Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

An Empirical Investigation on Dynamic Modeling in Requirements Engineering

  • Conference paper
Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems (MODELS 2008)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNPSE,volume 5301))

Abstract

Modeling is a fundamental activity within the requirements engineering process concerning the construction of abstract descriptions of system requirements that are amenable to interpretation and validation. In this paper we report on a controlled experiment aimed at assessing whether dynamic modeling of system requirements provides an accurate account of stakeholders’ requirements. The context is constituted of second year Bachelor students in Computer Science at the University of Basilicata. The data analysis reveals that there is not significant difference in the comprehension of system requirements achieved by using or not dynamic modeling.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Nuseibeh, B., Easterbrook, S.: Requirements engineering: a roadmap. In: Proceedings of the Conference on the Future of Software Engineering, pp. 35–46. ACM Press, New York (2000)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  2. Finkelstein, A.: Requirements engineering: an overview. In: 2nd Asia-Pacific Software Engineering Conference (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Jackson, M.: Software Requirements and Specifications: A Lexicon of Practice, Principles and Prejudices. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bruegge, B., Dutoit, A.: Object-Oriented Software Engineering Using UML, Patterns, and Java. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Davis, A.: Software Requirements: Objects, Functions and States. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1993)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Boehm, B.W.: Software Engineering Economics. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1981)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. Nakajo, T., Kume, H.: A case history analysis of software error cause-effect relationships. Transactions on Software Engineering 17(8), 830–838 (1991)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Wieringa, R.J.: Requirements Engineering: Frameworks forUnderstanding. Wiley, Chichester (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Anda, B., Sjoberg, D.I., Jorgensen, M.: Quality and understandability of use case models. In: Knudsen, J.L. (ed.) ECOOP 2001. LNCS, vol. 2072, pp. 402–428. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  10. Britton, C., Kutar, M., Anthony, S., Barker, T., Beecham, S., Wilkinson, V.: An empirical study of user preference and performance with UML diagrams. In: IEEE Symposia on Human Centric Computing Languages and Environments, pp. 31–33. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (2002)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  11. Letier, E., Kramer, J., Uchitel, J.M.S.: Monitoring and control in scenario-based requirements analysis. In: 27th International Conference on Software Engineering, pp. 382–391. ACM Press, New York (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Heitmeyer, C., Jeffords, R.D., Labaw, B.G.: Automated consistency checking of requirements specifications. Transaction on Software Engineerig and Methdology 5(3), 231–261 (1996)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Cox, K., Aurun, A., Jeffery, R.: Classification of research efforts in requirements engineering. Journal of Research and Practice in Information Technology 36(4), 211–229 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Fagan, M.: Design and code inspections to reduce errors in program development. IBM Systems Journal 15(3), 182–211 (1976)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Torchiano, M.: Empirical assessment of UML static object diagrams. In: Proceedings of the 12th International Workshop in Program Comprehension, Bari, Italy, pp. 226–229. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (2004)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  16. Otero, C., Dolado, J.J.: An initial experimental assessment of the dynamic modelling in UML. Empirical Software Engineering 7(1), 27–47 (2002)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. Otero, M.C., Dolado, J.J.: An empirical comparison of the dynamic modeling in OML and UML. Journal of Systems and Software 77(2), 91–102 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Ricca, F., Di Penta, M., Torchiano, M., Tonella, P., Ceccato, M.: The role of experience and ability in comprehension tasks supported by UML stereotypes. In: Proceedings of the 29th International Conference on Software Engineering, Minneapolis, MN, USA, pp. 375–384. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Conallen, J.: Building Web Applications with UML. Object Technology. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Kuzniarz, L., Staron, M., Wholin, C.: An empirical study on using stereotypes to improve understanding on UML models. In: 2th International Workshop on Program Comprehension, Bari, Italy, pp. 14–23. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (2004)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  21. Cruz-Lemus, J.A., Genero, M., Manso, M.E., Piattini, M.: Evaluating the effect of composite states on the understandability of UML statechart diagrams. In: ACM/IEEE 8th International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems, Montego Bay, Jamaica, pp. 113–125. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  22. Briand, L., Labiche, Y., Di Penta, M., Yan-Bondoc, H.: An experimental investigation of formality in UML-based development. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 31(10), 833–849 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. OMG: Object constraint language (OCL) specification, version 2.0 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Reynoso, L., Genero, M., Piattini, M., Manso, M.E.: Does object coupling really affect the understanding and modifying of UML expressions? In: Proceedings of ACM Symposium on Applied Computing, pp. 1721–1727. ACM Press, New York (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Arisholm, E., Briand, L.C., Hove, S.E., Labiche, Y.: An empirical comparison of the dynamic modeling in OML and UML. Transactions on Software Engineering 32(6), 365–381 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Wohlin, C., Runeson, P., Host, M., Ohlsson, M.C., Regnell, B., Wesslen, A.: Experimentation in Software Engineering - An Introduction. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (2000)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  27. Gravino, C., Scanniello, G., Tortora, G.: A controlled experiment conducted with bachelor students on dynamic modeling. Technical report, University of Salerno (2008), http://www.scienzemfn.unisa.it/scanniello/RE_Exp1/

  28. Purchase, H.C., Colpoys, L., McGill, M., Carrington, D., Britton, C.: UML class diagram syntax: an empirical study of comprehension. In: Proceedings of Australian Symposium on Information Visualisation, Sydney, Australia, pp. 113–120. Australian Computer Society (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Purchase, H.C., Wellanda, R., McGillb, M., Colpoysb, L.: Comprehension of diagram syntax: an empirical study of entity relationship notations. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 61(2), 187–203 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Baeza-Yates, R., Ribeiro-Neto, B.: Modern Information Retrieval. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Antoniol, G., Canfora, G., Casazza, G., De Lucia, A., Merlo, E.: Recovering traceability links between code and documentation. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 28(10), 970–983 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Zimmermann, T., Weissgerber, P., Diehl, S., Zeller, A.: Mining version histories to guide software changes. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 31(6), 429–445 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Briand, L., Penta, M.D., Labiche, Y.: Assessing and improving state-based class testing: A series of experiments. Transaction on Software Engineerig 30(11), 770–793 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Oppenheim, A.N.: Questionnaire Design, Interviewing and Attitude Measurement. Pinter Publishers (1992)

    Google Scholar 

  35. Devore, J.L., Farnum, N.: Applied Statistics for Engineers and Scientists. Duxbury (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  36. Conover, W.J.: Practical Nonparametric Statistics, 3rd edn. Wiley, Chichester (1998)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Dipartimento di Matematica e Informatica, University of Salerno, Via Ponte don Melillo, I-84084, Fisciano, (SA), Italy

    Carmine Gravino & Genoveffa Tortora

  2. Dipartimento di Matematica e Informatica, University of Basilicata, Viale dell’Ateneo, I-85100, Potenza, Italy

    Giuseppe Scanniello

Authors
  1. Carmine Gravino
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Giuseppe Scanniello
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Genoveffa Tortora
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Krzysztof Czarnecki Ileana Ober Jean-Michel Bruel Axel Uhl Markus Völter

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2008 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Gravino, C., Scanniello, G., Tortora, G. (2008). An Empirical Investigation on Dynamic Modeling in Requirements Engineering. In: Czarnecki, K., Ober, I., Bruel, JM., Uhl, A., Völter, M. (eds) Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems. MODELS 2008. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 5301. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-87875-9_43

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-87875-9_43

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-87874-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-87875-9

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation