HCD 09 Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Human Centered Design: Held as Part of HCI International 2009
A four-way framework for validating a specification
SAICSIT '10 Proceedings of the 2010 Annual Research Conference of the South African Institute of Computer Scientists and Information Technologists
Consolidating multiple requirement specifications through argumentation
Proceedings of the 2011 ACM Symposium on Applied Computing
Issue-based variability management
Information and Software Technology
GRL model validation: a statistical approach
SAM'12 Proceedings of the 7th international conference on System Analysis and Modeling: theory and practice
Enabling the collaborative definition of DSMLs
CAiSE'13 Proceedings of the 25th international conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering
| Hi-index | 0.00 |
Representation and reasoning about goals of an information system unavoidably involve the transformation of unclear stakeholder requirements into an instance of a goal model. If the requirements engineer does not justify why one clear form of requirements is chosen over others, the subsequent modeling decisions cannot be justified either. If arguments for clarification and modeling decisions are instead explicit, justifiably appropriate instances of goal models can be constructed and additional analyses applied to discover richer sets of requirements. The paper proposes the “Goal Argumentation Method (GAM)” to fulfil three roles: (i) GAM guides argumentation and justification of modeling choices during the construction or critique of goal model instances; (ii) it enables the detection of deficient argumentation within goal model instances; and (iii) it provides practical techniques for the engineer to ensure that requirements appearing both in arguments and in model instance elements are clear.