What Did You Mean? - Facing the Challenges of User-generated Software Requirements

Michaela Geierhos, Sabine Schulze, Frederik Simon Bäumer

2015

Abstract

Existing approaches towards service composition demand requirements of the customers in terms of service templates, service query profiles, or partial process models. However, addressed non-expert customers may be unable to fill-in the slots of service templates as requested or to describe, for example, pre- and postconditions, or even have difficulties in formalizing their requirements. Thus, our idea is to provide nonexperts with suggestions how to complete or clarify their requirement descriptions written in natural language. Two main issues have to be tackled: (1) partial or full inability (incapacity) of non-experts to specify their requirements correctly in formal and precise ways, and (2) problems in text analysis due to fuzziness in natural language. We present ideas how to face these challenges by means of requirement disambiguation and completion. Therefore, we conduct ontology-based requirement extraction and similarity retrieval based on requirement descriptions that are gathered from App marketplaces. The innovative aspect of our work is that we support users without expert knowledge in writing their requirements by simultaneously resolving ambiguity, vagueness, and underspecification in natural language.

References

  1. Berry, D. M., Kamsties, E., and Krieger, M. M. (2003). From contract drafting to software specification: Linguistic sources of ambiguity. https://cs.uwaterloo.ca/ %7Edberry/handbook/ambiguityHandbook.pdf.
  2. Bhat, M., Ye, C., and Jacobsen, H.-A. (2014). Orchestrating SOA Using Requirement Specifications and Domain Ontologies. In Service-Oriented Computing, pages 403-410. Springer.
  3. Boyd, S., Zowghi, D., and Farroukh, A. (2005). Measuring the expressiveness of a constrained natural language: an empirical study. In Proceedings of the 13th IEEE International Conference on Requirements Engineering, pages 339-349. IEEE.
  4. Choi, S.-P., Song, S.-K., Jung, H., Geierhos, M., and Myaeng, S. (2012). Scientic Literature Retrieval based on Terminological Paraphrases using Predicate Argument Tuple. Advanced Science and Technology Letters, 4:371-378. Information Science and Industrial Applications.
  5. Espana, S., Condori-Fernandez, N., Gonzalez, A., and Pastor, O . (2009). Evaluating the completeness and granularity of functional requirements specifications: a controlled experiment. In Requirements Engineering Conference, 2009. RE'09. 17th IEEE International, pages 161-170. IEEE.
  6. Fabbrini, F., Fusani, M., Gnesi, S., and Lami, G. (2001). An automatic quality evaluation for natural language requirements. In Proceedings of the Seventh International Workshop on Requirements Engineering: Foundation for Software Quality (REFSQ), volume 1, pages 4-5.
  7. Ferrari, A., dell'Orletta, F., Spagnolo, G. O., and Gnesi, S. (2014). Measuring and Improving the Completeness of Natural Language Requirements. In Requirements Engineering: Foundation for Software Quality, pages 23-38. Springer.
  8. Fuchs, N. E. and Schwitter, R. (1995). Specifying logic programs in controlled natural language. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Computational Logic for Natural Language Processing, pages 3-5. Arxiv.
  9. Geierhos, M. (2010). BiographIE - Klassifikation und Extraktion karrierespezifischer Informationen, volume 5 of Linguistic Resources for Natural Language Processing. Lincom, Munich, Germany.
  10. Génova, G., Fuentes, J. M., Llorens, J., Hurtado, O., and Moreno, V. (2013). A framework to measure and improve the quality of textual requirements. Requirements Engineering, 18(1):25-41.
  11. Gleich, B., Creighton, O., and Kof, L. (2010). Ambiguity detection: Towards a tool explaining ambiguity sources. In Requirements Engineering: Foundation for Software Quality, pages 218-232. Springer.
  12. Ilieva, M. and Ormandjieva, O. (2005). Automatic transition of natural language software requirements specification into formal presentation. In Natural Language Processing and Information Systems, pages 392-397. Springer.
  13. Kaiya, H. and Saeki, M. (2005). Ontology based requirements analysis: lightweight semantic processing approach. In Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Quality Software (QSIC 2005), pages 223- 230. IEEE.
  14. Kiyavitskaya, N., Zeni, N., Mich, L., and Berry, D. M. (2008). Requirements for tools for ambiguity identification and measurement in natural language requirements specifications. Requirements Engineering, 13(3):207-239.
  15. Loukanova, R. (2013). Algorithmic granularity with constraints. In Brain and Health Informatics, pages 399- 408. Springer.
  16. Menzel, I., Mueller, M., Gross, A., and Doerr, J. (2010). An experimental comparison regarding the completeness of functional requirements specifications. In Proceedings of the 18th IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE), pages 15-24. IEEE.
  17. Meth, H., Brhel, M., and Maedche, A. (2013). The state of the art in automated requirements elicitation. Information and Software Technology, 55(10):1695-1709.
  18. Murtaza, M., Shah, J. H., Azeem, A., Nisar, W., and Masood, M. (2013). Structured Language Requirement Elicitation Using Case Base Reasoning. Research Journal of Applied Sciences, Engineering and Technology, 6(23):4393-4398.
  19. Sommerville, I. (2010). Software Engineering. AddisonWesley, Harlow, England, 9th edition.
  20. Yang, H., De Roeck, A., Gervasi, V., Willis, A., and Nuseibeh, B. (2010a). Extending nocuous ambiguity analysis for anaphora in natural language requirements. In Proceedings of the 18th IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE), pages 25-34. IEEE.
  21. Yang, H., De Roeck, A., Gervasi, V., Willis, A., and Nuseibeh, B. (2011). Analysing anaphoric ambiguity in natural language requirements. Requirements Engineering, 16(3):163-189.
  22. Yang, H., Willis, A., De Roeck, A., and Nuseibeh, B. (2010b). Automatic detection of nocuous coordination ambiguities in natural language requirements. In Proceedings of the IEEE/ACM international conference on Automated software engineering, pages 53- 62. ACM.
Download


Paper Citation


in Harvard Style

Geierhos M., Schulze S. and Simon Bäumer F. (2015). What Did You Mean? - Facing the Challenges of User-generated Software Requirements . In Proceedings of the International Conference on Agents and Artificial Intelligence - Volume 1: PUaNLP, (ICAART 2015) ISBN 978-989-758-073-4, pages 277-283. DOI: 10.5220/0005346002770283


in Bibtex Style

@conference{puanlp15,
author={Michaela Geierhos and Sabine Schulze and Frederik Simon Bäumer},
title={What Did You Mean? - Facing the Challenges of User-generated Software Requirements},
booktitle={Proceedings of the International Conference on Agents and Artificial Intelligence - Volume 1: PUaNLP, (ICAART 2015)},
year={2015},
pages={277-283},
publisher={SciTePress},
organization={INSTICC},
doi={10.5220/0005346002770283},
isbn={978-989-758-073-4},
}


in EndNote Style

TY - CONF
JO - Proceedings of the International Conference on Agents and Artificial Intelligence - Volume 1: PUaNLP, (ICAART 2015)
TI - What Did You Mean? - Facing the Challenges of User-generated Software Requirements
SN - 978-989-758-073-4
AU - Geierhos M.
AU - Schulze S.
AU - Simon Bäumer F.
PY - 2015
SP - 277
EP - 283
DO - 10.5220/0005346002770283