Article

A framework for multi-valued reasoning over inconsistent viewpoints

Authors:

Steve Easterbrook,

Marsha ChechikAuthors Info & Claims

ICSE '01: Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Software Engineering

Pages 411 - 420

Published: 01 July 2001 Publication History

Publisher Site Get Access

Abstract

In requirements elicitation, different stakeholders often hold different views of how a proposed system should behave, resulting in inconsistencies between their descriptions. Consensus may not be needed for every detail, but it can be hard to determine whether a particular disagreement affects the critical properties of the system. In this paper, we describe the Xbel framework for merging and reasoning about multiple, inconsistent state machine models. Xbel permits the analyst to choose how to combine information from the multiple viewpoints, where each viewpoint is described using an underlying multi-valued logic. The different values of our logics typically represent different levels of agreement. Our multi-valued model checker, Xchek, allows us to check the merged model against properties expressed in a temporal logic. The resulting framework can be used as an exploration tool to support requirements negotiation, by determining what properties are preserved for various combinations of inconsistent viewpoints.

References

[1]

J. Atlee and J. Gannon. "State-Based Model Checking of Event-Driven System Requirements". IEEE Trans. on Software Engineering, pages 22-40, January 1993.]]

Digital Library

[2]

R. Balzer. "Tolerating Inconsistency". In Proc. 13th Int. Conf. on Software Engineering (ICSE-13), pages 158-165, Austin, Texas, USA, 1991. IEEE CS Press.]]

Digital Library

[3]

N. Belnap. "A Useful Four-Valued Logic". In Dunn and Epstein, editors, Modern Uses of Multiple-Valued Logic, pages 30-56. Reidel, 1977.]]

[4]

L. Bolc and P. Borowik. Many-Valued Logics. Springer- Verlag, 1992.]]

Digital Library

[5]

M. Chechik, S. Easterbrook, and V. Petrovykh. "Model- Checking Over Multi-Valued Logics". In Proc. Formal Methods Europe (FME'01), March 2001.]]

Digital Library

[6]

E. Clarke, E. Emerson, and A. Sistla. "Automatic Verification of Finite-State Concurrent Systems Using Temporal Logic Specifications". ACM Trans. on Programming Languages and Systems, 8(2):244-263, April 1986.]]

Digital Library

[7]

G. Cugola, E. D. Nitto, A. Fuggetta, and C. Ghezzi. "A Framework for Formalizing Inconsistencies and Deviations in Human-Centered Systems". ACM Trans. on Software Engineering and Methodology, 5(3):191-230, July 1996.]]

Digital Library

[8]

M. B. Dwyer, G. S. Avrunin, and J. C. Corbett. "Patterns in Property Specifications for Finite-State Verification". In Proc. 21st Int. Conf. on Software Engineering (ICSE-21), Los Angeles, May 1999.]]

Digital Library

[9]

S. Easterbrook and B. Nuseibeh. "Using Viewpoints for Inconsistency Management". BCS/IEE Software Engineering Journal, pages 31-43, January 1996.]]

[10]

A. C. W. Finkelstein, D. Gabbay, A. Hunter, J. Kramer, and B. Nuseibeh. "Inconsistency Handling in Multi-Perspective Specifications". IEEE Trans. on Software Engineering, 20(8):569-578, August 1994.]]

Digital Library

[11]

J. Grundy, J. Hosking, and W. B. Mugridge. "Inconsistency Management for Multiple-View Software Development Environments". IEEE Trans. on Software Engineering, 24(11):960-981, 1998.]]

Digital Library

[12]

A. Hunter. "Paraconsistent Logics". In D. Gabbay and P. Smets, editors, Handbook of Defeasible Reasoning and Uncertain Information, volume 2. Kluwer, 1998.]]

Digital Library

[13]

A. Hunter and B. Nuseibeh. "Managing Inconsistent Specifications: Reasoning, Analysis and Action". ACM Trans. on Software Engineering and Methodology, 7(4):335-367, October 1998.]]

Digital Library

[14]

K. McMillan. Symbolic Model Checking. Kluwer Academic, 1993.]]

Digital Library

[15]

T. Menzies, S. Easterbrook, B. Nuseibeh, and S. Waugh. "An Empirical Investigation of Multiple Viewpoint Reasoning in Requirements Engineering". In Proc. 4th Int. Symp. on Requirements Engineering (RE'99), Limerick, Ireland, June 7- 11 1999. IEEE CS Press.]]

Digital Library

[16]

K. Narayanaswamy and N. Goldman. "Lazy Consistency: A Basis for Cooperative Software Development". In Proc. 4th Int. Conf. on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW'92), pages 257-264, Toronto, Canada, 1992.]]

Digital Library

[17]

G. Priest and K. Tanaka. "Paraconsistent Logic". In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Stanford University, 1996.]]

[18]

W. Robinson and S. Pawlowski. "Managing Requirements Inconsistency with Development Goal Monitors". IEEE Trans. on Software Engineering, 25(6):816-835, 1999.]]

Digital Library

[19]

R. W. Schwanke and G. E. Kaiser. "Living With Inconsistency in Large Systems". In Proc. Int. Workshop on Software Version and Configuration Control, pages 98-118, Grassau, Germany, January 27-29 1988. B. G. Teubner, Stuttgart.]]

[20]

A. van Lamsweerde, R. Darimont, and E. Letier. "Managing Conflicts in Goal-Driven Requirements Engineering". IEEE Trans. on Software Engineering, 24(11):908-926, 1998.]]

Digital Library

[21]

P. Zave. "Feature Interactions and Formal Specifications in Telecommunications". IEEE Computer, 26(8):20-30, August 1993.]]

Digital Library

Cited By

Junior DPereira RSantos CBento Villela MGasparini IUchôa Conte T(2020)A conceptual scheme to support the identification of consolidation requirements in open designProceedings of the 19th Brazilian Symposium on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3424953.3426625(1-10)Online publication date: 26-Oct-2020
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3424953.3426625
Reineke JStergiou CTripakis S(2019)Basic problems in multi-view modelingSoftware and Systems Modeling (SoSyM)10.1007/s10270-017-0638-118:3(1577-1611)Online publication date: 1-Jun-2019
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s10270-017-0638-1
König HDiskin Z(2016)Advanced Local Checking of Global Consistency in Heterogeneous MultimodelingProceedings of the 12th European Conference on Modelling Foundations and Applications - Volume 976410.1007/978-3-319-42061-5_2(19-35)Online publication date: 6-Jul-2016
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/978-3-319-42061-5_2
Show More Cited By

Recommendations

Basic circuits for multi-valued sequential logic

Multi-valued logic circuits were presented as an alternative to well known binary logic. It has the potential of reducing the number of active elements and interconnection lines. More data may be transferred trough a single wire using logic signals ...
Multi-Input Variable-Threshold Circuits for Multi-Valued Logic Functions
ISMVL '00: Proceedings of the 30th IEEE International Symposium on Multiple-Valued Logic

In this paper, two-types of Multi-Input Variable-Threshold (M-I V-T) circuits and their applications to Multi-Valued Logic (MVL) are proposed. M-I V-T circuits are extensions of binary CMOS NAND and NOR gates to multi-valued logic. First, definitions of ...
Multiple-Valued Logic Charge-Coupled Devices

A new method to implement multiple-valued logic in large scale integrated circuits is introduced. The data are represented by discrete amounts of charge in a charge-coupled device. In this paper the design principles and realizations in four-valued ...

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

ICSE '01: Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Software Engineering

July 2001

844 pages

ISBN:0769510507

Chairman:
Hausi A. Müller
Univ. of Victoria, Canada

Copyright © Copyright (c) 2001 Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc. All rights reserved.

Sponsors

SIGSOFT: ACM Special Interest Group on Software Engineering

Publisher

IEEE Computer Society

United States

Publication History

Published: 01 July 2001

Check for updates

Qualifiers

Article

Conference

ICSE01

Sponsor:

SIGSOFT

ICSE01: 23rd International Conference on Software Engineering

May 12 - 19, 2001

Ontario, Toronto, Canada

Acceptance Rates

ICSE '01 Paper Acceptance Rate 47 of 268 submissions, 18%;

Overall Acceptance Rate 276 of 1,856 submissions, 15%

Upcoming Conference

ICSE 2025

2025 IEEE/ACM 46th International Conference on Software Engineering

April 26 - May 3, 2025

Ottawa , ON , Canada

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

49
Total Citations
View Citations
489
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)0
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

Reflects downloads up to 24 Nov 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Junior DPereira RSantos CBento Villela MGasparini IUchôa Conte T(2020)A conceptual scheme to support the identification of consolidation requirements in open designProceedings of the 19th Brazilian Symposium on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3424953.3426625(1-10)Online publication date: 26-Oct-2020
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3424953.3426625
Reineke JStergiou CTripakis S(2019)Basic problems in multi-view modelingSoftware and Systems Modeling (SoSyM)10.1007/s10270-017-0638-118:3(1577-1611)Online publication date: 1-Jun-2019
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s10270-017-0638-1
König HDiskin Z(2016)Advanced Local Checking of Global Consistency in Heterogeneous MultimodelingProceedings of the 12th European Conference on Modelling Foundations and Applications - Volume 976410.1007/978-3-319-42061-5_2(19-35)Online publication date: 6-Jul-2016
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/978-3-319-42061-5_2
Halamish SKupferman O(2015)Minimizing Deterministic Lattice AutomataACM Transactions on Computational Logic10.1145/263191516:1(1-21)Online publication date: 24-Mar-2015
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/2631915
Mu KLiu WJin Z(2012)A Blame-Based Approach to Generating Proposals for Handling Inconsistency in Software RequirementsInternational Journal of Knowledge and Systems Science10.4018/jkss.20120101013:1(1-17)Online publication date: 1-Jan-2012
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.4018/jkss.2012010101
Fischbein DD’Ippolito NBrunet GChechik MUchitel S(2012)Weak Alphabet Merging of Partial Behavior ModelsACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology10.1145/2089116.208911921:2(1-47)Online publication date: 1-Mar-2012
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/2089116.2089119
Brooke PPaige RPower C(2012)Approaches to modelling security scenarios with domain-specific languagesProceedings of the 20th international conference on Security Protocols10.1007/978-3-642-35694-0_6(41-54)Online publication date: 12-Apr-2012
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/978-3-642-35694-0_6
Halamish SKupferman O(2012)Approximating deterministic lattice automataProceedings of the 10th international conference on Automated Technology for Verification and Analysis10.1007/978-3-642-33386-6_4(27-41)Online publication date: 3-Oct-2012
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/978-3-642-33386-6_4
Halamish SKupferman O(2011)Minimizing deterministic lattice automataProceedings of the 14th international conference on Foundations of software science and computational structures: part of the joint European conferences on theory and practice of software10.5555/1987171.1987189(199-213)Online publication date: 26-Mar-2011
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/1987171.1987189
Trollmann FBlumendorf MSchwartze VAlbayrak SPaternò FLuyten KMaurer F(2011)Formalizing model consistency based on the abstract syntaxProceedings of the 3rd ACM SIGCHI symposium on Engineering interactive computing systems10.1145/1996461.1996498(79-84)Online publication date: 13-Jun-2011
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/1996461.1996498
Show More Cited By

View Options

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Table of Contents