DOCSLIB.ORG

Learning and Using Requirements Representation Notations by Information

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Learning and Using Requirements Representation Notations by Information Learning and Using Requirements Representation Notations by Information Technology Professionals A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of Drexel University by Ralph Rillman Miller III in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy November 2002 © Copyright 2002 Ralph R. Miller. All Rights Reserved. ii Dedications For Doranne, Wally, and Margaret iii Acknowledgements We are not alone. This dissertation is the culmination of fifty years of guidance, encouragement and loving patience from many people. I must first thank and acknowledge my lifelong mentor and uncle Dr. James W. Donald, PhD who has inspired and taught me, as has no other. I am indebted to Dr. Stephen J. Andriole, PhD whose enthusiasm encouraged me to enter this program in the first place. Next I acknowledge the enormous contribution of Dr. Scott Overmyer, PhD whose tireless patience and guidance have, in the end, been crucial to the success of this effort. I must recognize my reviewers who, from the pure goodness of their generous hearts have given unstintingly of their busy lives to help complete this work. And I am equally indebted to the brave volunteers who slogged through piles of papers and sometimes confusing directions to give their very best effort. Thank you all individually and collectively for your critical contributions to the study. You are, indeed, the true professionals. I am especially grateful to Mr. Hugh Gray and Mr. David Stephenson of the Computer Sciences Corporation who have unquestioningly provided vital support for this work. I must also thank all my friends, neighbors, and family past and present who have encouraged and sustained me especially during these past nine years of study, reflection and work. And finally, without the love, incredible patience and devotion of my lifelong companion, friend and wife Doranne, absolutely none of this, none of it, would have happened. It is inadequate but to all of you I can only say thank you. iv Table of Contents LIST OF TABLES ....................................................................................................................................................vi LIST OF FIGURES .................................................................................................................................................vii ABSTRACT .............................................................................................................................................................. xi CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................... 1 CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................................................................. 13 Expressing Requirements and the System Development Lifecycle .......................................................... 15 Previous Studies on the Relative Value of Different Notations................................................................. 18 Goals, Scenarios, and Prototypes .................................................................................................................... 25 Notations—Textual, Diagrammatic/Graphical and Formal........................................................................ 30 CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND METHODOLOGY ........................................................... 36 Approach of this Research................................................................................................................................ 38 Approach: Mapping the REL to the UIML.................................................................................................... 48 Approach: Mapping the UIML to the REL.................................................................................................... 51 Approach: The Pilot Study ............................................................................................................................... 54 CHAPTER 4: MAPPING BETWEEN THE REL AND THE UIML NOTATIONS.................................. 78 Overview of the Mappings............................................................................................................................... 78 Mapping the REL in Terms of the UIML Notation ..................................................................................... 78 Mapping the UIML in Terms of the REL ....................................................................................................100 CHAPTER 5: DATA REDUCTION AND ANALYSIS................................................................................156 Pilot Study Data Reduction ............................................................................................................................156 Discussion of Mapping Data..........................................................................................................................164 CHAPTER 6: RESULTS .....................................................................................................................................168 LIST OF REFERENCES .....................................................................................................................................185 APPENDIX A: STUDY MATERIALS AND QUESTIONNAIRES ..........................................................193 Project 01 – LEAP Familiarization ...............................................................................................................193 Questionnaires for Projects and Reviewer Materials .................................................................................210 v Reviewer Materials and Questionnaire.........................................................................................................223 VITA ........................................................................................................................................................................250 vi List of Tables 1. PROJECTS, PHASES AND DOCTYPES........................................................................................................................ 58 2. FUNCTIONS OF THE ZEN400..................................................................................................................................... 62 3. RESEARCH QUESTIONS (RQS) RELATED TO DATA TYPES................................................................................... 66 4. TIME KEEPING AND DATA EDITING WINDOWS OF THE LEAP TOOLKIT............................................................. 67 5. PERMITTED RELATIONSHIPS IN THE REQUIREMENTS ELEMENT LANGUAGE .................................................... 79 6. MEANING OF BOND-ARC MODIFIERS IN THE REQUIREMENTS ELEMENT LANGUAGE ..................................... 80 7. THE REL ELEMENT LEXICON.................................................................................................................................102 8. THE REL BOND-ARC LEXICON..............................................................................................................................103 9. MODIFICATIONS TO THE REL TO SHOW CARDINALITY......................................................................................105 10. MODIFICATIONS TO THE REL TO INDICATE ORDER AND EXISTENCE............................................................106 11. PARSED FUNCTIONS OF THE ZEN400 .................................................................................................................158 12. TIME DATA..............................................................................................................................................................160 13. TIME DATA (CONTINUED) ....................................................................................................................................160 14. AGGREGATE TIME DATA FOR STUDY CATEGORIES..........................................................................................161 15. ERROR DATA AS REPORTED BY VOLUNTEERS AND REVIEWERS....................................................................163 16. KNOWLEDGE AND UNDERSTANDING DATA.......................................................................................................165 17. EXPERT REVIEWER EVALUATION OF REPRESENTATIONS................................................................................166 18. EVALUATION OF STUDY MATERIALS BY VOLUNTEERS AND REVIEWERS.....................................................167 vii List of Figures 1. THE LUCITE BOX (REDRAWN WITH PERMISSION OF THE AUTHOR.) ..................................................................... 8 2. MAPPING BETWEEN THE REL AND THE UIML ..................................................................................................... 41 3. THE SEEHEIM USER INTERFACE MODEL (REDRAWN WITH PERMISSION OF THE AUTHOR.)............................ 45 4. THE STRUCTURE OF THE UIML (REDRAWN WITH PERMISSION OF THE AUTHOR.)........................................... 48 5. XML MODEL FOR REL ELEMENTS......................................................................................................................... 49 6. THE XML MODEL OF THE REL BOND TYPES....................................................................................................... 50 7. THE UIML ROOT ELEMENT...................................................................................................................................... 51 8. THE UIML ROOT ELEMENT REPRESENTED IN THE
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A New Golden Age for Computer Architecture: Domain-Specific
    A New Golden Age for Computer Architecture: Domain-Specific Hardware/Software Co-Design, Enhanced Security, Open Instruction Sets, and Agile Chip Development John Hennessy and David Patterson Stanford and UC Berkeley 13 June 2018 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3LVeEjsn8Ts 1 Outline Part I: History of Part II: Current Architecture - Architecture Challenges - Mainframes, Ending of Dennard Scaling Minicomputers, and Moore’s Law, Security Microprocessors, RISC vs CISC, VLIW Part III: Future Architecture Opportunities - Domain Specific Languages and Architecture, Open Architectures, Agile Hardware Development 2 IBM Compatibility Problem in Early 1960s By early 1960’s, IBM had 4 incompatible lines of computers! 701 ➡ 7094 650 ➡ 7074 702 ➡ 7080 1401 ➡ 7010 Each system had its own: ▪ Instruction set architecture (ISA) ▪ I/O system and Secondary Storage: magnetic tapes, drums and disks ▪ Assemblers, compilers, libraries,... ▪ Market niche: business, scientific, real time, ... IBM System/360 – one ISA to rule them all 3 Control versus Datapath ▪ Processor designs split between datapath, where numbers are stored and arithmetic operations computed, and control, which sequences operations on datapath ▪ Biggest challenge for computer designers was getting control correct Control Instruction Control Lines Condition?▪ Maurice Wilkes invented the idea of microprogramming to design the control unit of a PC processor* Datapath Registers Inst. Reg. ▪ Logic expensive vs. ROM or RAM ALU Busy? Address Data ▪ ROM cheaper than RAM Main Memory ▪ ROM much faster
    [Show full text]
  • Wake up with CPS 006 Program Design and Methodology I Computer Science and Programming What Is Computer Science? Computer Scienc
    Computer Science and Programming z Computer Science is more than programming ¾ The discipline is called informatics in many countries ¾ Elements of both science and engineering • Scientists build to learn, engineers learn to build Wake up with CPS 006 – Fred Brooks Program Design and Methodology I ¾ Elements of mathematics, physics, cognitive science, music, art, and many other fields z Computer Science is a young discipline Jeff Forbes ¾ Fiftieth anniversary in 1997, but closer to forty years of research and development ¾ First graduate program at CMU (then Carnegie Tech) in http://www.cs.duke.edu/courses/cps006/current 1965 http://www.cs.duke.edu/csed/tapestry z To some programming is an art, to others a science, to others an engineering discipline A Computer Science Tapestry 1.1 A Computer Science Tapestry 1.2 What is Computer Science? Computer Science What is it that distinguishes it from the z Artificial Intelligence thinking machines separate subjects with which it is related? z Scientific Computing weather, cars, heart, modelling What is the linking thread which gathers these z Theoretical CS analyze algorithms, models disparate branches into a single discipline? My answer to these questions is simple --- it is z Computational Geometry theory of animation, 3-D models the art of programming a computer. It is the art z Architecture hardware-software interface of designing efficient and elegant methods of z Software Engineering engineering, science getting a computer to solve problems, z Operating Systems the soul of the machine theoretical or practical, small or large, simple z Graphics from Windows to Hollywood or complex. z Many other subdisciplines C.A.R.
    [Show full text]
  • Reading List
    EECS 101 Introduction to Computer Science Dinda, Spring, 2009 An Introduction to Computer Science For Everyone Reading List Note: You do not need to read or buy all of these. The syllabus and/or class web page describes the required readings and what books to buy. For readings that are not in the required books, I will either provide pointers to web documents or hand out copies in class. Books David Harel, Computers Ltd: What They Really Can’t Do, Oxford University Press, 2003. Fred Brooks, The Mythical Man-month: Essays on Software Engineering, 20th Anniversary Edition, Addison-Wesley, 1995. Joel Spolsky, Joel on Software: And on Diverse and Occasionally Related Matters That Will Prove of Interest to Software Developers, Designers, and Managers, and to Those Who, Whether by Good Fortune or Ill Luck, Work with Them in Some Capacity, APress, 2004. Most content is available for free from Spolsky’s Blog (see http://www.joelonsoftware.com) Paul Graham, Hackers and Painters, O’Reilly, 2004. See also Graham’s site: http://www.paulgraham.com/ Martin Davis, The Universal Computer: The Road from Leibniz to Turing, W.W. Norton and Company, 2000. Ted Nelson, Computer Lib/Dream Machines, 1974. This book is now very rare and very expensive, which is sad given how visionary it was. Simon Singh, The Code Book: The Science of Secrecy from Ancient Egypt to Quantum Cryptography, Anchor, 2000. Douglas Hofstadter, Goedel, Escher, Bach: The Eternal Golden Braid, 20th Anniversary Edition, Basic Books, 1999. Stuart Russell and Peter Norvig, Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach, 2nd Edition, Prentice Hall, 2003.
    [Show full text]
  • ESD.33 -- Systems Engineering Session #1 Course Introduction
    ESD.33 -- Systems Engineering Session #4 Axiomatic Design Decision-Based Design Summary of Frameworks Phase Dan Frey Follow-up on Session #3 • Mike Fedor - Your lectures and readings about Lean Thinking have motivated me to re-read "The Goal" by Eliyahu M. Goldratt • Don Clausing – Remember that although set-based design seems to explain part of Toyota’s system, it also includes a suite of other powerful tools (QFD, Robust Design) • Denny Mahoney – What assumptions are you making about Ops Mgmt? Plan for the Session • Why are we doing this session? • Axiomatic Design (Suh) • Decision-Based Design (Hazelrigg) • What is rationality? • Overview of frameworks • Discussion of Exam #1 / Next steps Claims Made by Nam Suh • “A general theory for system design is presented” • “The theory is applicable to … large systems, software systems, organizations…” • “The flow diagram … can be used for many different tasks: design, construction, operation, modification, … maintenance … diagnosis …, and for archival documentation.” • “Design axioms were found to improve all designs without exceptions or counter-examples… When counter-examples or exceptions are proposed, the author always found flaws in the arguments.” Claims Made by Hazelrigg • “We present here … axioms and … theorems that underlie the mathematics of design” • “substantially different from … conventional … eng design” • “imposes severe conditions on upon design methodologies” • “all other measures are wrong” • “apply to … all fields of engineering … all products, processes, and services,
    [Show full text]
  • Compsci 6 Programming Design and Analysis
    CompSci 6 Programming Design and Analysis Robert C. Duvall http://www.cs.duke.edu/courses/cps006/fall04 http://www.cs.duke.edu/~rcd CompSci 6 : Spring 2005 1.1 What is Computer Science? Computer science is no more about computers than astronomy is about telescopes. Edsger Dijkstra Computer science is not as old as physics; it lags by a couple of hundred years. However, this does not mean that there is significantly less on the computer scientist's plate than on the physicist's: younger it may be, but it has had a far more intense upbringing! Richard Feynman http://www.wordiq.com CompSci 6 : Spring 2005 1.2 Scientists and Engineers Scientists build to learn, engineers learn to build – Fred Brooks CompSci 6 : Spring 2005 1.3 Computer Science and Programming Computer Science is more than programming The discipline is called informatics in many countries Elements of both science and engineering Elements of mathematics, physics, cognitive science, music, art, and many other fields Computer Science is a young discipline Fiftieth anniversary in 1997, but closer to forty years of research and development First graduate program at CMU (then Carnegie Tech) in 1965 To some programming is an art, to others a science, to others an engineering discipline CompSci 6 : Spring 2005 1.4 What is Computer Science? What is it that distinguishes it from the separate subjects with which it is related? What is the linking thread which gathers these disparate branches into a single discipline? My answer to these questions is simple --- it is the art of programming a computer.
    [Show full text]
  • The Computer Scientist As Toolsmith—Studies in Interactive Computer Graphics
    Frederick P. Brooks, Jr. Fred Brooks is the first recipient of the ACM Allen Newell Award—an honor to be presented annually to an individual whose career contributions have bridged computer science and other disciplines. Brooks was honored for a breadth of career contributions within computer science and engineering and his interdisciplinary contributions to visualization methods for biochemistry. Here, we present his acceptance lecture delivered at SIGGRAPH 94. The Computer Scientist Toolsmithas II t is a special honor to receive an award computer science. Another view of computer science named for Allen Newell. Allen was one of sees it as a discipline focused on problem-solving sys- the fathers of computer science. He was tems, and in this view computer graphics is very near especially important as a visionary and a the center of the discipline. leader in developing artificial intelligence (AI) as a subdiscipline, and in enunciating A Discipline Misnamed a vision for it. When our discipline was newborn, there was the What a man is is more important than what he usual perplexity as to its proper name. We at Chapel Idoes professionally, however, and it is Allen’s hum- Hill, following, I believe, Allen Newell and Herb ble, honorable, and self-giving character that makes it Simon, settled on “computer science” as our depart- a double honor to be a Newell awardee. I am pro- ment’s name. Now, with the benefit of three decades’ foundly grateful to the awards committee. hindsight, I believe that to have been a mistake. If we Rather than talking about one particular research understand why, we will better understand our craft.
    [Show full text]
  • Computer Science and Global Economic Development: Sounds Interesting, but Is It Computer Science?
    Computer Science and Global Economic Development: Sounds Interesting, but is it Computer Science? Tapan S. Parikh UC Berkeley School of Information Berkeley, CA, USA [email protected] OVERVIEW interventions from the bottom up, usually applying experi- Computer scientists have a long history of developing tools mental methods [1]. This includes prominent use of ICTs, useful for advancing knowledge and practice in other disci- both as the focus of new interventions (mobile phones for plines. More than fifty years ago, Grace Hopper said the making markets more efficient [6], digital cameras to moni- role of computers was “freeing mathematicians to do math- tor teacher attendance [2]), and as tools for understanding ematics.” [5] Fred Brooks referred to a computer scientist as their impact (PDAs and smartphones to conduct extensive a toolsmith, , making “things that do not themselves satisfy in-field surveys [8]). It is a wonderfully timely moment for human needs, but which others use in making things that computer scientists to engage with the state-of-the-art in enrich human living.” [4]. Computational biologists have ap- development research and practice. plied algorithmic techniques to process and understand the deluge of data made possible by recent advances in molecu- lar biology. WHY ACADEMIA? WHY CS? The proper way to approach this kind of research has never been clear within Computer Science. The refrain“Sounds Why do this work in academia, and within the disci- interesting, but is it Computer Science?” is frequently heard. pline of Computer Science? There are several motivations. In this paper I argue that it is crucial take an expansive Academia allows us to be more free, and take greater risks, view of what Computer Science is.
    [Show full text]
  • Systems Development Life Cycle
    Systems Development Life Cycle From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search For other uses, see SDLC (disambiguation). Model of the Systems Development Life Cycle with the Maintenance bubble highlighted. The Systems Development Life Cycle (SDLC), or Software Development Life Cycle in systems engineering, information systems and software engineering, is the process of creating or altering systems, and the models and methodologies that people use to develop these systems. The concept generally refers to computer or information systems. In software engineering the SDLC concept underpins many kinds of software development methodologies. These methodologies form the framework for planning and controlling the creation of an information system[1]: the software development process. Contents y 1 Overview y 2 History y 3 Systems development phases o 3.1 Requirements gathering and analysis o 3.2 Design o 3.3 Build or coding o 3.4 Testing o 3.5 Operations and maintenance y 4 Systems development life cycle topics o 4.1 Management and control o 4.2 Work breakdown structured organization o 4.3 Baselines in the SDLC o 4.4 Complementary to SDLC y 5 Strengths and weaknesses y 6 See also y 7 References y 8 Further reading y 9 External links [edit] Overview Systems and Development Life Cycle (SDLC) is a process used by a systems analyst to develop an information system, including requirements, validation, training, and user (stakeholder) ownership. Any SDLC should result in a high quality system that meets or exceeds customer expectations, reaches completion within time and cost estimates, works effectively and efficiently in the current and planned Information Technology infrastructure, and is inexpensive to maintain and cost-effective to enhance.[2] Computer systems are complex and often (especially with the recent rise of Service-Oriented Architecture) link multiple traditional systems potentially supplied by different software vendors.
    [Show full text]
  • Teaching How to Engineer Software Teaching How To
    CSEE&T-03 Madrid, Spain, 20 March 2003 Teaching how to engineer software CSEE&T-03 Keynote Dieter Rombach University of Kaiserslautern Computer Fraunhofer Institute Science Department for Experimental Software Software Engineering Chair Engineering (IESE) Kaiserslautern, Germany Kaiserslautern, Germany Slide 0 CSEE&T-03 Madrid, Spain, 20 March 2003 Focus & Message • Teaching the engineering of software requires –Communicating existing proven best practices as a basis –Concentration on first-order principles –Practice and experience of benefits –Analysis before construction Slide 1 1 CSEE&T-03 Madrid, Spain, 20 March 2003 Contents • (Software) Engineering • Practice of software engineering • Today’s typical teaching curricula • Some (innovative?) Ideas for adequate teaching • Proven Best Practices • (Graduate) SE Curriculum at Kaiserslautern • Summary & Outlook Slide 2 CSEE&T-03 Madrid, Spain, 20 March 2003 (Software) Engineering (Expectations) • Engineering requires the ability to – Choose an appropriate approach to solve a given problem à No optimal solution exists! – Assure adherence to best (proven) practices (engineering principles) à Ignorance violates due diligence! – Apply the approach in a predictable way à Can customize to goals & characteristics! – Repeat results à Continuous success & improvement! – Guarantee success before regular use à Works first time! – etc. Slide 3 2 CSEE&T-03 Madrid, Spain, 20 March 2003 (Software) Engineering (Special Characteristics) • Software Engineering –Focuses on development (non- deterministic
    [Show full text]
  • Arxiv:2106.11534V1 [Cs.DL] 22 Jun 2021 2 Nanjing University of Science and Technology, Nanjing, China 3 University of Southampton, Southampton, U.K
    Noname manuscript No. (will be inserted by the editor) Turing Award elites revisited: patterns of productivity, collaboration, authorship and impact Yinyu Jin1 · Sha Yuan1∗ · Zhou Shao2, 4 · Wendy Hall3 · Jie Tang4 Received: date / Accepted: date Abstract The Turing Award is recognized as the most influential and presti- gious award in the field of computer science(CS). With the rise of the science of science (SciSci), a large amount of bibliographic data has been analyzed in an attempt to understand the hidden mechanism of scientific evolution. These include the analysis of the Nobel Prize, including physics, chemistry, medicine, etc. In this article, we extract and analyze the data of 72 Turing Award lau- reates from the complete bibliographic data, fill the gap in the lack of Turing Award analysis, and discover the development characteristics of computer sci- ence as an independent discipline. First, we show most Turing Award laureates have long-term and high-quality educational backgrounds, and more than 61% of them have a degree in mathematics, which indicates that mathematics has played a significant role in the development of computer science. Secondly, the data shows that not all scholars have high productivity and high h-index; that is, the number of publications and h-index is not the leading indicator for evaluating the Turing Award. Third, the average age of awardees has increased from 40 to around 70 in recent years. This may be because new breakthroughs take longer, and some new technologies need time to prove their influence. Besides, we have also found that in the past ten years, international collabo- ration has experienced explosive growth, showing a new paradigm in the form of collaboration.
    [Show full text]
  • History of Computer Science
    HISTORY OF COMPUTER SCIENCE Gordana Dodig - Crnkovic, e-mail: [email protected] 1 A group of students at the Department of Electrical Engineering University of Pennsylvania have designed "ENIAC(TM)-on-a-Chip", under supervision of Professor J. Van der Spiegel, in collaboration with Dr. F. Ketterer. This was done as part of Eniac's 50th Anniversary Celebration. They have integrated the whole "ENIAC" on a 7.44 by 5.29 sq. mm chip using a 0.5 micrometer CMOS technology. 2 Table of Contents INTRODUCTION: MILESTONES IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF COMPUTERS ...............4 Before 1900: First Computing Devices ..................................................................................4 1900 – 1939 The Rise of Mathematics...................................................................................6 1940's: First Electronic Digital Computer..............................................................................6 1950's......................................................................................................................................7 1960's......................................................................................................................................7 1970's......................................................................................................................................8 1980's......................................................................................................................................8 1990's and Beyond..................................................................................................................9
    [Show full text]
  • Thinking Object Oriented
    Chapter 1 Thinking Ob ject Oriented Ob ject-oriented programming has b ecome exceedingly p opular in the past few years. Soft- ware pro ducers rush to release ob ject-oriented versions of their pro ducts. Countless b o oks and sp ecial issues of academic and trade journals have app eared on the sub ject. Students strive to b e able somehow to list \exp erience in ob ject-oriented programming" on their re- sumes. To judge from this frantic activity, ob ject-oriented programming is b eing greeted with an even greater p opularity than wehave seen in the past heralding earlier revolutionary ideas, such as \structured programming" or \exp ert systems". My intent in this rst chapter is to investigate and explain the basic principles of ob ject oriented programming, and in doing so to illustrate the following two prop ositions: OOP is a revolutionary idea, totally unlikeanything that has come b efore in program- ming. OOP is an evolutionary step, following naturally on the heels of earlier programming abstractions. 1.1 Why is Ob ject-Oriented Programming Popular? To judge from much of the p opular press, the following represent a few of the p ossible reasons why Ob ject-oriented programming has, in the past decade, b ecome so p opular: The hop e that it will quickly and easily lead to increased pro ductivity and improved reliability help solve the software crises. The desire for an easy transition from existing languages. The resonant similarity to techniques of thinking ab out problems in other domains.
    [Show full text]