2010 18th IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference 2010
DOI: 10.1109/re.2010.25
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Fuzzy Goals for Requirements-Driven Adaptation

Abstract: Self-adaptation is imposing as a key characteristic of many modern software systems to tackle their complexity and cope with the many environments in which they can operate. Self-adaptation is a requirement per-se, but it also impacts the other (conventional) requirements of the system; all these new and old requirements must be elicited and represented in a coherent and homogenous way. This paper presents FLAGS, an innovative goal model that generalizes the KAOS model, adds adaptive goals to embed adaptation … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
131
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
5
3
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 209 publications
(132 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
1
131
0
Order By: Relevance
“…They identify two approaches in the evolvability of C-AS: I) Short-term evolution, to handle exceptions and to make correct reactions at runtime; II) Long-term evolution, to monitor user behaviour and capture new system requirements based on human intentions. Baresi et al [90] present FLAGS, a goal model that adds adaptive goals in order to embed adaptation countermeasures, fostering self-adaptation by considering requirements as live, runtime entities. They distinguish between: 1) Crisp goals, whose satisfaction is Boolean; 2) Fuzzy goals, whose satisfaction is represented through fuzzy constraints.…”
Section: Adaptive and Goal-orientedmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…They identify two approaches in the evolvability of C-AS: I) Short-term evolution, to handle exceptions and to make correct reactions at runtime; II) Long-term evolution, to monitor user behaviour and capture new system requirements based on human intentions. Baresi et al [90] present FLAGS, a goal model that adds adaptive goals in order to embed adaptation countermeasures, fostering self-adaptation by considering requirements as live, runtime entities. They distinguish between: 1) Crisp goals, whose satisfaction is Boolean; 2) Fuzzy goals, whose satisfaction is represented through fuzzy constraints.…”
Section: Adaptive and Goal-orientedmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The language provided in FLAGS [8,9] to formally specify goals and operations is called FTL (Fuzzy-time Temporal Logic) and is obtained by extending the traditional linear temporal logic LTL with fuzzy constructs, embedding vagueness both at propositional and at the temporal level. The formalization of the requirements provides a detailed and mathematical formulation of the elements of the model.…”
Section: The Extended Flags Meta-modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The requirements modeling process re-uses the FLAGS [8] goal model that expresses requirements as fuzzy temporal properties. This helped us developing games that tolerate small deviations of the movements performed by the patients with respect to the correct ones.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Thus, DT-Golog goes beyond the classic MDP approach, where only primitive stochastic actions are allowed and not programs composed from such actions. Other approaches for dealing with uncertainty in requirements engineering have focussed on self-adaptive systems and follow a fuzzy logic based approach [18,19]. In comparison, we model probability and utility as separate measures, and focus on automated reasoning about optimal behaviours, in terms of both those measures.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%