Ontology-Driven Requirements Engineering in the Responsive and Formal Design Process

Requirements that are understood and shared by all stakeholders as well as system engineers are highly critical in the development of a successful system. Natural languages (NL) are essentially preferred to represent requirements to advance this shared understanding. However, natural languages are inherently imprecise and ambiguous leading to inconsistent, incomplete, and incorrect requirements. Therefore, there is a need to represent requirements formally. In this paper, the use of ontologies for knowledge representation from requirements is presented for the responsive and formal design (RFD) process. The main goals are to (1) facilitate requirements engineering, (2) serve as an intermediate representation for automatic transition to logic-based modeling, and (3) formalize the process of transformation from requirements to logic-based modeling. Therefore, requirements engineering in the RFD process will be augmented using ontologies in the domain modeling of the system to be implemented. Ontologies are utilized to capture domain requirements, and formal mechanisms are used to check for inconsistency and incompleteness at each abstraction layer in the RFD process.

[1]  Yacine Ghamri-Doudane,et al.  Formal Rule Representation and Verification from Natural Language Requirements Using an Ontology , 2014, RuleML.

[2]  David I. Spivak Ologs: A Categorical Framework for Knowledge Representation , 2011, PloS one.

[3]  Albert C. Esterline,et al.  Fuzzy classification context for the responsive and formal design process , 2017, 2017 Annual IEEE International Systems Conference (SysCon).

[4]  Erik Kamsties,et al.  Ambiguity in Requirements Specification , 2004 .

[5]  Simon Perry,et al.  Model-Based Requirements Engineering , 2011 .

[6]  Thomas R. Gruber,et al.  A translation approach to portable ontology specifications , 1993 .

[7]  Albert Esterline,et al.  Formal requirement management for the Responsive and Formal Design process , 2015, 2015 IEEE International Symposium on Systems Engineering (ISSE).

[8]  Edmund M. Clarke,et al.  Model Checking , 1999, Handbook of Automated Reasoning.

[9]  Edmund M. Clarke,et al.  Formal Methods: State of the Art and Future Directions Working Group Members , 1996 .

[10]  David I. Spivak Category Theory for the Sciences , 2014 .

[11]  Albert C. Esterline,et al.  Formal Behavioral Requirements Management , 2018, IEEE Systems Journal.

[12]  Robyn R. Lutz,et al.  Experiences Using Formal Methods for Requirements Modeling , 1996 .

[13]  Jéssyka Vilela,et al.  A Systematic Review on the Use of Ontologies in Requirements Engineering , 2014, 2014 Brazilian Symposium on Software Engineering.

[14]  Yacine Ghamri-Doudane,et al.  From Natural Language Requirements to Formal Specification Using an Ontology , 2013, 2013 IEEE 25th International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence.

[15]  José Ramón Hilera,et al.  Using Ontologies in Software Engineering and Technology , 2006, Ontologies for Software Engineering and Software Technology.

[16]  Christel Baier,et al.  Principles of model checking , 2008 .

[17]  James B. Dabney,et al.  8.4.2 Error Cost Escalation Through the Project Life Cycle , 2004 .

[18]  Michael G. Hinchey,et al.  The Use of Formal Ontology to Specify Context in Ubiquitous Computing , 2008, ISoLA.

[19]  James B. Dabney,et al.  Error Cost Escalation Through the Project Life Cycle , 2004 .

[20]  Heber Herencia-Zapana,et al.  Small satellite systems design methodology: A formal and agile design process , 2014, 2014 IEEE International Systems Conference Proceedings.

[21]  Trevor J. M. Bench-Capon,et al.  METHODOLOGIES FOR ONTOLOGY DEVELOPMENT , 2007 .

[22]  Albert C. Esterline,et al.  Formal Framework for Ensuring Consistent System and Component Theories in the Design of Small Satellite Systems , 2014, CSDM.

[23]  Anthony Hall,et al.  Seven myths of formal methods , 1990, IEEE Software.