Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Representing and reasoning about preferences in requirements engineering

  • Best Papers of Re’10: Requirements Engineering in a Multi-faceted World
  • Published:
Requirements Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The priorities that stakeholders associate with requirements may vary from stakeholder to stakeholder and from one situation to the next. Differing priorities, in turn, imply different design decisions for the system to be. While elicitation of requirement priorities is a well-studied activity, modeling and reasoning with prioritization has not enjoyed equal attention. In this paper, we address this problem by extending a state-of-the-art goal modeling notation to support the representation of preference (“nice-to-have”) requirements. In our extension, preference goals are distinguished from mandatory ones. Then, quantitative prioritizations of the former are constructed and used as criteria for evaluating alternative ways to achieve the latter. To generate solutions, an existing preference-based planner is utilized to efficiently search for alternatives that best satisfy a given set of mandatory and preferred requirements. With such a planning tool, analysts can acquire a better understanding of the impact of high-level stakeholder preferences on low-level design decisions.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. van Lamsweerde A (2001) Goal-oriented requirements engineering: a guided tour. In: Proceedings of the fifth IEEE international symposium on requirements engineering, RE ’01. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC

  2. Dardenne A, van Lamsweerde A, Fickas S (1993) Goal-directed requirements acquisition. Sci Comput Program 20(1–2):3–50

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  3. Giorgini P, Mylopoulos J, Nicchiarelli E, Sebastiani R (2002) Reasoning with goal models. In: Proceedings of the 21st international conference on conceptual modeling (ER’02). London, UK, pp 167–181

  4. Yu ESK (1997) Towards modelling and reasoning support for early-phase requirements engineering. In: Proceedings of the 3rd IEEE international symposium on requirements engineering (RE’97). Washington, DC

  5. Liaskos S, Lapouchnian A, Yu Y, Yu E, Mylopoulos J (2006) On goal-based variability acquisition and analysis. In: Proceedings of the 14th IEEE international requirements engineering conference (RE’06). IEEE Computer Society, Minneapolis, pp 79–88

  6. Hui B, Liaskos S, Mylopoulos J (2003) Requirements analysis for customizable software: a goals-skills-preferences framework. In: Proceedings of the 11th IEEE international requirements engineering conference (RE’03). Monterey Bay, pp 117–126

  7. Mylopoulos J, Chung L, Liao S, Wang H, Yu E (2001) Exploring alternatives during requirements analysis. IEEE Softw 18(1):92–96

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Karlsson J, Ryan K (1997) A cost-value approach for prioritizing requirements. IEEE Softw 14(5):67–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Sohrabi S, Baier JA, McIlraith S (2009) HTN planning with preferences. In: Proceedings of the 21st international joint conference on artificial intelligence (IJCAI’09). Pasadena, pp 1790–1797

  10. Gerevini A, Long D (2005) Plan constraints and preferences in PDDL3. Technical report. Department of Electronics for Automation, University of Brescia

  11. Nau D, Cao Y, Lotem A, noz Avila HM (1999) SHOP: simple hierarchical ordered planner. In: Proceedings of the 16th international joint conference on artificial intelligence (IJCAI-99), pp 968–973

  12. Liaskos S, McIlraith SA, Sohrabi S, Mylopoulos J (2010) Integrating preferences into goal models for requirements engineering. In: Proceedings of the 10th international requirements engineering conference (RE’10). Sydney, Australia, pp 135–144

  13. Yu ESK, Mylopoulos J (1994) Understanding “why” in software process modelling, analysis, and design. In: Proceedings of the 16th international conference on software engineering (ICSE’94), pp 159–168

  14. Liaskos S, Lapouchnian A, Wang Y, Yu Y, Easterbrook S (2005) Configuring common personal software: a requirements-driven approach. In: Proceedings of the 13th IEEE international requirements engineering conference (RE’05). Paris, France, pp 9–18

  15. Czarnecki K, Eisenecker UW (2000) Generative programming—methods, tools, and applications. Addison-Wesley, Reading

    Google Scholar 

  16. Fuxman A, Liu L, Mylopoulos J, Pistore M, Roveri M, Traverso P (2004) Specifying and analyzing early requirements in Tropos. Requir Eng 9(2):132–150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Wang X, Lesperance Y (2001) Agent-oriented requirements engineering using ConGolog and i*. In: AOIS-2001 Bi-conference workshop at agents 2001 and CAiSE’01

  18. Jureta IJ, Borgida A, Ernst NA, Mylopoulos J (2010) Techne: towards a new generation of requirements modeling languages with goals, preferences, and inconsistency handling. In: Proceedings of the 18th IEEE international requirements engineering conference (RE’10). Sydney, Australia, pp 115–124

  19. Saaty RW (1987) The analytic hierarchy process—what it is and how it is used. Math Model 9(3-5):161–176

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  20. Vaidya OS, Kumar S (2006) Analytic hierarchy process: an overview of applications. Eur J Oper Res 169(1):1–29

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  21. Wiegers K (1999) First things first: prioritizing requirements. Softw Develop 7(9)

  22. Azar J, Smith RK, Cordes D (2007) Value-oriented requirements prioritization in a small development organization. IEEE Softw 24:32–37

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Hansson SO (2005) Decision theory: a brief introduction. Technical report, Department of Philosophy and the History of Technology, Royal Institute of Technology (KTH)

  24. Dwyer MB, Avrunin GS, Corbett JC (1999) Patterns in property specifications for finite-state verification. In: Proceedings of the 21st international conference on software engineering (ICSE ’99). IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos, pp 411–420

  25. Liaskos S, Litoiu M, Jungblut MD, Mylopoulos J (2011) Goal-based behavioral customization of information systems. In: Proceedings of the 23rd international conference on advanced information systems engineering (CAiSE’11). London, UK

  26. Liaskos S, Jungblut MD, Mylopoulos J (2010) From goal models to three-layer web-based systems: an exploratory study. In: Proceedings of the 1st RE’10 workshop on the web and requirements engineering (WeRE’10). Sydney, Australia

  27. Liaskos S, McIlraith SA, Mylopoulos J (2009) Towards augmenting requirements models with preferences. In: Proceedings of the 24th IEEE/ACM international conference on automated software engineering (ASE’09), pp 565–569

  28. Erol K, Hendler J, Nau D (1996) Complexity results for HTN planning. Ann Math Artif Intel 18:69–93

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  29. Jureta I, Mylopoulos J, Faulkner S (2008) Revisiting the core ontology and problem in requirements engineering. In: Proceedings of the 16th IEEE international requirements engineering conference (RE’08), pp 71–80

  30. Beck K (1999) Extreme programming explained. Addison Wesley, Reading

    Google Scholar 

  31. Clegg D, Barker R (1994) Case method fast-track: a RAD approach. Addison Wesley, Reading

    Google Scholar 

  32. In HP, Olson D, Rodgers T (2002) Multi-criteria preference analysis for systematic requirements negotiation. In: Proceedings of the 26th annual international computer software and applications conference (COMPSAC’02), pp 887–892

  33. Avesani P, Bazzanella C, Perini A, Susi A, Facing scalability issues in requirements prioritization with machine learning techniques. In: Proceedings of the 13th IEEE international requirements engineering conference (RE’05), pp 297–305

  34. Zhang H, Jarzabek S, Yang B (2003) Quality prediction and assessment for product lines. In: Proceedings of the 15th international conference on advanced information systems engineering (CAiSE’03), pp 681–695

  35. Halmans G, Pohl K (2003) Communicating the variability of a software-product family to customers. Softw Syst Model 2(1):15–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Lapouchnian A, Yu Y, Mylopoulos J (2007) Requirements-driven design and configuration management of business processes. In: Proceedings of the 5th international conference on business process management (BPM 2007), pp 246–261

  37. Lu R, Sadiq S, Governatori G (2009) On managing business processes variants. Data Knowl Eng 68(7):642–664

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Gottschalk F, van der Aalst WM, Jansen-Vullers MH, La Rosa M (2008) Configurable workflow models. Int J Cooperat Inf Syst

  39. Sadiq SW, Orlowska ME, Sadiq W (2005) Specification and validation of process constraints for flexible workflows. Inf Syst 30(5):349–378

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Soffer P, Wand Y (2005) On the notion of soft-goals in business process modeling. Bus Process Manage J 11:663–679

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Soffer P, Wand Y (2007) Goal-driven multi-process analysis. J Assoc Inf Syst 8(3):175–203

    Google Scholar 

  42. Yi Ch, Johannesson P (1999) Beyond goal representation: checking goal-satisfaction by temporal reasoning with business processes. In: Advanced information systems engineering, lecture notes in computer science, vol 1626, pp 462–466

  43. Andersson B, Johannesson P, Zdravkovic J (2009) Aligning goals and services through goal and business modelling. Inf Syst e-Bus Manage 7:143–169

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Krogstie J, Sindre G (1996) Utilizing deontic operators in information systems specification. Requir Eng 1:210–237

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Padmanabhan V, Governatori G, Sadiq S, Colomb R, Rotolo A (2006) Process modelling: the deontic way. In: Proceedings of the 3rd Asia-Pacific conference on conceptual modelling (APCCM ’06). Darlinghurst, Australia, pp 75–84

  46. Fantechi A, Asirelli P, ter Beek M, Gnesi S (2009) Deontic logics for modeling behavioural variability. In: Proceedings of the 3rd international workshop on variability modelling of software-intensive systems (VaMoS’09). Sevilla, Spain

  47. Diaper D, Stanton NA (2004) The handbook of task analysis for human-computer interaction. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, London

    Google Scholar 

  48. Wang Y, McIlraith SA, Yu Y, Mylopoulos J (2007) An automated approach to monitoring and diagnosing requirements. In: Proceedings of the 22nd IEEE/ACM international conference on automated software engineering (ASE ’07), pp 293–302

  49. Sutcliffe AG, Maiden NAM, Minocha S, Manuel D (1998) Supporting scenario-based requirements engineering. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 24(12):1072–1088

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Gans G, Jarke M, Lakemeyer G, Vits T (2002) Snet: A modeling and simulation environment for agent networks based on i* and ConGolog. In: Proceedings of the 14th international conference on advanced information systems engineering (CAiSE’02). Toronto, Canada

  51. Bryl V, Giorgini P, Mylopoulos J (2006) Designing cooperative IS: Exploring and evaluating alternatives. In: Proceedings of the 14th international conference on cooperative information systems (CoopIS’06). Springer, Montpellier, pp 533–550

  52. Sebastiani R, Giorgini P, Mylopoulos J (2004) Simple and minimum-cost satisfiability for goal models. In: Proceedings of the 16th conference on advanced information systems engineering (CAiSE’04), pp 20–35

  53. Horkoff J, Yu E (2011) Analyzing goal models—different approaches and how to choose among them. In: Proceedings of the 26th symposium on applied computing (SAC’11). Taiwan

  54. Kaiya H, Horai H, Saeki M (2002) AGORA: attributed goal-oriented requirements analysis method. In: Proceedings of the 10th anniversary IEEE joint international requirements engineering conference (RE’02), pp 13–22

  55. Schobbens PY, Heymans P, Trigaux JC (2006) Feature diagrams: A survey and a formal semantics. In: Proceedings of the 14th IEEE international requirements engineering conference (RE’06), IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos, pp 139–148

  56. Borba C, Silva C (2009) A comparison of goal-oriented approaches to model software product lines variability. In: Proceedings of the ER 2009 workshops on advances in conceptual modeling—challenging perspectives, pp 244–253

  57. António S, Araújo Ja, Silva C (2009) Adapting the i* framework for software product lines. In: Proceedings of the ER 2009 workshop on requirements, intentions and goals in conceptual modeling (RIGIM’09), pp 286–295

  58. Uno K, Hayashi S, Saeki M (2009) Constructing feature models using goal-oriented analysis. In: Proceedings of the 9th international conference on quality software (QSIC ’09), pp 412–417

  59. Yu Y, do Prado Leite JCS, Lapouchnian A, Mylopoulos J (2008) Configuring features with stakeholder goals. In: Proceedings of the 2008 ACM symposium on applied computing (SAC ’08), pp 645–649

  60. Silva L, Batista T, Soares S, Santos L (2010) On the role of features and goals models in the aspect-oriented development of software product line. Information Sciences and Technologies Bulletin of the ACM Slovakia, Special Section on Early Aspects 2

  61. Mussbacher G, Amyot D, Araújo Ja, Moreira A (2008) Modeling software product lines with AoURN. In: Proceedings of the 2008 AOSD workshop on early aspects (EA’08), EA ’08, vol 2, pp 1–2 (8)

  62. van Lamsweerde A (2000) Requirements engineering in the year 00: a research perspective. In: Proceedings of the 22nd international conference on software engineering (ICSE’00). ACM, New York, pp 5–19

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Information Technology, York University, Toronto, Canada

    Sotirios Liaskos

  2. Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada

    Sheila A. McIlraith, Shirin Sohrabi & John Mylopoulos

Authors
  1. Sotirios Liaskos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sheila A. McIlraith
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Shirin Sohrabi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. John Mylopoulos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sotirios Liaskos.

Additional information

Extended version of the paper titled Integrating Preferences into Goal Models for Requirements Engineering that appears in the Proceedings of the 18th International Requirements Engineering Conference, Sydney, Australia, 2010, pp. 135–144 [12].

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Liaskos, S., McIlraith, S.A., Sohrabi, S. et al. Representing and reasoning about preferences in requirements engineering. Requirements Eng 16, 227–249 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00766-011-0129-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00766-011-0129-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation