Risk-Aware Multi-stakeholder Next Release Planning Using Multi-objective Optimization

  • Antonio Mauricio PitangueiraEmail author
  • Paolo Tonella
  • Angelo Susi
  • Rita Suzana Maciel
  • Marcio Barros
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9619)


[Context and motivation]: Software requirements selection is an essential task in the software development process. It consists of finding the best requirement set for each software release, considering several requirements characteristics, such as precedences and multiple conflicting objectives, such as stakeholders’ perceived value, cost and risk. [Question/Problem]: However, in this scenario, important information about the variability involved in the requirements values estimation are discarded and might expose the company to a risk when selecting a solution. [Principal ideas/results]: We propose a novel approach to the risk-aware multi-objective next release problem and implemented our approach by means of a satisfiability modulo theory solver. We aim at improving the decision quality by reducing the risk associated with the stakeholder dissatisfaction as related to the variability of the value estimation made by these stakeholders. [Contribution]: Results show that Pareto-optimal solutions exist where a major risk reduction can be achieved at the price of a minor penalty in the value-cost trade-off.


Risk-aware decision making Next release problem Multi-stakeholder 



We would like to thank Fitsum Meshesha Kifetew for his support to the implementation of the approach.


  1. 1.
    Asnar, Y., Giorgini, P., Mylopoulos, J.: Goal-driven risk assessment in requirements engineering. Requirements Eng. 16, 101–116 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bagnall, A., Rayward-Smith, V., Whittley, I.: The next release problem. Inf. Softw. Technol. 43(14), 883–890 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Brasil, M.M.A., da Silva, T.G.N., de Freitas, F.G., de Souza, J.T., Cortés, M.I.: A multiobjective optimization approach to the software release planning with undefined number of releases and interdependent requirements. In: Zhang, R., Zhang, J., Zhang, Z., Filipe, J., Cordeiro, J. (eds.) ICEIS 2011. LNBIP, vol. 102, pp. 300–314. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cai, X., Wei, O.: A hybrid of decomposition and domination based evolutionary algorithm for multi-objective software next release problem. In: 2013 10th IEEE International Conference on Control and Automation (ICCA), pp. 412–417, June 2013Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Coello, C.C., Lamont, G., van Veldhuizen, D.: Evolutionary Algorithms for Solving Multi-Objective Problems. Genetic and Evolutionary Computation, 2nd edn. Springer, New York (2007)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Colares, F., Souza, J., Carmo, R., Pádua, C., Mateus, G.R.: A new approach to the software release planning. In: 2009 XXIII Brazilian Symposium on Software Engineering, pp. 207–215, October 2009Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    de Moura, L., Bjørner, N.S.: Z3: an efficient SMT solver. In: Ramakrishnan, C.R., Rehof, J. (eds.) TACAS 2008. LNCS, vol. 4963, pp. 337–340. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    de Moura, L., Dutertre, B., Shankar, N.: A tutorial on satisfiability modulo theories. In: Damm, W., Hermanns, H. (eds.) CAV 2007. LNCS, vol. 4590, pp. 20–36. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Del Sagrado, J., Del Águila, I.M., Orellana, F.J., Túnez, S.: Requirements selection: Knowledge based optimization techniques for solving the next release problem. In: 6th Workshop on Knowledge Engineering and Software Engineering (KESE, 2010) (2010)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dutertre, B., de Moura, L.: The Yices SMT solver. Technical report, SRI International (2006)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Feather, M.S., Cornford, S.L.: Quantitative risk-based requirements reasoning. Requirements Eng. 8, 248–265 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Franch, X., Susi, A., Annosi, M.C., Ayala, C.P., Glott, R., Gross, D., Kenett, R.S., Mancinelli, F., Ramsamy, P., Thomas, C., Ameller, D., Bannier, S., Bergida, N., Blumenfeld, Y., Bouzereau, O., Costal, D., Dominguez, M., Haaland, K., López, L., Morandini, M., Siena, A.: Managing risk in open source software adoption. In: ICSOFT 2013 - Proceedings of the 8th International Joint Conference on Software Technologies, Reykjavík, Iceland, 29–31 July 2013, pp. 258–264 (2013)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gueorguiev, S., Harman, M., Antoniol, G.: Software project planning for robustness and completion time in the presence of uncertainty using multi objective search based software engineering. In: Proceedings of the 11th Annual Conference on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation, GECCO 2009, pp. 1673–1680. ACM, New York (2009)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Harman, M., McMinn, P., de Souza, J.T., Yoo, S.: Search based software engineering: techniques, taxonomy, tutorial. In: Meyer, B., Nordio, M. (eds.) Empirical Software Engineering and Verification. LNCS, vol. 7007, pp. 1–59. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Karim, M.R., Ruhe, G.: Bi-objective genetic search for release planning in support of themes. In: Le Goues, C., Yoo, S. (eds.) SSBSE 2014. LNCS, vol. 8636, pp. 123–137. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Li, L., Harman, M., Letier, E.: Robust next release problem: handling uncertainty during optimization. In: Proceedings of 14th Annual Conference on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation - GECCO 2014, July 12–16 2014, Vancouver, pp. 1247–1254 (2014)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    McNeil, A.J., Frey, R., Embrechts, P.: Quantitative Risk Management: Concepts, Techniques and Tools. Princeton Series in Finance. Princeton University Press, Princeton (2005)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Memik, S., Fallah, F.: Accelerated sat-based scheduling of control/data flow graphs. In: 2002 IEEE International Conference on Computer Design: VLSI in Computers and Processors, 2002 Proceedings, pp. 395–400 (2002)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Moores, T., Champion, R.: A methodology for measuring the risk associated with a software requirements specification. Australas. J. Inf. Syst. 4(1) (1996)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ngo-The, A., Ruhe, G.: A systematic approach for solving the wicked problem of software release planning. Soft Comput. 12(1), 95–108 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ortega, F., Bobadilla, J., Hernando, A., Gutiérrez, A.: Incorporating group recommendations to recommender systems: alternatives and performance. Inf. Process. Manage. 49(4), 895–901 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Peter Goos, D.M.: Statistics with JMP: Graphs, Descriptive Statistics and Probability, 1st edn. Wiley, Hoboken (2015)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Pitangueira, A.M., Maciel, R.S.P., Barros, M.: Software requirements selection and prioritization using SBSE approaches: a systematic review and mapping of the literature. J. Syst. Softw. 103, 267–280 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Regnell, B., Kuchcinski, K.: Exploring software product management decision problems with constraint solving - opportunities for prioritization and release planning. In: 2011 Fifth International Workshop on Software Product Management (IWSPM), pp. 47–56, August 2011Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Rong, J., Hongzhi, L., Jiankun, Y., Yafei, S., Junlin, L., Lihua, C.: An approach to measuring software development risk based on information entropy. In: International Conference on Computational Intelligence and Natural Computing, 2009 (CINC, 2009), vol. 2, pp. 296–298, June 2009Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ruhe, G., Tn, A.B., Greer, D.: Quantitative studies in software release planning under risk and resource constraints University of Calgary. In: Empirical Software Engineering, pp. 1–10 (2003)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    van Lamsweerde, A.: Requirements Engineering - From System Goals to UML Models to Software Specifications. Wiley, Hoboken (2009)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Veerappa, V., Letier, E.: Clustering stakeholders for requirements decision making. In: Berry, D. (ed.) REFSQ 2011. LNCS, vol. 6606, pp. 202–208. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Yuan, M., Gu, Z., He, X., Liu, X., Jiang, L.: Hardware/software partitioning and pipelined scheduling on runtime reconfigurable fpgas. ACM Trans. Des. Autom. Electron. Syst. 15(2), 13:1–13:41 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Zhang, Y.-Y., Finkelstein, A., Harman, M.: Search based requirements optimisation: existing work and challenges. In: Rolland, C. (ed.) REFSQ 2008. LNCS, vol. 5025, pp. 88–94. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Zhang, Y., Harman, M., Mansouri, S.A.: The multi-objective next release problem. In: Proceedings of the 9th Annual Conference on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation - GECCO 2007, p. 1129 (2007)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Antonio Mauricio Pitangueira
    • 1
    Email author
  • Paolo Tonella
    • 2
  • Angelo Susi
    • 2
  • Rita Suzana Maciel
    • 1
  • Marcio Barros
    • 3
  1. 1.Computer Science DepartmentFederal University of BahiaBahiaBrazil
  2. 2.Software Engineering Research UnitFondazione Bruno KesslerTrentoItaly
  3. 3.Post-graduate Information Systems Program-UnirioRio de JaneiroBrazil

Personalised recommendations