以目標驅動之需求追溯方法

以作者查詢圖書館館藏

、以作者查詢臺灣博碩士

、以作者查詢全國書目

、勘誤回報

、線上人數：68

、訪客IP：3.145.91.121

姓名

李文廷(Wen-Tin Lee) 查詢紙本館藏

畢業系所

資訊工程學系

論文名稱

以目標驅動之需求追溯方法
(G-ART: A Goal-driven Approach toRequirements Traceability)

相關論文

★ 移動代理人監控系統之設計與實作	★ 以正規表式法為基礎之地理編碼服務設計與實作
★ Android應用程式開發之持續整合系統	★ 基於設計矩陣之需求追溯關係建立方法
★ 點對點移動代理人之設計與實作與於車資通訊之應用	★ 網頁內容叢集分類法之設計與實作
★ 設計與實作於行動裝置上以XUL為基礎之介面呈現	★ Android平台上以OSGi為基礎之服務遞送
★ 利用網頁內容結構之區塊擷取方法以呈現新聞服務	★ 設計與實作以感測器為中心的查詢機制
★ 針對路徑規劃服務之Web 2.0系統設計與實作	★ 整合OSGi與RESTful服務之BPEL引擎
★ 利用文件相似度以轉換網路內容為OSGi Bundles	★ 量測Java類別的耦合關係
★ 轉換Android應用程式為OSGi Service	★ 物聯網應用之Context塑模方法

檔案

[Endnote RIS 格式]

[Bibtex 格式]

[相關文章]

[文章引用]

[完整記錄]

[館藏目錄]

[檢視]

[下載]

本電子論文使用權限為同意立即開放。
已達開放權限電子全文僅授權使用者為學術研究之目的，進行個人非營利性質之檢索、閱讀、列印。
請遵守中華民國著作權法之相關規定，切勿任意重製、散佈、改作、轉貼、播送，以免觸法。

摘要(中)

近年來，需求追溯和變更影響分析在需求工程方法的研究領域越
來越受到重視。然而，在開發軟體系統的過程中，目前的需求管理方
法並無法系統化的處理追溯關連性與需求變更。因此，本研究提出了
一套目標驅動之需求追溯方法以系統化開發與管理需求，並使用會議
排程系統以說明所發展之方法。本研究方法包含三個面向：
(1) 根據目標導向使用案例方法發展系統與管理需求;
(2) 使用設計結構矩陣建立與維護需求追溯關連性，並產生設計結構
矩陣區塊與需求追溯樹;
(3) 根據設計結構矩陣區塊使用變更分析演算法分析需求變更的影
響。

摘要(英)

Recently, the growing popularity of requirements engineering methodologies has implied
an increasing focus on requirements traceability and change impact analysis. However, exist-
ing approaches cannot systematically handle traceability relations and requirements changes
when developing software systems. This study proposes a goal-driven requirements trace-
ability approach to develop and manage requirements along three aspects: (1) to develop
software and manage requirements according to the goal-driven use case (GDUC) approach,
(2) to establish and maintain the traceability relation with a design structure matrix (DSM)
to derive the traceability tree, and (3) to analyze requirements change impacts using the
impact analysis algorithms based on DSM partitions. The proposed approach is illustrated
by the problem domain of meeting scheduler systems.

關鍵字(中)

★ 需求追溯
★ 設計結構矩陣
★ 目標驅動
★ 目標驅動使用案例

關鍵字(英)

★ requirements traceability
★ GDUC
★ Goal-Driven
★ DSM

論文目次

ABSTRACT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iii
DEDICATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v
TABLE OF CONTENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vi
LIST OF FIGURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . viii
LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . x
CHAPTER
I INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
I.A Motivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
I.B Organization of the Dissertation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
II BACKGROUND WORK . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
II.A Requirements Traceability Reference Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
II.B Design Structure Matrix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
III G-ART: Goal-driven Approach to Requirements Traceability . . . . . . . . . . 11
III.A Goal and Use Case Modelling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
III.B Goal and Use Case Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
III.C DSM Partitioning and Traceability Tree Derivation . . . . . . . . . . . 30
III.D Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
IV CIAM: Change Impact Analysis Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
IV.A CIAM Algorithm and Definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
IV.B Change Impact Analysis based on Ripple Traversal . . . . . . . . . . . 46
IV.C Change Impact Analysis based on Evolution-First Traversal . . . . . . 52
IV.D Impact Analysis to Related Partitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
IV.E Illustrative Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
IV.F Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
V RELATED WORK . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
V.A Requirements Traceability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
V.B Goal-Based Requirements Engineering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
V.C Change Impact Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
VI CONCLUSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
VI.A A Summary of the Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
VI.B Future Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
vii
REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
APPENDIX
A Use Case Point Analysis of Meeting Scheduler System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
A.A Weighting Actors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
A.B Weighting Use Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
A.C Weighting Technical Complexity Factors (TCF) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
A.D Weighting Environment Factor (EF) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
A.E Calculate Use Case Points . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94
VITA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96

參考文獻

[1] C. Ackermann and M. Lindvall. Understanding change requests to predict software im-
pact. In Proceedings of the 30th Annual IEEE/NASA Software Engineering Workshop,
pages 66–75, April 2006.
[2] A. I. Ant´on. Goal-based requirements analysis. In Proceedings of the Second IEEE
International Conference on Requirements Engineering, pages 136–144, April 1996.
[3] G. Antoniol, G. Canfora, G. Casazza, A. D. Lucia, and E. Merlo. Recovering trace-
ability links between code and documentation. IEEE Transactions on Software Engi-
neering, 28(10):970–983, October 2002.
[4] P. Arkley and S. Riddle. Overcoming the traceability benefit problem. In Proceedings
of the 2005 13th IEEE International Conference on Requirements Engineering (RE05),
pages 385–389, 2005.
[5] R. S. Arnold and S. A. Bohner. Impact analysis - towards a framework for comparison.
In Proceedings of the Conference on Software Maintenance, pages 292–301, Sep 1993.
[6] H. B. B. Dano and F. Barbier. Progressing towards object-oriented requirements spec-
ifications byusing the use case concept. In Proceedings of the international conference
on Requirements Engineering, pages 450–456, 1996.
[7] S. A. Bohner. Software change impacts - an evolving perspective. In Proceedings of the
International Conference on Software Maintenance (ICSM’02), pages 263–272, 2002.
[8] S. A. Bohner and R. S. Arnold. Software Change Impact Analysis. IEEE Computer
Society Press, CA.
[9] A. Borgida, S. Greenspan, and J. Mylopoulos. Knowledge representation as the basis
for requirements specifications. Computer, 18(4):82–91, April 1985.
[10] L. Briand, Y. Labiche, L. OSullivan, and M. So’wka. Automated impact analysis of
uml models. Journal of Systems and Software, 79(3):339–352, March 2006.
[11] T. R. Browning. Modeling and analyzing cost, schedule, and performance in complex
system product development. PhD thesis, Massachusetts Inst. Technology, Cambridge,
MA, 1998.
[12] T. R. Browning. Applying the design structure matrix to system decomposition and
integration problems: A review and new directions. IEEE Transactions on Engineering
Management, 48(3):292–306, August 2001.
[13] T. R. Browning and S. D. Eppinger. Modeling impacts of process architecture on
cost and schedule risk in product development. IEEE Transactions on Engineering
Management, 49(4):428 – 442, November 2002.
[14] S.-H. Cho and S. D. Eppinger. A simulation-based process model for managing complex
design projects. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 52(3):316 – 328,
August 2005.
[15] M. B. Chrissis, M. Konrad, and S. Shrum. CMMI: Guidelines for Process Integration
and Product Improvement (2nd Edition). Addison-Wesley, November.
[16] J. Cleland-Huang. Toward improved traceability of non-functional requirements. In
Proceedings of the 3rd international workshop on Traceability in emerging forms of
software engineering, pages 14–19, Nomember 2005.
[17] J. Cleland-Huang, C. K. Chang, and M. Christensen. Event-based traceability for man-
aging evolutionary change. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 29(9):796–
810, Septmember 2003.
[18] J. Cleland-Huang, R. Settimi, O. BenKhadra, E. Berezhanskaya, and S. Christina.
Goal-centric traceability for managing non-functional requirements. In Proceedings of
the International Conference on Software Engineering, pages 362–371, May 2005.
[19] A. Cockburn. Goals and use cases. Journal of Object-Oriented Programming, 10(7):35–
40, September 1997.
[20] J.-P. Corriveau. Traceability process for large oo projects. IEEE Computer, 29(9):63–
68, September 1996.
[21] M. Danilovic and T. R. Browning. Managing complex product development projects
with design structure matrices and domain mapping matrices. International Journal
of Project Management, 25(3):300–314, April 2007.
[22] A. Dardenne, A. van Lamsweerde, and S. Fickas. Goal-directed requirements acquisi-
tion. Science of Computer Programming, 20(1-2):3–50, April 1993.
[23] J. Dick. Design traceability. IEEE Software, 22(6):14–16, November/December 2005.
[24] R. D´omges and K. Pohl. Adapting traceability environments to project-specific needs.
Communications of the ACM, 41(12):54 – 62, December 1998.
[25] A. Egyed. A scenario-driven approach to trace dependency analysis. IEEE Transac-
tions on Software Engineering, 29(2):116–132, February 2003.
[26] A. Egyed. Resolving uncertainties during trace analysis. In Proceedings of the 12th
ACM SIGSOFT Symposium on Foundations of Software Engineering (FSE), pages
3–12, 2004.
[27] S. D. Eppinger, D. E. Whitney, R. P. Smith, and D. A. Gebala. A model-based method
for organizing tasks in product development. Research in Engineering Design, 6:1–13,
March 1994.
[28] M. S. Feather, S. Fickas, A. Finkelstein, and A. van Lamsweerde. Requirements
and specifications exemplars. Automated Software Engineering, 4(4):419–438, Octo-
ber 1997.
[29] R. Garnier and J. Taylor. Discrete Mathematics for New Technology, 2nd edition.
Taylor and Francis.
[30] O. Gotel and A. Finkelstein. Extended requirements traceability: results of an indus-
trial case study. In Proceedings of the 3rd IEEE International Symposium on Require-
ments Engineering, pages 169–178, Jan 1993.
[31] O. C. Z. Gotel and A. C. W. Finkelstein. An analysis of the requirements traceability
problem. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Requirements Engineering,
pages 94–101, Appril 1994.
[32] J. Hassine, J. Rilling, and J. Hewitt. Change impact analysis for requirement evolution
using use case maps. In Proceedings of the 2005 Eighth International Workshop on
Principles of Software Evolution, pages 81–90, 2005.
[33] S. Ibrahim and M. Munro. A requirements traceability to support change impact
analysis. Asian Journal of Information Technology, 4(4):329–338, 2005.
[34] S. E. Institute. Cmmi for development version 1.2, Technical Report CMU/SEI-2006-
TR-008, 2006.
[35] M. Jarke. Requirements tracing. Communications of the ACM, 41(12):32–36, Decem-
ber 1998.
[36] C. Jones. Software change management. IEEE Computer, 29(4):80–82, 1996.
[37] H. Kaindl. The missing link in requirements engineering. ACM SIGSOFT Software
Engineering Notes, 18(2):30–39, April 1993.
[38] J. Lee and K.-H. Hsu. Modeling software architectures with goals in virtual university
environment. Information and Software Technology, 44(6):361–380, April 2002.
[39] J. Lee and J.-Y. Kuo. New approach to requirements trade-off analysis for com-
plex systems. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 10(4):551–562,
Jul/Aug 1998.
[40] J. Lee and N.-L. Xue. Analyzing user requirements by use cases: A goal-driven ap-
proach. IEEE Software, 16(4):92–101, July/August 1999.
[41] J. Lee, N.-L. Xue, and J.-Y. Kuo. Structuring requirements specifications with goals.
Information and Software Technology, 43(2):121–135, February 2001.
[42] S. Lock and G. Kotonya. An integrated, probabilistic framework for requirement
change impact analysis. Australasian Journal of Information Systems, 6(2):38–63,
1999.
[43] J. Mylopoulos, L. Chung, and B. A. Nixon. Representing and using nonfunctionalrequirements: A process-oriented approach. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 18(6):483–497, 1992.
[44] J. S. O’Neal. Analyzing the impact of changing software requirements: A traceability-
based methodology, Ph.D. dissertation of Louisiana State University, 2003.
[45] J. S. O’Neal and D. L. Carver. Analyzing the impact of changing requirements. In
Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance, pages
190–195, November 2001.
[46] C. Potts, K. Takahashi, and A. l. Anton. Inquiry-based requirements analysis. IEEE
Software, 11(2):21–32, Mar 1994.
[47] B. Ramesh. Factors influencing requirements traceability practice. Communications
of the ACM, 41(12):37 – 44, December 1998.
[48] B. Ramesh and M. Edwards. Issues in the development of a requirements traceability
model. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Requirements Engineering,
pages 256–259, Jan 1993.
[49] B. Ramesh and M. Jarke. Toward reference models for requirements traceability. IEEE
Transactions on Software Engineering, 27(1):58–93, January 2001.
[50] B. Ramesh, T. Powers, C. Stubbs, and M. Edwards. Implementing requirements trace-
ability: a case study. In Proceedings of the Second IEEE International Symposium on
Requirements Engineering, pages 89–95, March 1995.
[51] C. Rolland, C. Souveyet, and C. B. Achour. Guiding goal modeling using scenarios.
IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 24(12):1055–1071, December 1998.
[52] T. L. Satty. Analytic Hierarchy Process. McGraw-Hill International, New York, 1980.
[53] G. Schneider and J. P. Winters. Applying Use Cases: A Practical Guide (2nd Edition).
Addison-Wesley, 2001.
[54] G. Spanoudakis, A. Zisman, E. Pe’rez-Minana, and P. Krause. Rule-based generation
of requirements traceability relations. Journal of Systems and Software, 72(2):105–127,
2004.
[55] D. V. Steward. Partitioning and tearing systems of equations. Journal of the Society
for Industrial and Applied Mathematics: Series B, Numerical Analysis, 2(2).
[56] D. V. Steward. The design structure system: A method for managing the design of
complex systems. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 28:71–74, 1981.
[57] A. Tang, Y. Jin, J. Han, and A. Nicholson. Predicting change impact in architecture
design with bayesian belief networks. In Proceedings of the 5th Working IEEE/IFIP
Conference on Software Architecture, pages 67–76, 2005.
[58] A. van Lamsweerde, R. Darimont, and E. Leitier. Managing conflicts in goal-driven
requirements engineering. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 24(11):908–
926, November 1998.
[59] A. van Lamsweerde, R. Darimont, and P. Massonet. Goal-directed elaboration of
requirements for a meeting scheduler: problems and lessons learnt. In Second IEEE
International Symposium on Requirements Engineering (RE’95), pages 194–203, 1995.
[60] R. Watkins and M. Neal. Why and how of requirements tracing. IEEE Software,
11(4):104–106, Jul 1994.
[61] A. A. Yassine, D. E. Whiteny, and T. Zambito. Assessment of rework probabilities for
simulating product development processes using the design structure matrix (dsm). In
Proc. ASME Design Eng. Tech. Conf., 2001, no DETC2001/DTM-21693.

指導教授

李允中(Jonathan Lee)

審核日期

2008-7-14

推文