Abstract
Neglecting traceability—i.e., the ability to describe and follow the life of a requirement—is known to entail misunderstanding and miscommunication, leading to the engineering of poor quality systems. Following the simple principles that (a) changes to UML model instances ought be justified to the stakeholders, (b) justification should proceed in a structured manner to ensure rigor in discussions, critique, and revisions of model instances, and (c) the concept of argument instantiated in a justification process ought to be well defined and understood, the present paper introduces the UML Traceability through Argumentation Method (UML-TAM) to enable the traceability of design rationale in UML while allowing the appropriateness of model changes to be checked by analysis of the structure of the arguments provided to justify such changes.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Antoniol, G., Canfora, G., De Lucia, A.: Maintaining traceability during object-oriented software evolution: a case study. In: Proc. Int. Conf. Softw. Maintenance (1999)
Besnard, P., Hunter, A.: A logic-based theory of deductive arguments. Intell. 128(1–2), 203–235 (2001)
Briand, L.C., Labiche, Y., Yue, T.: Automated Traceability Analysis for UML Model Refinements. Carleton Univ. Technical Report, TR SCE-06-06, ver.2 (August 2006)
Chesñevar, C.I., Maguitman, A.G., Loui, R.P.: Logical Models of Argument. ACM Comput. Surv. 32(4), 337–383 (2000)
Conklin, J., Begeman, M.L.: gIBIS: A hypertext tool for exploratory policy discussion. ACM Trans. Inf. Syst., 6(4) (1988)
Dömges, R., Pohl, K.: Adapting Traceability Environments to Project-Specific Needs. Comm. ACM 41(12), 54–62 (1998)
Egyed, A.: A Scenario-Driven Approach to Traceability. Proc. Int. Conf. Softw. Eng., 123–132 (2001)
Ford, M., Billington, D.: Strategies in Human Nonmonotonic Reasoning. Computat. Intel. 16(3), 446–468 (2000)
Gotel, O.C.Z., Finkelstein, A.C.W.: An Analysis the Requirements Traceability Problem. Tech. Rep. TR-93-41, Dept. of Computing, Imperial College (1993)
Gotel, O.C.Z., Finkelstein, A.C.W.: An analysis of the requirements traceability problem. In: Proc. Int. Conf. Req. Eng., pp. 94–101 (1994)
Gotel, O.C.Z.: Contribution Structures for Requirements Engineering. Ph.D. Thesis, Imperial College of Science, Technology, and Medicine, London, England (1996)
Haumer, P., Pohl, K., Weidenhaupt, K., Jarke, M.: Improving Reviews by Extending Traceability. In: Proc. Annual Hawaii Int. Conf. on System Sciences (1999)
Jackson, J.: A Keyphrase Based Traceability Scheme. IEE Colloq. on Tools and Techn. for Maintaining Traceability During Design (1991)
Jureta, I.J., Faulkner, S., Schobbens, P.-Y.: Justifying Goal Models. Proc. Int. Conf. Req. Eng., 119–128 (2006)
Letelier, P.: A Framework for Requirements Traceability in UML-Based Projects. In: Proc. Int. Worksh. on Traceability in Emerging Forms of Softw. Eng. (2002)
Louridas, P., Loucopoulos, P.: A Generic Model for Reflective Design. ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Meth. 9(2) (2000)
Naslavsky, L., Alspaugh, T.A., Richardson, D.J., Ziv, H.: Using Scenarios to Support Traceability. Proc. Int. Worksh. on Traceability in emerging forms of software engineering, 25–30 (2005)
OMG. UML 2.0 Superstructure Specification. Object Management Group, Final Adopted Specification ptc/03-08-02 (2003)
Pinheiro, F.A.C., Goguen, J.A.: An Object-Oriented Tool for Tracing Requirements. IEEE Software 13(2), 52–64 (1996)
Pohl, K.: Process-Centered Requirements Engineering. Advanced Software Development Series. J.Wiley & Sons Ltd, Taunton, England (1996)
Pohl, K.: PRO-ART: Enabling Requirements Pre-Traceability. Proc. Int. Conf. Req. Eng., 76–85 (1996)
Pohl, K., Dömges, R., Jarke, M.: Towards Method-Driven Trace Capture. Proc. Conf. Adv. Info. Syst. Eng., 103–116 (1997)
Prakken, H., Vreeswijk, G.: Logical systems for defeasible argumentation. In: Gabbay, D., Guenther, F. (eds.) Handbook of Philosophical Logic, Kluwer, Dordrecht (2002)
Ramesh, B., Dhar, V.: Supporting systems development by capturing deliberations during requirements engineering. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 18(6), 498–510 (1992)
Ramesh, B., Stubbs, C., Powers, T., Edwards, M.: Implementing requirements traceability: A case study. Annals of Softw. Eng. 3, 397–415 (1997)
Simari, G.R., Loui, R.P.: A mathematical treatment of defeasible reasoning and its implementation. Artificial Intelligence 53, 125–157 (1992)
Toranzo, M., Castro, J.: A Comprehensive Traceability Model to Support the Design of Interactive Systems. In: Guerraoui, R. (ed.) ECOOP 1999. LNCS, vol. 1628, pp. 283–284. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)
Ubayashi, N., Tamai, T., Sano, S., Maeno, Y., Murakami, S.: Model evolution with aspect-oriented mechanisms. In: Proc. Int. Worksh. Principles of Softw. Evol. (2005)
van Lamsweerde, A., Darimont, R.: Massonet Ph.: The Meeting Scheduler Problem: Preliminary Definition. Université catholique de Louvain (1992)
van Lamsweerde, A.: Goal-Oriented Requirements Engineering: A Guided Tour. In: Proc. Int. Conf. Req, pp. 249–263 (2001)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2007 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Jureta, I.J., Faulkner, S. (2007). Tracing the Rationale Behind UML Model Change Through Argumentation. In: Parent, C., Schewe, KD., Storey, V.C., Thalheim, B. (eds) Conceptual Modeling - ER 2007. ER 2007. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 4801. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-75563-0_31
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-75563-0_31
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-75562-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-75563-0
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)