Measuring the Fitness-for-Purpose of Requirements: An initial Model of Activities and Attributes

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2405.09895v1
• Date: Thu, 16 May 2024 08:31:44 GMT
• Title: Measuring the Fitness-for-Purpose of Requirements: An initial Model of Activities and Attributes
• Authors: Julian Frattini, Jannik Fischbach, Davide Fucci, Michael Unterkalmsteiner, Daniel Mendez,
• Abstract summary: We propose an initial model of requirements-affected activities and their attributes. Our long-term goal is to develop evidence-based decision support on how to optimize the fitness for purpose of the RE phase.
• Score: 4.147594239309427
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Requirements engineering aims to fulfill a purpose, i.e., inform subsequent software development activities about stakeholders' needs and constraints that must be met by the system under development. The quality of requirements artifacts and processes is determined by how fit for this purpose they are, i.e., how they impact activities affected by them. However, research on requirements quality lacks a comprehensive overview of these activities and how to measure them. In this paper, we specify the research endeavor addressing this gap and propose an initial model of requirements-affected activities and their attributes. We construct a model from three distinct data sources, including both literature and empirical data. The results yield an initial model containing 24 activities and 16 attributes quantifying these activities. Our long-term goal is to develop evidence-based decision support on how to optimize the fitness for purpose of the RE phase to best support the subsequent, affected software development process. We do so by measuring the effect that requirements artifacts and processes have on the attributes of these activities. With the contribution at hand, we invite the research community to critically discuss our research roadmap and support the further evolution of the model.

Related papers

• A Systematic Review of Business Process Improvement: Achievements and Potentials in Combining Concepts from Operations Research and Business Process Management [0.0]
  Business Process Management and Operations Research aim to enhance value creation in organizations. This systematic literature review identifies and analyzes work that uses combined concepts from both disciplines. Results indicate a strong focus on resource allocation and scheduling problems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-02T14:13:14Z)
• The Responsible Foundation Model Development Cheatsheet: A Review of Tools & Resources [100.23208165760114]
  Foundation model development attracts a rapidly expanding body of contributors, scientists, and applications. To help shape responsible development practices, we introduce the Foundation Model Development Cheatsheet.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-24T15:55:49Z)
• GPT in Data Science: A Practical Exploration of Model Selection [0.7646713951724013]
  This research is committed to advancing our comprehension of AI decision-making processes. Our efforts are directed towards creating AI systems that are more transparent and comprehensible.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-20T03:42:24Z)
• Data-Centric Long-Tailed Image Recognition [49.90107582624604]
  Long-tail models exhibit a strong demand for high-quality data. Data-centric approaches aim to enhance both the quantity and quality of data to improve model performance. There is currently a lack of research into the underlying mechanisms explaining the effectiveness of information augmentation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-03T06:34:37Z)
• Information-Theoretic Odometry Learning [83.36195426897768]
  We propose a unified information theoretic framework for learning-motivated methods aimed at odometry estimation. The proposed framework provides an elegant tool for performance evaluation and understanding in information-theoretic language.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-03-11T02:37:35Z)
• When Can Models Learn From Explanations? A Formal Framework for Understanding the Roles of Explanation Data [84.87772675171412]
  We study the circumstances under which explanations of individual data points can improve modeling performance. We make use of three existing datasets with explanations: e-SNLI, TACRED, SemEval.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-02-03T18:57:08Z)
• All That Glitters Is Not Gold: Towards Process Discovery Techniques with Guarantees [1.3299507495084417]
  The better the quality of the event data, the better the quality of the model that is discovered. We demonstrate this by using a range of quality measures for both event data and discovered process models. This paper is a call to the community of IS engineers to complement their process discovery algorithms with properties that relate qualities of their inputs to those of their outputs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-12-23T16:08:47Z)
• A Technique for Determining Relevance Scores of Process Activities using Graph-based Neural Networks [0.0]
  We develop a technique to determine the relevance scores for process activities with respect to performance measures. Annotating process models with such relevance scores facilitates a problem-focused analysis of the business process. We quantitatively evaluate the predictive quality of our technique using four datasets from different domains, to demonstrate the faithfulness of the relevance scores.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-08-07T12:15:30Z)
• Goal-Aware Prediction: Learning to Model What Matters [105.43098326577434]
  One of the fundamental challenges in using a learned forward dynamics model is the mismatch between the objective of the learned model and that of the downstream planner or policy. We propose to direct prediction towards task relevant information, enabling the model to be aware of the current task and encouraging it to only model relevant quantities of the state space. We find that our method more effectively models the relevant parts of the scene conditioned on the goal, and as a result outperforms standard task-agnostic dynamics models and model-free reinforcement learning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-07-14T16:42:59Z)
• Causal Feature Selection for Algorithmic Fairness [61.767399505764736]
  We consider fairness in the integration component of data management. We propose an approach to identify a sub-collection of features that ensure the fairness of the dataset.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-10T20:20:10Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.