceability using deep learning techniques. In: 2017 IEEE/ACM 39th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE), pp. 3–14. IEEE (2017)
Mosquera, D., Ruiz, M., Pastor, O., Spielberger, J., Fievet, L.: OntoTrace: a tool for supporting trace generation in software development by using ontology-based automatic reasoning. In: De Weerdt, J., Polyvyanyy, A. (eds.) CAiSE 2022, pp. 73–81. Springer, Cham (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-07481-3_9
Snoeck, M.: Enterprise Information Systems Engineering. Springer, Cham (2014)
Guo, J., Monaikul, N., Cleland-Huang, J.: Trace links explained: an automated approach for generating rationales. In: 2015 IEEE 23rd International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE), pp. 202–207. IEEE (2015)
Thamrongchote, C., Vatanawood, W.: Business process ontology for defining user story. In: 2016 IEEE/ACIS 15th International Conference on Computer and Information Science (ICIS), pp. 1–4. IEEE (2016)
Li, B., Han, L.: Distance weighted cosine similarity measure for text classification. In: Yin, H., et al. (eds.) IDEAL 2013, pp. 611–618. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-41278-3_74
Cer, D., Yang, Y., et al: Universal Sentence Encoder (2018)
Singh, L.: Clustering text: a comparison between available text vectorization techniques. In: Reddy, V.S., Prasad, V.K., Wang, J., Reddy, K.T.V. (eds.) Soft Computing and Signal Processing. AISC, vol. 1340, pp. 21–27. Springer, Singapore (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-1249-7_3
Hickman, L., Thapa, S., Tay, L., Cao, M., Srinivasan, P.: Text preprocessing for text mining in organizational research: review and recommendations. Organ. Res. Methods 25, 114–146 (2022)
Noy, N.F., McFuiness, D.L.: Ontology Development 101: A Guide to Creating Your First Ontology. https://protege.stanford.edu/publications/ontology_development/ontology101.pdf. Accessed 29 Nov 2021
Bragilovski, Maxim, Dalpiaz, Fabiano, Sturm, Arnon: Guided derivation of conceptual models from user stories: a controlled experiment. In: Gervasi, Vincenzo, Vogelsang, Andreas (eds.) REFSQ 2022. LNCS, vol. 13216, pp. 131–147. Springer, Cham (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-98464-9_11
Nasiri, S., Rhazali, Y., Lahmer, M., Chenfour, N.: Towards a generation of class diagram from user stories in agile methods. Procedia Comput. Sci. 170, 831–837 (2020)
Web Ontology Language (OWL). https://www.w3.org/OWL/. Accessed 29 Nov 2021
SPARQL query language. https://www.w3.org/2001/sw/wiki/SPARQL. Accessed 29 Nov 2021
Fayyaz, Z., Ebrahimian, M., Nawara, D., Ibrahim, A., Kashef, R.: Recommendation systems: algorithms, challenges, metrics, and business opportunities. Appl. Sci. 10, 7748 (2020)
Wohlin, C., Runeson, P., Höst, M., Ohlsson, M.C., Regnell, B., Wesslén, A.: Experimentation in Software Engineering. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)
Moody, D.L.: The method evaluation model: a theoretical model for validating information systems design methods. In: ECIS 2003 Proceedings, pp. 79–96 (2003)
van Solingen, R., Basili, V., Caldiera, G., Rombach, H.D.: Goal Question Metric (GQM) approach. In: Encyclopedia of Software Engineering. Wiley, Hoboken (2002)
Acknowledgments
This research is fully funded by the ZHAW Institute for Applied Information Technology (InIT), the Innosuisse Flagship SHIFT project, and the ZHAW School of Engineering. Moreover, we would like to thank all RASOP course students for actively participating on the quasi-experiment, allowing us to gather all the data we used to build our research.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Mosquera, D., Ruiz, M., Pastor, O., Spielberger, J. (2023). Ontology-Based Automatic Reasoning and NLP for Tracing Software Requirements into Models with the OntoTrace Tool. In: Ferrari, A., Penzenstadler, B. (eds) Requirements Engineering: Foundation for Software Quality. REFSQ 2023. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 13975. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-29786-1_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-29786-1_10
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-29785-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-29786-1
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)