Text2Test: Automated Inspection of Natural Language Use Cases

Sinha, Avik; Sutton, Stanley M.; Paradkar, Amit

doi:10.1109/icst.2010.19

Cited by 51 publications

(43 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…To date, many researchers and practitioners have proposed and developed numerous requirements validation techniques to improve requirements validation processes and their effectiveness, such as reviews, inspections, prototyping, and formal methods [8], [4], [10], [11], [12]. Each of these techniques has its inherent strengths and weaknesses over others, so choosing a requirements validation technique should take into account the type of systems being built.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interactive requirements validation for reactive systems through virtual requirements prototype

Aceituna

Lee

2011

2011 Model-Driven Requirements Engineering Workshop

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

-Adequate requirements validation can prevent errors from propagating into later development phases, and eventually improve the quality of software systems. However, validating natural language requirements is often difficult and error-prone. An effective means of requirements validation for embedded software systems has been to build a working model of the requirements in the form of a physical prototype that stakeholders can interact with. However, physical prototyping can be costly, and time consuming, extending the time it takes to obtain and implement stakeholder feedback. We have developed a requirements validation technique, called Virtual Requirements Prototype (VRP), that reduces cost and stakeholder feedback time by allowing stakeholders to validate embedded software requirements through the interaction with a virtual prototype.I.

show abstract

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interactive requirements validation for reactive systems through virtual requirements prototype

Aceituna

Lee

2011

2011 Model-Driven Requirements Engineering Workshop

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…; Anda and Sjøberg, 2002;Denger et al, 2005;Leite et al, 2005;Phalp et al, 2007;Sinha et al, 2010). Indeed, these proposals use inspection techniques by examination of scenario (or use case) descriptions, and find defects using checklists.…”

Section: Quality Of Scenariosmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Some focus on the classification of quality into characteristics (Gnesi et al, 2005;Wilson et al, 1997;Lucassen et al, 2015;Arora et al, 2015), and the definition of quality models and metrics to quantify the presence of evidences (or not) of these characteristics; others developed comprehensive checklists or constructive approaches (Glinz, 2000;Leite et al 2000;Denger et al, 2005;Phalp et al, 2007;Sinha et al, 2010) for detecting defects classified into taxonomy of defects.…”

Section: Quality Assurance For Software Requirementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…183 Table 35 -Analysis of Correctness using the C&L -Lua. 184 Table 36 -Characteristics of the Admission System Case Study 186 Table 52 -Quality Indicators of ARM (Wilson et al, 1997) 224 Table 53 -Expressiveness Quality Model of QuARS (Gnesi et al, 2005) 224 Table 54 -Ambiguity Indicators of SRRE (Tjong, 2008) 225 Table 55 -Requirements language criteria (IEEE, 2011;Femmer et al, 2014) 225 Table 56 -Potentially problematic constructs (from Berry et al, 2012) 225 Table 57 -Quality User Story Framework (Lucassen et al, 2015) 226 Table 58 -Taxonomy of defects in use case models (Anda and Sjoberg, 2002) 226 Table 59 -Scenario Checklist (Leite et al, 2000;Leite et al, 2005) 227 (Sinha et al, 2010) 230 Table 63 -Common use case defects (Liu et al, 2014) 230 Table 64 -Consistency and Completeness in CMPN (Lee et al,1998) 230 Table 65 -Faults Detected by Time Petri-Nets (Lee et al, 2001) 231 Table 66 -Use Case Defect Classification (Denger et al, 2005) 231 Table 67 -Properties of UC-LTSs (Sinnig et al, 2009) 231 Table 68 -Properties of Timed and Controlled Petri-Nets (Zhao and Duan, 2009) 231 Table 69 -Properties of Reactive Petri-Nets (Somé, 2010) 231…”

Section: List Of Figuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Some researches focused in the automatic detection of defects in requirements (Gnesi et al, 2005;Arora et al, 2015;Sinha et al, 2010), taking advantage of NLP techniques.…”

Section: Quality Assurance For Software Requirementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Analysis of Natural Language Scenarios

CALISAYA¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Use case specifications: How complete are they?

Tiwari

Gupta

2019

J Software Evolu Process

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The flexibility of the use cases in specifying requirements from informal textual descriptions to more formal ones makes them usable in different contexts and purposes. However, the versatility of use cases regarding their admissible structure raises a natural concern about the specification completeness. This paper reports on the analysis of the eight different variants of use case template regarding their functional completeness, ability to express the set of particular functionalities, by comparing their information contents exercised by comprehensive questionnaires on five different problem specifications. The questionnaire was obtained from two sources: one based on the understanding of the functionality to be implemented and the other based on the functionality documented in eight different use case templates under study. Our results suggested that use cases can be used to specify a complete set of requirements intended to develop a software system. We found that the choice of a use case template influences the completeness of the specification. A more detailed analysis of the eight different variants of use case template resulted in the identification of 21 significant use case elements. We showed that by incorporating these significant use case elements in a given template, the completeness of the specification could be further enhanced.

show abstract

Text2Test: Automated Inspection of Natural Language Use Cases

Cited by 51 publications

References 7 publications

Interactive requirements validation for reactive systems through virtual requirements prototype

Interactive requirements validation for reactive systems through virtual requirements prototype

Analysis of Natural Language Scenarios

Use case specifications: How complete are they?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About