Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

International Symposium on Rules and Rule Markup Languages for the Semantic Web

RuleML 2014: Rules on the Web. From Theory to Applications pp 186–200Cite as

Requirement Compound Mining and Analysis

  • Conference paper

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNPSE,volume 8620))

Abstract

In this paper, we motivate and develop the linguistic characteristics of requirement compounds which are major types of business rules. The discourse structures that further refine or elaborate requirements are also analyzed. An implementation is then presented. It is carried out in Dislog on the <TextCoop> platform. Dislog allows high level specifications in logic that allow fast and easy prototyping at a high level of linguistic adequacy. Elements of an indicative evaluation are provided.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bagheri, E., Ensan, F.: Consolidating Multiple Requirement Specifcations through Argumentation. In: Proceedings of the 2011 ACM Symposium on Applied Computing, SAC 2011 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Ceravolo, P., Fugazza, C., Leida, M.: Modeling semantics of business rules. In: Digital EcoSystems and Technologies Conference, DEST 2007 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Cisternino, V., Corallo, A., Elia, G., Fugazza, C.: Business rules for semantics-aware business modelling: Overview and open issues. Int. J. Web Eng. Technol. 5 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Couper-Kuhlen, E., Kortmann, B.: Cause, Condition, Concession, Contrast: Cognitive and Discourse Perspectives. In: Topics in English Linguistics, vol. 33. de Gryuter (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Delin, J., Hartley, A., Paris, C., Scott, D.: Keith Vander Linden: Expressing Procedural Relationships in Multilingual Instructions. In: Proceedings of the Seventh International Workshop on Natural Language Generation, USA, pp. 61–70 (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  6. van Eemeren, F., Grootendorst, R.: Argumentation, communication, and fallacies: A pragma-dialectical perspective. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates (1992)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Dick, A.J.J.: Evidence-based development - Coupling structured argumentation with requirements development, System Safety. In: 7th IET International Conference on Incorporating the Cyber Security Conference, UK (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Feng, V., Hirst, G.: Text-level discourse parsing with rich linguistic features. In: Proc. 50th ACL Meeting (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Grosz, B., Sidner, C.: Attention, intention and the structure of discourse. Computational Linguistics 12(3) (1986)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Guissé, A.: Une plateforme d’ aide a l’ acquisition et á la maintenance des règles metier, PhD dissertation, Paris Nord (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Haley, C.B., Mottet, J.D., Laney, R., Nuseibeh, B.: Arguing Security: Validating Security Requirements Using Structured Argumentation. In: Proceedings of the Third Symposium on Requirements Engineering for Information Security, SREIS 2005 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Hernault, H., Prendinger, H., Ishuzuka, M.: HILDA: A discourse parser using support vector machine classification. Diualogue and Discourse 1(3) (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Hull, E., Jackson, K., Dick, J.: Requirements Engineering. Springer (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Kang, J., Saint-Dizier, P.: Discourse Structure Analysis for Requirement Mining. International Journal of Knowledge Content Development and Technology 3(2) (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Kosseim, L., Lapalme, G.: Choosing Rhetorical Structures to Plan Instructional Texts. Computational Intelligence, Blackwell, Boston (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Mann, W., Thompson, S.: Rhetorical Structure Theory: Towards a Functional Theory of Text Organisation. TEXT 8(3), 243–281 (1988)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Marcu, D.: The Theory and Practice of Discourse Parsing and Summarization. MIT Press (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Mich, L.: NL-OOPS: From natural language to object oriented requirements using the natural language processing system LOLITA. Natural Language Engineering 2, 161–187 (1996)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Miltasaki, E., Prasad, R., Joshi, A., Webber, B.: Annotating Discourse Connectives and Their Arguments. In: New Frontiers in NLP (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Mirbel, I., Villata, S.: Enhancing Goal-based Requirements Consistency: An Argumentation-based Approach. In: Fisher, M., van der Torre, L., Dastani, M., Governatori, G. (eds.) CLIMA XIII 2012. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 7486, pp. 110–127. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  21. Rosner, D., Stede, M.: Customizing RST for the Automatic Production of Technical Manuals. In: Dale, R., Rösner, D., Stock, O., Hovy, E. (eds.) IWNLG 1992. LNCS, vol. 587, pp. 199–214. Springer, Heidelberg (1992)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  22. Ryan, K.: The role of natural language understanding in requirement engineering. In: IEEE Symposium on Requirements, San Diego (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Saint-Dizier, P.: Processing natural language arguments with the TextCoop platform. Journal of Argumentation and Computation 3(1) (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Saint-Dizier, P.: Challenges of Discourse processing: The case of technical documents. Cambridge Scholars Publising (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Saito, M.: Using Phrasal Patterns to Identify Discourse Relations. In: Proceedings ACL 2006 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Spenader, J., Lobanova, A.: Reliable Discourse Markers for Contrast. Eighth International Workshop on Computational Semantics, Tilburg (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Stede, M.: Discourse Processing. Morgan and Claypool Publishers (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Taboada, M., Mann, W.C.: Rhetorical Structure Theory: Looking back and moving ahead. Discourse Studies 8(3), 423–459 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Villalba, M.G., Saint-Dizier, P.: Some Facets of Argument Mining for Opinion Analysis. In: COMMA. IOS Publising, Vienna (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Walton, D., Reed, C., Macagno, F.: Argumentation Schemes. Cambridge University Press (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Walton, D.: Argument Mining by Applying Argumentation Schemes. Studies in Logic 4(1) (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  32. Webber, B., Joshi, A.: Discourse Structure: Past, Present and Future. In: Proceedings of the ACL 2012 Workshop on Rediscovering 50 Years of Discoveries 2012, pp. 42–54. Republic of Korea, Jeju (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Wolf, F., Gibson, E.: Representing Discourse Coherence: A Corpus-Based Study. Computational Linguistics 31(2), 249–288 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. IRIT - CNRS, Toulouse, France

    Juyeon Kang & Patrick Saint-Dizier

  2. Prometil, Toulouse, France

    Juyeon Kang

Authors
  1. Juyeon Kang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Patrick Saint-Dizier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Information Studies, University College London, Gower Street, WC1E 6BT, London, UK

    Antonis Bikakis

  2. Department of Computer Science, Stony Brook University, 11794, Stony Brook, NY, USA

    Paul Fodor

  3. SINTEF, University of Oslo, Forskningsveien 1, 0314, Oslo, Norway

    Dumitru Roman

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this paper

Cite this paper

Kang, J., Saint-Dizier, P. (2014). Requirement Compound Mining and Analysis. In: Bikakis, A., Fodor, P., Roman, D. (eds) Rules on the Web. From Theory to Applications. RuleML 2014. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 8620. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-09870-8_14

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-09870-8_14

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-09869-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-09870-8

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation