skip to main content
10.1145/2576768.2598309acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesgeccoConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Applying search algorithms for optimizing stakeholders familiarity and balancing workload in requirements assignment

Published: 12 July 2014 Publication History

Abstract

During the early phase of project development lifecycle of large scale cyber-physical systems, a large number of requirements are needed to be assigned to different stakeholders from different organizations or different departments of the same organization for reviewing, clarifying and checking their conformance to industry standards and government or other regulations. These requirements have different characteristics such as various extents of importance to the organization, complexity, and dependencies between each other, thereby requiring different effort (workload) to review and clarify. While working with our industrial partners in the domain of cyber-physical systems, we discovered an optimization problem, where an optimal solution is required for assigning requirements to different stakeholders by maximizing their familiarities to the assigned requirements while balancing the overall workload of each stakeholder. We propose a fitness function which was investigated with four search algorithms: (1+1) Evolutionary Algorithm (EA), Genetic Algorithm, and Alternating Variable Method, whereas Random Search is used as a comparison base line. We empirically evaluated their performance for finding an optimal solution using a large-scale industrial case study and 120 artificial problems with varying complexity. Results show that (1+1) EA gives the best results together with our proposed fitness function as compared to the other three algorithms.

References

[1]
Cyber-Physical Systems (CPS): http://cyberphysicalsystems.org/
[2]
Ali S., Briand L. C., Hemmati H. and Panesar-Walawege R. K., "A Systematic Review of the Application and Empirical Investigation of Search-Based Test Case Generation," IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. 99 (RapidPosts), 2009.
[3]
Arcuri A., "It really does matter how you normalize the branch distance in search-based software testing," Software Testing, Verification and Reliability, 2011.
[4]
Arcuri A. and Briand. L., "A Practical Guide for Using Statistical Tests to Assess Randomized Algorithms in Software Engineering," in International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE), 2011.
[5]
Arcuri A. and Fraser G., "On Parameter Tuning in Search Based Software Engineering," in International Symposium on Search Based Software Engineering (SSBSE): Springer's Lecture Notes in Computer Science (LNCS) 2011.
[6]
Bagnall A. J., Rayward-Smith V. J. and Whittley I., "The next release problem," Information and Software Technology, vol. 43 (14), pp. 883--890, 2001.
[7]
Baker P., Harman M., Steinhofel K. and Skaliotis A., "Search based approaches to component selection and prioritization for the next release problem," Proc. Software Maintenance, 2006. ICSM'06. 22nd IEEE International Conference on, pp. 176--185, 2006.
[8]
Feather M. S. and Menzies T., "Converging on the optimal attainment of requirements," Proc. Requirements Engineering, 2002. Proceedings. IEEE Joint International Conference on, pp. 263--270, 2002.
[9]
Finkelstein A., Harman M., Mansouri S. A., Ren J. and Zhang Y., ""Fairness Analysis" in Requirements Assignments," Proc. International Requirements Engineering, 2008. RE'08. 16th IEEE, pp. 115--124, 2008.
[10]
Finkelstein A., Harman M., Mansouri S. A., Ren J. and Zhang Y., "A search based approach to fairness analysis in requirement assignments to aid negotiation, mediation and decision making," Requirements Engineering, vol. 14 (4), pp. 231--245, 2009.
[11]
Greer D. and Ruhe G., "Software release planning: an evolutionary and iterative approach," Information and Software Technology, vol. 46 (4), pp. 243--253, 2004.
[12]
Harman M., Mansouri S. A. and Zhang Y., "Search based software engineering: A comprehensive analysis and review of trends techniques and applications," Department of Computer Science, King College London, Tech. Rep. TR-09-03, 2009.
[13]
Saliu M. O. and Ruhe G., "Bi-objective release planning for evolving software systems," Proc. Proceedings of the the 6th joint meeting of the European software engineering conference and the ACM SIGSOFT symposium on The foundations of software engineering, pp. 105--114, 2007.
[14]
Zhang Y., Finkelstein A. and Harman M., "Search based requirements optimisation: Existing work and challenges," Requirements Engineering: Foundation for Software Quality, pp. 88--94, 2008.
[15]
Zhang Y., Harman M. and Mansouri S. A., "The multi-objective next release problem," Proc. Proceedings of the 9th annual conference on Genetic and evolutionary computation, pp. 1129--1137, 2007.

Cited By

View all
  • (2022)On the preferences of quality indicators for multi-objective search algorithms in search-based software engineeringEmpirical Software Engineering10.1007/s10664-022-10127-427:6Online publication date: 6-Aug-2022
  • (2021)Multi-objective whale optimization algorithm and multi-objective grey wolf optimizer for solving next release problem with developing fairness and uncertainty quality indicatorsApplied Intelligence10.1007/s10489-020-02018-2Online publication date: 8-Jan-2021
  • (2020)Quality Indicators in Search-based Software EngineeringACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology10.1145/337563629:2(1-29)Online publication date: 4-Mar-2020
  • Show More Cited By

Index Terms

  1. Applying search algorithms for optimizing stakeholders familiarity and balancing workload in requirements assignment

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Information & Contributors

      Information

      Published In

      cover image ACM Conferences
      GECCO '14: Proceedings of the 2014 Annual Conference on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation
      July 2014
      1478 pages
      ISBN:9781450326629
      DOI:10.1145/2576768
      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Sponsors

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      Published: 12 July 2014

      Permissions

      Request permissions for this article.

      Check for updates

      Author Tags

      1. experiment
      2. requirements assignment
      3. search algorithm
      4. search based requirements engineering

      Qualifiers

      • Research-article

      Conference

      GECCO '14
      Sponsor:
      GECCO '14: Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference
      July 12 - 16, 2014
      BC, Vancouver, Canada

      Acceptance Rates

      GECCO '14 Paper Acceptance Rate 180 of 544 submissions, 33%;
      Overall Acceptance Rate 1,669 of 4,410 submissions, 38%

      Contributors

      Other Metrics

      Bibliometrics & Citations

      Bibliometrics

      Article Metrics

      • Downloads (Last 12 months)7
      • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
      Reflects downloads up to 25 Feb 2025

      Other Metrics

      Citations

      Cited By

      View all
      • (2022)On the preferences of quality indicators for multi-objective search algorithms in search-based software engineeringEmpirical Software Engineering10.1007/s10664-022-10127-427:6Online publication date: 6-Aug-2022
      • (2021)Multi-objective whale optimization algorithm and multi-objective grey wolf optimizer for solving next release problem with developing fairness and uncertainty quality indicatorsApplied Intelligence10.1007/s10489-020-02018-2Online publication date: 8-Jan-2021
      • (2020)Quality Indicators in Search-based Software EngineeringACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology10.1145/337563629:2(1-29)Online publication date: 4-Mar-2020
      • (2020)CPS-PMBOK: How to Better Manage Cyber-Physical System Development ProjectsEnterprise Information Systems10.1007/978-3-030-40783-4_9(154-181)Online publication date: 20-Feb-2020
      • (2018)Search and similarity based selection of use case scenariosEmpirical Software Engineering10.1007/s10664-017-9500-x23:1(87-164)Online publication date: 27-Dec-2018
      • (2017)A multi-objective and cost-aware optimization of requirements assignment for review2017 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation (CEC)10.1109/CEC.2017.7969300(89-96)Online publication date: Jun-2017
      • (2017)Zen-ReqOptimizerEmpirical Software Engineering10.1007/s10664-015-9418-022:1(175-234)Online publication date: 1-Feb-2017
      • (2016)A practical guide to select quality indicators for assessing pareto-based search algorithms in search-based software engineeringProceedings of the 38th International Conference on Software Engineering10.1145/2884781.2884880(631-642)Online publication date: 14-May-2016
      • (2016)AVMf: An Open-Source Framework and Implementation of the Alternating Variable MethodSearch Based Software Engineering10.1007/978-3-319-47106-8_21(259-266)Online publication date: 24-Sep-2016
      • (2015)An Evolutionary and Automated Virtual Team Making Approach for Crowdsourcing PlatformsCrowdsourcing10.1007/978-3-662-47011-4_7(113-130)Online publication date: 29-May-2015

      View Options

      Login options

      View options

      PDF

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader

      Figures

      Tables

      Media

      Share

      Share

      Share this Publication link

      Share on social media