Deriving static and dynamic concepts from software requirements using sophisticated tagging

Natural language requirements specifications form the basis for the subsequent phase of the information system development process, namely the development of conceptual schemata. Both, the textual as well as the conceptual representations are not really appropriate for being thoroughly captured and validated by the 'requirement holders', i.e. the end users. Therefore, in our approach the textual specifications are firstly linguistically analyzed and translated into a so-called conceptual predesign schema. That schema is formulated using an interlingua which is based on a lean semantic model, thus allowing users to participate more efficiently in the design and validation process. After validation, the predesign schema is mapped to a conceptual representation (e.g. UML). The sequence of these translation and transformation steps is described by the ''NIBA workflow''. This paper focuses on the information supporting a step by step mapping of natural language requirements specifications to a conceptual model, and on how that information is gained. On particular, we present a four-level interpretation of tagging-output.

[1]  Stephen R. Schach An Introductionto Object-Oriented Analysis and Design with UML and The Unified Process , 2007 .

[2]  Natalia Juristo Juzgado,et al.  Formal justification in object-oriented modelling: A linguistic approach , 2000, Data Knowl. Eng..

[3]  Stephen R. Schach Introduction to Object-Oriented Systems Analysis and Design with Uml and the Unified Process , 2003 .

[4]  Heinrich C. Mayr,et al.  Mapping pre-designed business process models to UML , 2004, IASTED Conf. on Software Engineering and Applications.

[5]  A Min Tjoa,et al.  Transformation of Requirement Specifications Expressed in Natural Language into an EER Model , 1993, ER.

[6]  Claudia Kohl,et al.  Cooperations—an abstraction concept suitable for business process re-engineering , 1995 .

[7]  Heinrich C. Mayr,et al.  Highlights of the SAMMOA Framework for Object-Oriented Application Modeling , 1998, DEXA.

[8]  Helmut Schmidt,et al.  Probabilistic part-of-speech tagging using decision trees , 1994 .

[9]  G Fliedl,et al.  \“NIBA – TAG” - A Tool For Analyzing And Preparing German Texts , 2002 .

[10]  Erich Ortner,et al.  Normative Language Approach - A Framework for Understanding , 1996, ER.

[11]  Heinrich C. Mayr,et al.  Conceptual predesign bridging the gap between requirements and conceptual design , 1998, Proceedings of IEEE International Symposium on Requirements Engineering: RE '98.

[12]  Beatrice Santorini,et al.  Building a Large Annotated Corpus of English: The Penn Treebank , 1993, CL.

[13]  Dan Tufis,et al.  Tagging romanian texts: a case study for QTAG, a language independent probabilistic tagger , 1998 .

[14]  Jeffrey E. Smith Proceedings of the 11th IASTED International Conference on Software Engineering and Applications , 2007, ICSE 2007.

[15]  Eric Brill,et al.  A Simple Rule-Based Part of Speech Tagger , 1992, HLT.

[16]  Günther Fliedl Natürlichkeitstheoretische Morphosyntax : Aspekte der Theorie und Implementierung , 1999 .

[17]  Edith Buchholz,et al.  Applying a Natural Language Dialogue Tool for Designing Databases , 1995 .

[18]  Heinrich C. Mayr,et al.  A User Centered Approach to Requirements Modeling , 2002, Modellierung.

[19]  Heinrich C. Mayr,et al.  Semantic Tagging and Chunk-Parsing in Dynamic Modeling , 2004, NLDB.

[20]  Josef Ruppenhofer,et al.  Framenet in Action: The Case of Attaching , 2003 .

[21]  J. F. M. Burg,et al.  Linguistic instruments in requirements engineering , 1996 .