Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A two‐step methodology to reduce requirement defects

  • Published:
Annals of Software Engineering

Abstract

Defects are introduced into a software product during every phase of software development. A major source of defects that is often overlooked is requirements generation. Requirement errors discovered in later phases of the software development process are the most costly to correct because all phases of software development are usually impacted. Requirement defects can be categorized into two main types: 1) specification generation errors; and 2) unwanted/unnecessary/incorrect user functionality. This experience report presents the results of incorporating a two‐step methodology which combines Operational Demonstrations of the user interface and Requirement Inspections on software requirement specifications. The two‐step methodology addresses and corrects both types of requirement defects. Results from this experience support the premise that cost reduction and quality improvement can be obtained using a combined Operational Demonstration and Requirement Inspection development methodology for software requirements.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Beohm, B. (1987), “Industrial software metrics top-10 list,” IEEE Software 3,9, 84–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bisant, B. and J. Lyle (1989), “A Two-Person Inspection Method to Improve Programming Productivity,” IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 15,10, 1294–1304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, A. (1992), “Operational Prototyping: A New Development Approach,” IEEE Software 9,5, 70–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fagan, M. (1976), “Design and Code Inspections to Reduce Errors in Program Development,” IBM Systems Journal 15,3, 182–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fagan, M. (1986), “Advances in Software Inspections,” IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering SE-12,7, 744–751.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hekmatpour, S. (1987), “Experience with evolutionary prototyping in a large software system,” ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes 12, 38–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kolkhorst, B. and A. Macina (1988), “Developing Error-Free Software,” IEEE AES Magazine, 25–31.

  • Martin, J. and W. Tsai (1990), “N-Fold Inspection: A Requirements Analysis Technique,” Communications of the ACM 33,2, 225–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pleeger, S. (1992), “Measuring software reliability,” IEEE Spectrum, 56–60.

  • Royce, W. (1987), “Managing the development of large software systems: concepts and techniques,” In Proc. 9th Conf. Software Engineering, pp. 328–338.

  • Russell, G. (1991), “Experience with Inspection in Ultralarge-Scale Developments,” IEEE Software 8,1, 25–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Naval Undersea Warfare Center Division, Code 3122, 1176 Howell Street, Newport, RI, 02841‐1708, USA

    Robert J. Kosman

Authors
  1. Robert J. Kosman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kosman, R.J. A two‐step methodology to reduce requirement defects. Annals of Software Engineering 3, 477–494 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1018925618802

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1018925618802

Keywords

Search

Navigation