Advertisement

Requirements Engineering

, Volume 9, Issue 1, pp 40–56 | Cite as

Market research for requirements analysis using linguistic tools

  • Mich LuisaEmail author
  • Franch Mariangela
  • Novi Inverardi Pierluigi
Original Article

Abstract

Numerous studies in recent months have proposed the use of linguistic instruments to support requirements analysis. There are two main reasons for this: (i) the progress made in natural language processing and (ii) the need to provide the developers of software systems with support in the early phases of requirements definition and conceptual modelling. This paper presents the results of an online market research intended (a) to assess the economic advantages of developing a CASE (computer-aided software engineering) tool that integrates linguistic analysis techniques for documents written in natural language, and (b) to verify the existence of the potential demand for such a tool. The research included a study of the language – ranging from completely natural to highly restricted – used in documents available for requirements analysis, an important factor given that on a technological level there is a trade-off between the language used and the performance of the linguistic instruments. To determine the potential demand for such tool, some of the survey questions dealt with the adoption of development methodologies and consequently with models and support tools; other questions referred to activities deemed critical by the companies involved. Through statistical correspondence analysis of the responses, we were able to outline two “profiles” of companies that correspond to two potential market niches, which are characterised by their very different approach to software development.

Keywords

Conceptual modelling Market research NLP-based CASE tools Potential demand Requirements analysis 

References

  1. 1.
    Franch M, Mich L, Osti L (2000) Online research as decision tool for marketing and management strategies. In: Gan R (ed) Proceedings of the Information Technology for Business Management – ITBM2000, 16th IFIP WCC, Beijing, China, 21–25 August 2000, pp 737–743Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    D’Elia M (2000) On-line market research: an application to the software domain (in Italian). Degree Thesis, University of TrentoGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Loucopoulos P, Karakostas V (1995) System requirements engineering. McGraw-HillGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chiocchetti N, Mich L (2000) The market for object-oriented CASE tools (in Italian). Tech Report, Department of Computer and Management Sciences, University of TrentoGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Burg JFM (1997) Linguistic instrument in requirements engineering. IOS, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ryan K (1992) The role of natural language in requirements engineering. IEEE, pp 240–242Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chen PP-S (1983) English sentence structure and entity-relationships diagrams. Inf Sci 29:127–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ambriola V, Gervasi V (1999) An environment for cooperative construction of natural-language requirements bases. In: Proceedings of the 8th ICRE. IEEE Computer Society Press, pp 124–130Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Juristo N, Moreno AM, Lòpez M (2000) How to use linguistic instruments for OO analysis. IEEE Softw 17(3):80–89Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fuchs NE, Schwitter R (1996) Attempto controlled english. In: CLAW ‘96, 1st international workshop on controlled language applications, Katholieke Universiteit, Leuven, BelgiumGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Delisle S, Barker K, Biskri I (1999) Object-oriented analysis: getting help from robust computational linguistic tools. In: Friedl G, Mayr HC (eds) Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on NLDB ‘99, Klagenfurt, Austria, 17–19 June 1999: Application of natural language to information systems (OCG Schriftenreihe 129), pp 167–172Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Mich L, Garigliano R (2000) Ambiguity measures in requirements engineering. In: Proceedings of ICS 2000 16th IFIP WCC, Beijing, China, 21–25 August 2000, pp 39–48Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Davis AM (1998) The harmony in rechoirments. IEEE Softw, March/April:6–8Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Nitto E Di, Fuggetta A (1995) Change vs consolidation: a challenge for SW development organisations. Riv Inf AICA 25(4):267–279Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Mylopoulos J (1998) Information modeling in the time of the revolution. Inf Syst 23(3–4):127–156Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rugg G, Hooper S (1999) Knowing the unknowable: the causes and nature of changing requirements. In: Eder J, Maiden N, Missikoff M (eds) Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop EMRPS ‘99, Venice, 25–27 September 1999, pp 183–192Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    AAA Message Understanding Conference (1991, 1992, 1993, 1995, 1998) Proceedings MUC-3, MUC-4, MUC-5, MUC-6, MUC-7. Morgan Kaufmann. http://www.itl.nist.gov/iaui/894.02/related_projects/muc/index.html
  18. 18.
    Fabbrini F, Fusani M, Gervasi V, Gnesi S, Ruggieri S (1998) Achieving quality in natural language requirements. In: Proceedings of International SW Quality Week, Francisco, CA, May 1998Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Laitenberg O, Atkinson C, Schlich M, El Emam K (2000) An experimental comparison of reading techniques for defect detection in UML design documents. J Syst Softw 53:183–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Canzano G (1999) Natural language processing in market research: automatic analysis of replies to open-ended questions (in Italian). Degree Thesis, University of TrentoGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Mich L (1996) NL-OOPS: from natural language to OO requirements using the natural language processing system LOLITA. In: J Nat Language Eng 2(2):161–187Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Mich L, Garigliano R (1999) The NL-OOPS project: OO modelling using the NLPS LOLITA. In: Friedl G, Mayr HC (eds) Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on NLDB ‘99, Klagenfurt, Austria, 17–19 June 1999: Application of natural language to information systems (OCG Schriftenreihe 129), pp 215–218Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Nikula U, Sajaniemi J, Kaelviaeinen H (2000) A state-of-the-practice survey on requirements engineering in small- and medium-sized enterprises. Research Report 1, Lappeenranta University of TechnologyGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Zvegintzov N (1998) Frequently begged questions and how to answer them. IEEE Softw 15(2):93–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Glass R, Howard A (1998) Software development state-of-the-practice. Managing Syst Dev June:7–8Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Comley P (1996) The use of the Internet as a data collection method. SGA Market Research, 1996Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Wheelwright SC, Makridakis S (1985) Forecasting methods. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Greenacre JM (1984) Theory and application of correspondence analysis. Academic Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Dutta S, Lee M, Van Wassenhove L (1999) Software engineering in Europe: a study of best practices. IEEE Softw 16(3):82–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    ESI (1996) ESPITI, European user survey analysis. European Software Insitute, Spain, NovGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    ESI (1998) System engineering in Europe. Survey: summary of results. European Software Insitute, Spain, AugGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    van Genuchten M (1991) Why is software late? An empirical study of reasons for delay in software development. IEEE Trans SWE 17(6):582–590Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Pearson K (1901) On lines and planes of closest fit to systems of points in space. Philos Mag 6(2):559–572Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Melchisedech R (1998) Investigation of requirements documents written in natural language. Require Eng 3:91–97Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    ESI (1997) Software best practice questionnaire, analysis of results. European Software Insitute, Spain, DecGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Limited 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mich Luisa
    • 1
    Email author
  • Franch Mariangela
    • 2
  • Novi Inverardi Pierluigi
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Computer and Telecommunication TechnologyUniversity of TrentoTrentoItaly
  2. 2.Department of Computer and Management SciencesUniversity of TrentoTrentoItaly

Personalised recommendations