Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Achieving high quality of use-case-based requirements

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Informatik - Forschung und Entwicklung

Zusammenfassung

Seit der Einführung von Use Cases hat deren Bedeutung zur Spezifikation von Anforderungen stetig zugenommen. Die Qualität der Use Cases ist ein entscheidender Faktor für den Erfolg des Entwicklungsprozesses, da die meisten Entwicklungsschritte auf den Use Cases aufbauen. Trotz der extremen Wichtigkeit der Qualität der Use Cases stellen die meisten use-case-basierten Entwicklungsansätze keine oder nur unzureichende integrierte qualitätssichernde Maßnahmen bereit (z.B. ad-hoc Empfehlungen, Erstellungsrichtlinien, einige Checklisten zur Inspektion von Use Cases). Diese Techniken werden in den meisten Fällen unabhängig voneinander eingesetzt, so dass bestimmte Fehlerklassen in den Use Cases durch mehrere Techniken, andere Fehlerklassen überhaupt nicht adressiert werden. In diesem Artikel wird ein integrierter Ansatz vorgestellt, in dem Use Case Erstellungsrichtlinien, Inspektionen und Simulation in systematischer Weise miteinander verknüpft werden. Der Ansatz basiert auf einer Fehlerklassifikation für Use Cases, die als Grundlage dient, die verschiedenen Techniken auf bestimmte Fehlerarten zu fokussieren .

Abstract

Since their introduction, use cases (UCs) have become increasingly important for the specification of software requirements. High quality UCs are a prerequisite for project success. Despite the high importance of their quality, UC driven approaches often lack systematic and integrated quality assurance techniques. Only ad-hoc recommendations, creation guidelines, and a few checklists for inspection are available in the literature. If at all, these techniques are developed and used separately, so that one class of defects is addressed by several techniques and other classes are not addressed at all. In this paper, we present an integrated approach that combines UC creation guidelines, UC inspections, and simulation in a systematic way. We base our combined approach on a defect classification for use cases. This classification enables the requirements engineer to focus the different techniques on different types of defects.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Literatur

  1. Amour F, Miller G (2001) Advanced Use Case Modelling. Addison Wesley

  2. Anda B, Sjøberg DIK (2002) Towards an inspection technique for UC models. In: Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering (SEKE), Italy, pp 127–134

  3. Boehm B, Basili VR (2001) Software Defect Reduction Top 10 List. IEEE Computer, 34(1):135–137, January 2001

    Google Scholar 

  4. Basili VR, Green S, Laitenberger O, Lanubile F, Shull F, Sorumgard S, Zelkowitz M (1996) The Empirical Investigation of Perspective-based Reading. Empirical Software Engineering 1(2):133–164

  5. Bunse C, Laitenberger O (2002) Improving Component Quality Through the Systematic Combination of Construction and Analysis. In: Proceedings of Software Quality Week Europe, Belgium, pp 1–17

  6. Boehm BW (1981) Software Engineering Economics. Advances in Computer Science and Technology. Prentice Hall

  7. Booch G, Rumbaugh J, Jacobson I (1999) The Unified Modelling Language User Guide. Addison-Wesley

  8. Bittner K, Spence I (2003) Use Case Modeling. Addison Wesley

  9. Chillarege R, Bhandari I, Chaar J, Halliday M, Moebus D, Ray B, Wong M (1992) Orthogonal defect classification – A concept for in-process measurements. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 18:943–956, November 1992

    Google Scholar 

  10. Constantine L, Lockwood L (1999) Software for Use, Addison Wesley

  11. Cockburn A (2001) Writing Effective Use Cases. Addison Wesley

  12. Davis FD (1989) Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of Information technology. MIS Quarterly, pp 319–340

  13. Denger, C, Ciolkowski M, Lanubile F (2004) Does Active Guidance Improve Software Inspections? A Preliminary Empirical Study. IASTED conference 2004, Innsbruck, Austria, pp 408–413

  14. Denger C, Kerkow D, von Knethen A, Paech B (2003) A Comprehensive Approach for Creating High-Quality Requirements and Specifications in Automotive Projects. In: 16th International Conference “Software & Systems Engineering and their Applications” Paris, 2–4 December 2003

  15. Denger C, Olsson T (2004) Simulating Textual Scenarios using State charts. In: 3rd International Workshop on Scenarios and State Machines. Models, Algorithms, and Tools. SCESM04, Ill., Lit., pp 21–26

  16. Denger C, Paech B, Benz S (2003) Guidelines – Creating Use Cases for Embedded Systems. IESE Report No. 078.03/E

  17. Freimut B (2001) Developing and Using Defect Classification Schemes, IESE Report No. 072.01/E

  18. Firesmith G. Use Cases: the Pros and Cons. http://www.ksc.com/article7.html

  19. Grady R (1992) Practical Software Metrics for Project Management and Process Improvement. Prentice Hall

  20. Harel D (1998) Modeling Reactive Systems with Statecharts. McGraw-Hill

  21. Heitmeyer C, Labaw B, Kiskis D (1995) Consistency Checking of SCR-Style Requirements Specifications. In: Proceedings of the Second International Symposium on Requirements Engineering, pp 56 ff, March 1995

  22. IEEE Standard Classification for Software Anomalies (1994) IEEE Std. 1044-1993

  23. IEEE Recommended Practice for Software Requirements Specification (1998) Standard 830-1998

  24. Kruchten P (1999) The Rational Unified Process, An Introduction. Addison Wesley

  25. Laitenberger O (2000) Cost-effective Detection of Software Defects through Perspective-based Inspections. PhD Thesis in Experimental Software Engineering, Fraunhofer IRB Verlag

  26. Lilly S (1999) UC Pitfalls: Top 10 Problems from Real Projects Using UCs. Proceedings Technology of object-oriented languages and systems (TOOLS), pp 174–183

  27. Mellor P (1992) Failures, faults and changes in dependability measurement. Information and Software Technology 34:640–654, October 1992

    Google Scholar 

  28. Paech B, Denger C, Kerkow D, von Knethen A (2005) Requirements engineering for technical products – integrating specification, validation and change management. In: Maté JL, Silva A (eds) Requirements Engineering for Sociotechnical Systems. Hershey: Information Science Publishing, pp 153–169

  29. Pettit R (2002) Establishing Inspection Criteria for UML Models. Tutorial at the 5th Conference of the Unified Modelling Language (UML 2002), Germany

  30. Porter A, Votta L, Basili V (1996) Comparing Detection Methods for Software Requirements Inspections: A Replicated Experiment. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, pp 563–575

  31. Prechelt L (2001) Kontrollierte Experimente in der Softwaretechnik. Springer (in German)

  32. Rolland C, Achour CB (1998) Guiding the Construction of Textual UC Specifications. Data & Knowledge Engineering Journal 25(1–2):125–160, Elsevier Science Publishers, North Holland, March 1998

  33. Runeson P (2003) Using Students as Experiment Subjects – An Analysis on Graduate and Freshmen Student Data. In: Proceedings 7th International Conference on Empirical Assessment and Evalutation in Software Engineering

  34. Ryser J, Glinz M (1999) A Practical Approach to Validating and Testing Software Systems Using Scenarios. Proceedings Quality Week Europe

  35. http://www.ilogix.com/products/rhapsody/index.cfm

  36. Shull F, Carver J, Travassos G (2001) An Empirical Methodology for Introducing Software Processes. In: Proceedings 8th European Software Engineering Conference, pp 288–296

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Fraunhofer Institute for Experimental Software Engineering, Sauerwiesen 6, 67661, Kaiserslautern, Germany

    Christian Denger & Bernd Freimut

  2. Institute for Computer Science, University of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 348, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany

    Barbara Paech

Authors
  1. Christian Denger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Barbara Paech
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Bernd Freimut
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christian Denger.

Additional information

CR Subject Classification

D2.1

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Denger, C., Paech, B. & Freimut, B. Achieving high quality of use-case-based requirements. Informatik Forsch. Entw. 20, 11–23 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00450-005-0198-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00450-005-0198-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation