The treatment of non-functional requirements in MIKE

  • Dieter Landes
  • Rudi Studer
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 989)


Non-functional requirements significantly affect and determine the quality of software systems. In this paper it is shown how non-functional requirements are modelled in MIKE, an approach to the development of knowledge-based systems. A semi-formal hypermedia-based model is used to describe the results of the elicitation and interpretation of non-functional requirements and their relationships. Non-functional requirements are the driving force behind the decisions taken in the design phase of MIKE. The impact of non-functional requirements on design decisions and interdependencies between design decisions are explicitly recorded in an additional model in MIKE, thus resulting in a rich documentation of the rationale of design decisions and also providing an important contribution to the traceability of these requirements.


Design Decision Requirement Engineer Information System Design Elevator System Partial Configuration 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [1]
    J. Angele: Operationalisierung des Modells der Expertise (Operationalization of the Model of Expertise). Dissertation, Infix, St. Augustin / Germany, 1993 (in German).Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    J. Angele, D. Fensel, D. Landes, S. Neubert, and R. Studer: Model-Based and Incremental Knowledge Engineering: The MIKE Approach. In Knowledge Oriented Software Design, J. Cuena, ed. IFIP Transactions A-27, Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1993, 139–168.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    J. Angele, D. Fensel, and R. Studer: The model of expertise in KARL. In Proceedings of the 2nd World Congress on Expert Systems (Lisbon/Estoril, Portugal, January 10–14), 1994.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    D.N. Card and R.L. Glass: Measuring Software Design Quality. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, 1990.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    L. Chung: Representation and utilization of non-functional requirements for information system design. In Advanced Information Systems Engineering, R. Andersen et al., eds. LNCS 498, Springer, Berlin, 1991, 5–30.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    L. Chung, P. Katalagarianos, M. Marakakis, M. Mertikas, J. Mylopoulos, and Y. Vassiliou: Mapping information systems requirements to designs. In Database Applications Engineering with DAIDA, M. Jarke, ed. Research Reports ESPRIT Project 892 DAIDA Vol. 1, Springer, Berlin, 1993, 243–280.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    A. Dardenne, A. van Lamsweerde, and S. Fickas: Goal-directed requirements acquisition. In Science of Computer Programming 20, 1993, 3–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. [8]
    D. Fensel: The Knowledge Acquisition and Representation Language KARL. Kluwer, Boston, 1995.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    B.R. Gaines and M. Musen, eds.: Proceedings of the 8th Knowledge Acquisition for Knowledge-Based Systems Workshop KAW'94 (Banff, Canada, January 30–February 4). SRDG Publications, University of Calgary, 1994.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    B.R. Gaines and M. Musen, eds.: Proceedings of the 9th Knowledge Acquisition for Knowledge-Based Sytems Workshop KAW'95 (Banff, Canada, February 26–March 3). SRDG Publications, University of Calgary, 1995.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    G. Guida and G. Mauri: Evaluating performance and quality of knowledge-based systems: foundation and methodology. In IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering 5(2), 1993, 204–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. [12]
    IEEE Computer Society: IEEE Standard for a Software Quality Metrics Methodology. IEEE Std 1061-1992, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, New York, 1993.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    S.E. Keller, L.G. Kahn, and R.B. Panara: Specifying software quality requirements with metrics. In System and Software Requirements Engineering, R.H. Thayer and M. Dorfman, eds. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos, 1990, 145–163.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    D. Landes: DesignKARL — A language for the design of knowledge-based systems. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering SEKE'94 (Jurmala, Latvia, June 20–23), 1994,78–85.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    D. Landes: Die Entwurfsphase in MIKE — Methode und Beschreibungssprache (The Design Phase in MIKE — Method and Description Language). Dissertation, Infix, St. Augustin / Germany, 1995 (in German).Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    D. Landes and R. Studer: The design process in MIKE. In [9], 33/1–33/20.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    D. Landes and R. Studer: Mechanisms for structuring knowledge-based systems. In Database and Expert Systems Applications, D. Karagiannis, ed. LNCS 856, Springer, Berlin, 1994, 488–497.Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    J. Lee: Extending the Potts and Bruns model for recording design rationale. In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Software Engineering (Austin, Texas, May 13–17), 1991, 114–125.Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    J. Mylopoulos, L. Chung, and B. Nixon: Representing and using non-functional requirements: a process-oriented approach. In IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 18(6), 1992, 483–497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. [20]
    S. Neubert: Model construction in MIKE (Model-based and Incremental Knowledge Engineering). In Knowledge Acquisition for Knowledge-Based Systems, N. Aussenac et al., eds. LNAI 723, Springer, Berlin, 1993, 200–219.Google Scholar
  21. [21]
    S. Neubert and F. Maurer: A tool for model-based knowledge engineering. In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence Tools, Techniques, Methods and Applications Avignon'93 (Avignon, France, May 24–28), 1993, 427–436.Google Scholar
  22. [22]
    H.A. Partsch: Specification and Transformation of Programs. Springer, Berlin, 1990.Google Scholar
  23. [23]
    K. Poeck, D. Fensel, D. Landes, and J. Angele: Combining KARL and configurable role limiting methods for configuring elevator systems. In [9], 41/1–41/32.Google Scholar
  24. [24]
    K. Pohl, G. Starke, and P. Peters, eds.: Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Requirements Engineering: Foundation of Software Quality — REFSQ'94. Augustinus Verlag, Aachen / Germany, 1994.Google Scholar
  25. [25]
    C. Potts and G. Brans: Recording the reasons for design decisions. In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Software Engineering (Singapore, April 11–15), 1988, 418–427.Google Scholar
  26. [26]
    H. Rittel and M. Webber: Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. In Policy Sciences 4, 1973, 155–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. [27]
    J. Rumbaugh et al.: Object-Oriented Modelling and Design. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, 1991.Google Scholar
  28. [28]
    A. Shaw: Reasoning about time in higher level language software. In IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 15(7), 1989, 875–889.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. [29]
    S. Buckingham Shum and N. Hammond: Argumentation-based design rationale. In International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 40(4), 1994, 653–676.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. [30]
    C.U. Smith and L.G. Williams: Software performance engineering: a case study including performance comparison with design alternatives. In IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 19(7), 1993, 720–741.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. [31]
    A. Stutt and E. Motta: Recording the design decisions of knowledge engineers to facilitate re-use of design models. In [10], 33/1–33/19.Google Scholar
  32. [32]
    J. Vanwelkeahuysen: Embedding non-functional requirements analyses in conceptual knowledge systems designs. In [10], 45/1–45/15.Google Scholar
  33. [33]
    F. Zimmer: Werkzeugunterstützung zur Modellierung nicht-funktionaler Anforderungen in MIKE (Tool Support for Modelling Non-Functional Requirements in MIKE). Master's Thesis, University of Karlsruhe (in German, in preparation).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dieter Landes
    • 1
  • Rudi Studer
    • 1
  1. 1.Institut für Angewandte Informatik und Formale BeschreibungsverfahrenUniversität KarlsruheKarlsruheGermany

Personalised recommendations