Requirements Tracing to Support Change in Dynamically Adaptive Systems

  • Kristopher Welsh
  • Pete Sawyer
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5512)


[Context and motivation] All systems are susceptible to the need for change, with the desire to operate in changeable environments driving the need for software adaptation. A Dynamically Adaptive System (DAS) adjusts its behaviour autonomously at runtime in order to accommodate changes in its operating environment, which are anticipated in the system’s requirements specification. [Question/Problem] In this paper, we argue that Dynamic Adaptive Systems’ requirements specifications are more susceptible to change than those of traditional static systems. We propose an extension to i* strategic rationale models to aid in changing a DAS. [Principal Ideas/Results] By selecting some of the types of tracing proposed for the most complex systems and supporting them for DAS modelling, it becomes possible to handle change to a DAS’ requirements efficiently, whilst still allowing artefacts to be stored in a Requirements Management tool to mitigate additional complexity. [Contribution] The paper identifies different classes of change that a DAS’ requirements may be subjected to, and illustrates with a case study how additional tracing information can support the making of each class of change.


Adaptive Systems Requirements Evolution Traceability 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Gotel, O., Finkelstein, A.: An analysis of the requirements traceability problem. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Requirements Engineering, Colorado Springs (1994)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Welsh, K., Sawyer, P.: When to Adapt? Identification of Problem Domains for Adaptive Systems. In: Paech, B., Rolland, C. (eds.) REFSQ 2008. LNCS, vol. 5025, pp. 198–203. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Goldsby, J., Sawyer, P., Bencomo, N., Cheng, B., Hughes, D.: Goal-Based Modelling of Dynamically Adaptive System Requirements. In: Proceedings of 15th IEEE International Conference on Engineering of Computer-Based Systems, Belfast, Northern Ireland (2008)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Fickas, S., Feather, S.: Requirements Monitoring in Dynamic Environments. In: Proceedings of the Second IEEE International Symposium on Requirements Engineering, York, England (1995)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Savor, T., Seviora, R.: An approach to automatic detection of software failures in realtime systems. In: IEEE Real- Time Tech. and Appl. Sym., pp. 136–147 (1997)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Feather, M., Fickas, S., van Lamsweerde, A., Ponsard, C.: Reconciling system requirements and runtime behavior. In: Proceedings of the 9th International Workshop on Software Specification and Design (1998)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Robinson, W.: A requirements monitoring framework for enterprise systems. Requirements Engineering 11(1), 17–41 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Yu, Y., Leite, J., Mylopoulos, J.: From goals to aspects: Discovering aspects from requirements goal models. In: Proceedings of the 12th IEEE International Conference on Requirements Engineering (2004)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lapouchnian, A., Liaskos, S., Mylopoulos, J., Yu, Y.: Towards requirements-driven autonomic systems design. In: Proceedings of 2005 Workshop on Design and Evolution of Autonomic Application Software, St. Louis, Missouri, USA (2005)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Yu, Y., Mylopoulos, J., Lapouchnian, A., Liaskos, S., Leite, J.: From stakeholder goals to high-variability software design. Technical report csrg-509, University of Toronto (2005)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dardenne, A., van Lamsweerde, A., Fickas, S.: Goal-directed requirements acquisition. Sci. Comput. Program. 20, 3–50 (1993)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Yu, E.: Towards modelling and reasoning support for early-phase requirements engineering. Requirements Engineering. In: Proceedings of the Third IEEE International Symposium on Requirements Engineering (1997)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Berry, D., Cheng, B., Zhang, J.: The four levels of requirements engineering for and in dynamic adaptive systems. In: Proceedings of the 11th International Workshop on Requirements Engineering: Foundation for Software Quality (2005)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Coulson, G., Grace, P., Blair, G., Cai, W., Cooper, C., Duce, D., Mathy, L., Yeung, W., Porter, B., Sagar, M., Li, W.: A component-based middleware framework for configurable and reconfigurable Grid computing: Research Articles. Concurr. Comput. Pract. Exper. 18(8), 865–874 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ramesh, B., Jarke, M.: Toward reference models for requirements traceability. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 27(1), 58–93 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sawyer, P., Bencomo, N., Hughes, D., Grace, P., Goldsby, H.J., Cheng, B.H.: Visualizing the Analysis of Dynamically Adaptive Systems Using i* and DSLs. In: Proceedings of the Second international Workshop on Requirements Engineering Visualization (2007)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Chung, L., Nixon, B., Yu, E., Mylopoulos, J.: Non-functional requirements in software engineering. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (2000)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Quality Systems & Software Ltd., Oxford Science Park, Oxford, U.K., DOORS Reference Manual (V3. 0) (1996) Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hughes, D., Greenwood, P., Coulson, G., Blair, G.: GridStix: supporting flood prediction using embedded hardware and next generation grid middleware. World of Wireless, Mobile and Multimedia Networks (2006)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kristopher Welsh
    • 1
  • Pete Sawyer
    • 1
  1. 1.Computing Dept., Infolab21Lancaster UniversityLancasterUK

Personalised recommendations