An Approach to Generating Proposals for Handling Inconsistent Software Requirements

  • Kedian Mu
  • Weiru Liu
  • Zhi Jin
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7091)


Inconsistency has been considered as one of the main classes of defects in software requirements specification. Various logic-based techniques have been proposed to manage inconsistencies in requirements engineering. However, identifying an appropriate proposal for resolving inconsistencies in software requirements is still a challenging problem. In this paper, we propose a logic-based approach to generating appropriate proposals for handling inconsistency in software requirements. Informally speaking, given an inconsistent requirements specification, we identify which requirements should be given priority to be changed for resolving the inconsistency in that specification, by balancing the blame of each requirement for the inconsistency against its value for that requirements specification. We follow the viewpoint that minimal inconsistent subsets of a set of formulas are the purest forms of inconsistencies in that set. According to this viewpoint, a potential proposal for resolving inconsistencies can be described by a possible combination of some requirements to be changed that can eliminate minimal inconsistent subsets. Then we propose a method of evaluating the degree of disputability of each requirement involved in the inconsistency in a requirements specification. Finally, we provide an algorithm of generating appropriate proposals for resolving the inconsistency in a requirements specification based on the degree of disputability of requirements.


Requirement Engineering Software Requirement Software Requirement Specification Generate Proposal Free Formula 
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.
    Easterbrook, S., Chechik, M.: 2nd international workshop on living with inconsistency. Software Engineering Notes 26, 76–78 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Nuseibeh, B., Easterbrook, S., Russo, A.: Making inconsistency respectable in software development. Journal of Systems and Software 58, 171–180 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gervasi, V., Zowghi, D.: Reasoning about inconsistencies in natural language requirements. ACM Transaction on Software Engineering and Methodologies 14, 277–330 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hunter, A., Nuseibeh, B.: Managing inconsistent specification. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology 7, 335–367 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Martinez, A.B.B., Arias, J.J.P., Vilas, A.F., Duque, J.G., Norse, M.L., Redondo, R.P.D., Fernandez, Y.B.: On the interplay between inconsistency and incompleteness in multi-perspective requirements specifications. Information and Software Technology 50, 296–321 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Zowghi, D., Gervasi, V.: On the interplay between consistency, completeness, and correctness in requirements evolution. Information and Software Technology 45, 993–1009 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Mu, K., Jin, Z., Lu, R., Liu, W.: Measuring Inconsistency in Requirements Specifications. In: Godo, L. (ed.) ECSQARU 2005. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3571, pp. 440–451. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Mu, K., Liu, W., Jin, Z., Yue, A., Lu, R., Bell, D.: Handling inconsistency in distributed software requirements specifications based on prioritized merging. Fundamenta Informaticae 91, 631–670 (2009)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Mu, K., Jin, Z., Zowghi, D.: A priority-based negotiations approach for handling inconsistency in multi-perspective software requirements. Journal of Systems Science and Complexity 21, 574–596 (2008) MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Easterbrook, S., Chechik, M.: A framework for multi-valued reasoning over inconsistent viewpoints. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE 2001), Toronto, Canada, pp. 411–420 (2001)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Finkelstein, A., Gabbay, D., Hunter, A., Kramer, J., Nuseibeh, B.: Inconsistency handling in multiperspective specifications. IEEE Trans. on Software Engineering 20, 569–578 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gabbay, D., Hunter, A.: Making inconsistency respectable 2: Meta-level handling of inconsistent data. In: Moral, S., Kruse, R., Clarke, E. (eds.) ECSQARU 1993. LNCS, vol. 747, pp. 129–136. Springer, Heidelberg (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Mu, K., Jin, Z.: Identifying Acceptable Common Proposals for Handling Inconsistent Software Requirements. In: Derrick, J., Vain, J. (eds.) FORTE 2007. LNCS, vol. 4574, pp. 296–308. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mu, K., Liu, W., Jin, Z.: Measuring the blame of each formula for inconsistent prioritized knowledge bases. Journal of Logic and Computation (2011), doi:10.1093/logcom/EXR002Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Jackson, D.: Automating frist-order relational logic. ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes 25, 130–139 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Reiter, R.: A theory of diagnosis from first priniciples. Artificial Intelligence 32, 57–95 (1987)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hunter, A., Konieczny, S.: Measuring inconsistency through minimal inconsistent sets. In: Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning: Proceedings of the Eleventh International Conference (KR 2008), pp. 358–366 (2008)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kedian Mu
    • 1
  • Weiru Liu
    • 2
  • Zhi Jin
    • 3
    • 4
  1. 1.School of Mathematical SciencesPeking UniversityP.R. China
  2. 2.School of Electronics, Electrical Engineering and Computer ScienceQueen’s University BelfastUK
  3. 3.Key Laboratory of High Confidence Software Technologies, Ministry of EducationPeking UniversityBeijingP.R. China
  4. 4.School of Electronics Engineering and Computer SciencePeking UniversityBeijingP.R. China

Personalised recommendations