Clarifying Goal Models

Representation and reasoning about information system (IS) requirements is facilitated with the use of goal models to describe the desired and undesired IS behaviors. One difficulty in goal modeling is arriving at a shared understanding of a goal model instance, mainly due to different backgrounds of the system stakeholders who participate in modeling, and the subsequent disparate use of terminology. Lack of shared understanding, or, in other words, the presence of multiple interpretations entails no guarantee that stakeholders' expectations expressed in the model instance will be appropriately understood during the subsequent steps of system development. Among the many potential causes of multiple interpretations, this paper focuses on a critical set of such causes, namely: ambiguity, overgenerality, synonymy, and vagueness of information represented in instances of goal modeling primitives. The "Goal Clarification Method" is suggested to guide the identification of unclear information and the subsequent clarification thereof.

[1]  John Mylopoulos,et al.  Non-Functional Requirements in Software Engineering , 2000, International Series in Software Engineering.

[2]  Erik Kamsties,et al.  The Syntactically Dangerous All and Plural in Specifications , 2005, IEEE Softw..

[3]  K. Goodman,et al.  Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics , 2006 .

[4]  Joseph Y. Halpern INTRANSITIVITY AND VAGUENESS , 2004, The Review of Symbolic Logic.

[5]  John Mylopoulos,et al.  Towards requirements-driven information systems engineering: the Tropos project , 2002, Inf. Syst..

[6]  Stephen Fickas,et al.  Goal-Directed Requirements Acquisition , 1993, Sci. Comput. Program..

[7]  Haralambos Mouratidis,et al.  When security meets software engineering: a case of modelling secure information systems , 2005, Inf. Syst..

[8]  D. Fara Shifting sands: An interest relative theory of vagueness , 2000 .

[9]  Francis Chantree,et al.  Identifying Nocuous Ambiguities in Natural Language Requirements , 2006, 14th IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE'06).

[10]  Haralambos Mouratidis,et al.  Analysis and Design of the eSAP: An Integrated Health and Social Care Information System , 2003, Health Informatics J..

[11]  Claudia Leacock,et al.  Polysemy: Theoretical and Computational Approaches , 2000 .

[12]  Paolo Donzelli,et al.  A goal-driven and agent-based requirements engineering framework* , 2004, Requirements Engineering.

[13]  John Mylopoulos,et al.  Specifying and analyzing early requirements in Tropos , 2004, Requirements Engineering.

[14]  Lin Liu,et al.  Designing information systems in social context: a goal and scenario modelling approach , 2004, Inf. Syst..

[15]  Brendan S. Gillon,et al.  Ambiguity, generality, and indeterminacy: Tests and definitions , 1990, Synthese.

[16]  Pierre-Yves Schobbens,et al.  A More Expressive Softgoal Conceptualization for Quality Requirements Analysis , 2006, ER.

[17]  Axel van Lamsweerde,et al.  Goal-Oriented Requirements Engineering: A Guided Tour , 2001, RE.

[18]  Eric S. K. Yu,et al.  Towards modelling and reasoning support for early-phase requirements engineering , 1997, Proceedings of ISRE '97: 3rd IEEE International Symposium on Requirements Engineering.

[19]  Barbara Paech,et al.  Detecting Ambiguities in Requirements Documents Using Inspections , 2001 .

[20]  Brandon Bennett,et al.  Modal Semantics for Knowledge Bases Dealing with Vague Concepts , 1998, KR.

[21]  John Yen,et al.  An analytic framework for specifying and analyzing imprecise requirements , 1996, Proceedings of IEEE 18th International Conference on Software Engineering.