• DocumentCode
    1799840
  • Title

    Experimental evaluation of a tool for change impact prediction in requirements models: Design, results, and lessons learned

  • Author

    Goknil, Arda ; van Domburg, Roderick ; Kurtev, Ivan ; van den Berg, Klaas ; Wijnhoven, Fons

  • Author_Institution
    Univ. of Luxembourg, Luxembourg, Luxembourg
  • fYear
    2014
  • fDate
    25-25 Aug. 2014
  • Firstpage
    57
  • Lastpage
    66
  • Abstract
    There are commercial tools like IBM Rational RequisitePro and DOORS that support semi-automatic change impact analysis for requirements. These tools capture the requirements relations and allow tracing the paths they form. In most of these tools, relation types do not say anything about the meaning of the relations except the direction. When a change is introduced to a requirement, the requirements engineer analyzes the impact of the change in related requirements. In case semantic information is missing to determine precisely how requirements are related to each other, the requirements engineer generally has to assume the worst case dependencies based on the available syntactic information only. We developed a tool that uses formal semantics of requirements relations to support change impact analysis and prediction in requirements models. The tool TRIC (Tool for Requirements Inferencing and Consistency checking) works on models that explicitly represent requirements and the relations among them with their formal semantics. In this paper we report on the evaluation of how TRIC improves the quality of change impact predictions. A quasi-experiment is systematically designed and executed to empirically validate the impact of TRIC. We conduct the quasi-experiment with 21 master´s degree students predicting change impact for five change scenarios in a real software requirements specification. The participants are assigned with Microsoft Excel, IBM RequisitePro or TRIC to perform change impact prediction for the change scenarios. It is hypothesized that using TRIC would positively impact the quality of change impact predictions. Two formal hypotheses are developed. As a result of the experiment, we are not able to reject the null hypotheses, and thus we are not able to show experimentally the effectiveness of our tool. In the paper we discuss reasons for the failure to reject the null hypotheses in the experiment.
  • Keywords
    formal specification; formal verification; software tools; systems analysis; DOORS; IBM Rational RequisitePro; Microsoft Excel; TRIC tool; change impact prediction; formal semantics; requirement models; requirements engineer; semantic information; semiautomatic change impact analysis; software requirement specification; syntactic information; tool for requirements inferencing and consistency checking; Analysis of variance; Reliability; Semantics; Software tools; Spreadsheet programs; Standards; Requirements management tools; change impact analysis; requirements models;
  • fLanguage
    English
  • Publisher
    ieee
  • Conference_Titel
    Model-Driven Requirements Engineering Workshop (MoDRE), 2014 IEEE 4th International
  • Conference_Location
    Karlskrona
  • Type

    conf

  • DOI
    10.1109/MoDRE.2014.6890826
  • Filename
    6890826