Managing inconsistent specifications: reasoning, analysis, and action
ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology (TOSEM)
Automating first-order relational logic
SIGSOFT '00/FSE-8 Proceedings of the 8th ACM SIGSOFT international symposium on Foundations of software engineering: twenty-first century applications
A framework for multi-valued reasoning over inconsistent viewpoints
ICSE '01 Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Software Engineering
2nd international workshop on living with inconsistency
ICSE '01 Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Software Engineering
Reasoning about inconsistencies in natural language requirements
ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology (TOSEM)
Information and Software Technology
Identifying Acceptable Common Proposals for Handling Inconsistent Software Requirements
FORTE '07 Proceedings of the 27th IFIP WG 6.1 international conference on Formal Techniques for Networked and Distributed Systems
On the measure of conflicts: Shapley Inconsistency Values
Artificial Intelligence
Measuring inconsistency in requirements specifications
ECSQARU'05 Proceedings of the 8th European conference on Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty
Measuring the blame of each formula for inconsistent prioritized knowledge bases
Journal of Logic and Computation
A characteristic function approach to inconsistency measures for knowledge bases
SUM'12 Proceedings of the 6th international conference on Scalable Uncertainty Management
| Hi-index | 0.00 |
Inconsistency has been considered one of the main classes of defects in software requirements specification. Various logic-based techniques have been proposed to manage inconsistencies in requirements engineering. However, identifying an appropriate proposal for resolving inconsistencies in software requirements is still a challenging problem. This paper proposes a logic-based approach to generating appropriate proposals for handling inconsistency in software requirements. Informally speaking, given an inconsistent requirements specification, the authors identify which requirements should be given priority to be changed for resolving the inconsistency in that specification, by balancing the blame of each requirement for the inconsistency against its value for that requirements specification. The authors follow the viewpoint that minimal inconsistent subsets of a set of formulas are the purest forms of inconsistencies in that set. According to this viewpoint, a potential proposal for resolving inconsistencies can be described by a possible combination of some requirements to be changed that can eliminate minimal inconsistent subsets. Then a method is proposed of evaluating the degree of disputability of each requirement involved in the inconsistency in a requirements specification. Finally, an algorithm is provided of generating appropriate proposals for resolving the inconsistency in a given requirements specification based on the degree of disputability of requirements.