Advertisement

Exploring New Directions in Traceability Link Recovery in Models: The Process Models Case

  • Raúl Lapeña
  • Jaime Font
  • Carlos Cetina
  • Óscar Pastor
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10816)

Abstract

Traceability Links Recovery (TLR) has been a topic of interest for many years. However, TLR in Process Models has not received enough attention yet. Through this work, we study TLR between Natural Language Requirements and Process Models through three different approaches: a Models specific baseline, and two techniques based on Latent Semantic Indexing, used successfully over code. We adapted said code techniques to work for Process Models, and propose them as novel techniques for TLR in Models. The three approaches were evaluated by applying them to an academia set of Process Models, and to a set of Process Models from a real-world industrial case study. Results show that our techniques retrieve better results that the baseline Models technique in both case studies. We also studied why this is the case, and identified Process Models particularities that could potentially lead to improvement opportunities.

Keywords

Traceability Link Recovery Requirements engineering Business Process Models 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work has been partially supported by the Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness (MINECO) through the Spanish National R+D+i Plan and ERDF funds under the project Model-Driven Variability Extraction for Software Product Line Adoption (TIN2015-64397-R). We also thank ITEA3 15010 REVaMP2 Project.

References

  1. 1.
    Gotel, O.C., Finkelstein, C.: An analysis of the requirements traceability problem. In: Proceedings of the First International Conference on Requirements Engineering, pp. 94–101. IEEE (1994)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Spanoudakis, G., Zisman, A.: Software traceability: a roadmap. Handb. Softw. Eng. Knowl. Eng. 3, 395–428 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Watkins, R., Neal, M.: Why and how of requirements tracing. IEEE Softw. 11(4), 104–106 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ghazarian, A.: A research agenda for software reliability. In: IEEE Reliability Society 2009 Annual Technology Report (2010)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Rempel, P., Mäder, P.: Preventing defects: the impact of requirements traceability completeness on software quality. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 43(8), 777–797 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Parizi, R.M., Lee, S.P., Dabbagh, M.: Achievements and challenges in state-of-the-art software traceability between test and code artifacts. IEEE Trans. Reliab. 63(4), 913–926 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Rubin, J., Chechik, M.: A survey of feature location techniques. In: Domain Engineering, pp. 29–58. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Spanoudakis, G., Zisman, A., Pérez-Minana, E., Krause, P.: Rule-based generation of requirements traceability relations. J. Syst. Softw. 72(2), 105–127 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Landauer, T.K., Foltz, P.W., Laham, D.: An introduction to latent semantic analysis. Discourse Processes 25(2–3), 259–284 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hulth, A.: Improved automatic keyword extraction given more linguistic knowledge. In: Proceedings of the 2003 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing. Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 216–223 (2003)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Plisson, J., Lavrac, N., Mladenic, D., et al.: A rule based approach to word lemmatization. In: Proceedings of the 7th International Multi-conference Information Society, vol. 1, pp. 83–86. Citeseer (2004)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Marcus, A., Sergeyev, A., Rajlich, V., Maletic, J.: An information retrieval approach to concept location in source code. In: Proceedings of the 11th Working Conference on Reverse Engineering, pp. 214–223, November 2004Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Salman, H.E., Seriai, A., Dony, C.: Feature location in a collection of product variants: combining information retrieval and hierarchical clustering. In: The 26th International Conference on Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering, pp. 426–430 (2014)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Salton, G., McGill, M.J.: Introduction to Modern Information Retrieval. McGraw-Hill Inc., New York (1986)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Leech, G., Garside, R., Bryant, M.: CLAWS4: the tagging of the British National Corpus. In: Proceedings of the 15th Conference on Computational Linguistics, vol. 1, pp. 622–628. Association for Computational Linguistics (1994)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Camunda: Camunda BPMN Model API (2017). https://github.com/camunda/camunda-bpmn-model. Accessed 3 Nov 2017
  17. 17.
    Apache: OpenNLP Toolkit for the Processing of Natural Language Text (2017). https://opennlp.apache.org/. Accessed 12 Nov 2017
  18. 18.
    Abeles, P.: Efficient Java Matrix Library (2017). http://ejml.org/. Accessed 9 Nov 2017
  19. 19.
    Wohlin, C., Runeson, P., Höst, M., Ohlsson, M.C., Regnell, B., Wesslén, A.: Experimentation in Software Engineering. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Sultanov, H., Hayes, J.H.: Application of swarm techniques to requirements engineering: requirements tracing. In: 18th IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference (2010)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sundaram, S.K., Hayes, J.H., Dekhtyar, A., Holbrook, E.A.: Assessing traceability of software engineering artifacts. Requirements Eng. 15(3), 313–335 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Duan, C., Cleland-Huang, J.: Clustering support for automated tracing. In: Proceedings of the 22nd IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (2007)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Falessi, D., Cantone, G., Canfora, G.: Empirical principles and an industrial case study in retrieving equivalent requirements via natural language processing techniques. Trans. Softw. Eng. 39(1), 18–44 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Arora, C., Sabetzadeh, M., Goknil, A., Briand, L.C., Zimmer, F.: Change impact analysis for natural language requirements: an NLP approach. In: IEEE 23rd International Requirements Engineering Conference (2015)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ryan, K.: The role of natural language in requirements engineering. In: Proceedings of IEEE International Symposium on Requirements Engineering (1993)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    De Lucia, A., Fasano, F., Oliveto, R., Tortora, G.: Enhancing an Artefact management system with traceability recovery features. In: Proceedings of the 20th IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance, pp. 306–315. IEEE (2004)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Eder, S., Femmer, H., Hauptmann, B., Junker, M.: Configuring latent semantic indexing for requirements tracing. In: Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Requirements Engineering and Testing (2015)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Raúl Lapeña
    • 1
  • Jaime Font
    • 1
  • Carlos Cetina
    • 1
  • Óscar Pastor
    • 2
  1. 1.SVIT Research GroupUniversidad San JorgeVillanueva de GállegoSpain
  2. 2.Centro de Investigación en Métodos de Producción de SoftwareUniversitat Politècnica de ValènciaValenciaSpain

Personalised recommendations