Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

State-of-the-Art

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Business Standard Compliance and Requirements Validation Using Goal Models

Part of the book series: Services and Business Process Reengineering ((SBPR))

  • 292 Accesses

Abstract

Several languages and frameworks have been proposed in the domain of goal oriented requirements engineering that try to capture and model the requirement specifications of the system being developed. Some well documented articles have been published that compare and contrast these approaches and stress on the analytical capabilities of each approach [1,2,3,4]. For the purpose of this book, we provide a brief summary of the current state-of-the-art in the requirements engineering domain in Sect. 2.1.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Lapouchnian A (2005) Goal-oriented requirements engineering: an overview of the current research, Depth Report. University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada

    Google Scholar 

  2. Yu E, Modelling strategic relationships for process reengineering. PhD thesis, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada

    Google Scholar 

  3. Fuxman AD (2001) Formal analysis of early requirements specifications. MS thesis, Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto, Canada

    Google Scholar 

  4. van Lamsweerde A, Darimont R, Letier E (1998) Managing conflicts in goal-driven requirements engineering. Trans Softw Eng Special Issue Inconsistency Manage Softw Dev 24(11):908–926. https://doi.org/10.1109/32.730542

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Ross D (1977) Structured analysis (SA): a language for communicating ideas. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 3(1):16–34. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSE.1977.229900

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Greespan S, Borgida A, Mylopoulos J (1986) A requirements modeling language and its logic. Knowl Based Manage Syst 471–502. https://doi.org/10.1016/0306-4379(86)90020-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Bois PD (1995) The albert ii language: on the design and use of a formal specification language for requirements analysis. PhD thesis, Notre Dame de la Paix, Namur, Belgium

    Google Scholar 

  8. Chung L et al, Non-functional requirements in software engineering. Kluwer Academic Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-5269-7. ISBN 978-1-4615-5269-7

    Book  Google Scholar 

  9. Mylopoulos J, Chung L, Nixon B, Representing and using non-functional requirements: a process-oriented approach. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 18(6). https://doi.org/10.1109/32.142871

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Dardenne A, van Lamsweerde A, Fickas S (1993) Goal-directed requirements acquisition. Sci Comput Program 20(1–2):3–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-6423(93)90021-G

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. van Lamsweerde A, Letier E (2002) From object orientation to goal orientation: a paradigm shift for requirements engineering. In: Proceedings of the 9th international workshop on radical innovations of software and systems engineering in the future (Lecture Notes in Computer Science 2941), pp 325–340. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-24626-8_23

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  12. Anton A (1996) Goal-based requirements analysis. In: Proceedings of the 2nd IEEE international conference on requirements engineering (ICRE), pp 136–144. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICRE.1996.491438

  13. Anton A (1997) Goal identification and refinement in the specification of software-based information systems. PhD thesis, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, USA

    Google Scholar 

  14. Yu E (1997) Towards modeling and reasoning support for early-phase requirements engineering.In: Proceedings of the 3rd international symposium on requirements engineering (RE), pp 226–235. https://doi.org/10.1109/ISRE.1997.566873

  15. Abbas S, Seba H (2012) A module-based approach for structural matching of process models. In: Proceedings of the 5th IEEE international conference on service-oriented computing and applications (SOCA), pp 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1109/SOCA.2012.6449441

  16. Wang J, Liu H, Wang H (2014) A mapping-based tree similarity algorithm and its application to ontology alignment. Knowl Based Syst 56:97–107. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2013.11.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Mao M, Peng Y, Spring M (2010) An adaptive ontology mapping approach with neural network based constraint satisfaction. Web Semant Sci Serv Agents World Wide Web 8(1):14–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.websem.2009.11.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Kalyanpur A, Pastor DJ, Battle S, Padget JA (2004) Automatic mapping of OWL ontologies into java. In: Proceedings of the sixteenth international conference on software engineering and knowledge engineering (SEKE), pp 98–103

    Google Scholar 

  19. Arnold P, Rahm E (2014) Enriching ontology mappings with semantic relations. Data Knowl Eng 93:1–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.datak.2014.07.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Khattak A, Pervez Z, Khan W, Khan A, Latif K, Lee S (2015) Mapping evolution of dynamic web ontologies. Inf Sci 303(C):101–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2014.12.040

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  21. Wang P, Xu B, Lu J, Kang D, Zhou J (2006) Mapping ontology relations: an approach based on best approximations. In: Proceedings of the 8th Asia-Pacific Web conference on Frontiers of WWW Research and Development, APWeb’06 (Lecture Notes in Computer Science 3841), pp 930–936. https://doi.org/10.1007/11610113_97

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  22. Kumar SK, Harding JA (2013) Ontology mapping using description logic and bridging axioms. Comput Ind 64(1):19–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2012.09.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Arch-int N, Arch-int S (2013) Semantic ontology mapping for interoperability of learning resource systems using a rule-based reasoning approach. Expert Syst Appl 40(18):7428–7443. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2013.07.027

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  24. Zawawy H, Mankovskii S, Kontogiannis K, Mylopoulos J (2015) Mining software logs for goal-driven root cause analysis. Art Sci Anal Softw Data Chap 18:519–554

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Ghose A, Santiputri M, Saraswati A, Dam HK (2014) Data-driven requirements modeling: some initial results with i\(^*\). In: Tenth Asia-Pacific conference on conceptual modelling (APCCM), vol 154, pp 55–64. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2667691.2667698

  26. Jin X, Donze A, Deshmukh JV, Seshia SA (2015) Mining requirements from closed-loop control models. IEEE Trans Comput Aided Des Integr Circ Syst 34(11):1704–1717. https://doi.org/10.1109/TCAD.2015.2421907

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  27. Qi J, Zhang Z, Jeon S, Zhou Y (2016) Mining customer requirements from online reviews: A product improvement perspective. Inf Manage Elsevier 53(8):951–963. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2016.06.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Garcia JE, Paiva AC (2016) Maintaining requirements using web usage data. Proc Comput Sci 100(Supplement C):626–633. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2016.09.204

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Knauss A, Damian D, Franch X, Rook A, Müller HA, Thomo A (2016) ACon: a learning-based approach to deal with uncertainty in contextual requirements at run time. Inf Softw Technol Elsevier 70(Supplment C):85–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2015.10.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Hassani M, Siccha S, Richter F, Seidl T (2015) Efficient process discovery from event streams using sequential pattern mining. In: IEEE symposium series on computational intelligence, pp 1366–1373. https://doi.org/10.1109/SSCI.2015.195

  31. Sohrabi MK, Ghods V (2016) CUSE: a novel cube-based approach for sequential pattern mining. In: 4th international symposium on computational and business intelligence (ISCBI) pp 186–190. https://doi.org/10.1109/ISCBI.2016.7743281

  32. Hassani M, Lu Y, Wischnewsky J, Seidl T (2016) A geometric approach for mining sequential patterns in interval-based data streams. In: IEEE international conference on fuzzy systems (FUZZ-IEEE), pp 2128–2135. https://doi.org/10.1109/FUZZ-IEEE.2016.7737954

  33. Chaudhari M, Mehta C (2016) Extension of prefix span approach with grc constraints for sequential pattern mining. In: International conference on electrical, electronics, and optimization techniques (ICEEOT), pp 2496–2498. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICEEOT.2016.7755142

  34. Fei X, Zheng S, Li-jing Y, Chao F (2016) A improved sequential pattern mining algorithm based on prefixspan. World Autom Congr (WAC) 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1109/WAC.2016.7583059

  35. Patel R, Chaudhari T (2016) A review on sequential pattern mining using pattern growth approach. In: International conference on wireless communications, signal processing and networking (WiSPNET), pp 1424–1427. https://doi.org/10.1109/WiSPNET.2016.7566371

  36. Zhu X, Wu S, Zou G (2015) User behavior detection for online survey via sequential pattern mining. In: Fifth international conference on instrumentation and measurement, computer, communication and control (IMCCC), pp 493–497. https://doi.org/10.1109/IMCCC.2015.110

  37. Uragaki K, Hosaka T, Arahori Y, Kushima M, Yamazaki T, Araki K, Yokota H (2016) Sequential pattern mining on electronic medical records with handling time intervals and the efficacy of medicines. In: IEEE symposium on computers and communication (ISCC), pp 20–25. https://doi.org/10.1109/ISCC.2016.7543708

  38. Abbasghorbani S, Tavoli R (2015) Survey on sequential pattern mining algorithms. In: 2nd international conference on knowledge-based engineering and innovation (KBEI), pp 1153–1164. https://doi.org/10.1109/KBEI.2015.7436211

  39. Ni Z, Wang S, Li H (2011) Mining organizational structure from workflow logs. In: Proceeding of the international conference on e-education, entertainment and e-management, pp 222–225. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICeEEM.2011.6137791

  40. Schöniga S, Cabanillas C, Jablonski S, Mendling J (2016) A framework for efficiently mining the organisational perspective of business processes. Decis Support Syst Elsevier 89(Supplement C):87–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2016.06.012

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Cleland-Huang J, Settimi R, Zou X, Solc P (2006) The detection and classification of non-functional requirements with application to early aspects In: 14th IEEE international conference requirements engineering, pp 39–48. https://doi.org/10.1109/RE.2006.65

  42. Sendall S, Kozaczynski W (2003) Model transformation: The heart and soul of model-driven software development. IEEE Softw 20(5):42–45. https://doi.org/10.1109/MS.2003.1231150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Schönböck J et al (2009) Catch me if you can—debugging support for model transformations, MODELS, Workshops (Lecture notes in computer science 6002(2010)), pp 5–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-12261-3_2

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  44. Shah SMA, Anastasakis K, Bordbar B (2009) From uml to alloy and back again, MODELS, workshops (Lecture notes in computer science 6002(2010)), pp 158–171. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-12261-3_16

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  45. Kerzhner AA, Paredis CJJ (2010) Model-based system verification: a formal framework for relating analyses, requirements, and tests, MODELS, workshops (Lecture notes in computer science 6627(2011)), PP 279–292. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-21210-9_27

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  46. Mussbacher G et al (2011) Comparing six modelling approaches, MODELS, workshops (Lecture notes in computer science 7167(2012)), PP 217–243. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-29645-1_22

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  47. Mussbacher G (2010) Aspect-oriented user requirements notation. PhD thesis, School of Information Technology and Engineering, University of Ottawa, Canada

    Google Scholar 

  48. Georg G (2011) Activity theory and its applications in software engineering and technology. Technical Report CS-11-101, Colorado State University

    Google Scholar 

  49. Kathayat SB, Le HN, Bræk R (2011) A model-driven framework for component-based development. In: 15th International SDL Forum Toulouse Integrating System and Software Modeling 2011, France, pp 154–167. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-25264-8_13

    Google Scholar 

  50. Capozucca A, Cheng B, Guelfi N, Istoan P (2011) bcms-oom-spl, repository for model driven development. http://www.cs.colostate.edu/content/bcms-oom-spl

  51. Klein J, Kienzle J (2007) Reusable aspect models, 11th workshop on aspect-oriented modelling. Nashville, TN, USA

    Google Scholar 

  52. Kienzle J et al (2010) Aspect-oriented design with reusable aspect models, transactions on aspect-oriented software development VII (Lecture notes in computer science 6210), pp 272–320. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-16086-8_8

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  53. Mussbacher G, Amyot D, Araújo J, Moreira A (2010) Requirements modelling with the aspect-oriented user requirements notation (AoURN): a case study. In; Transactions on aspect-oriented software development VII: a common case study for aspect-oriented modeling, pp 23–68. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-16086-8_2

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  54. User Requirements Notation (URN)—Language Definition (2008) ITU-T: Recommendation Z.151. Geneva, Switzerland. http://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-Z.151/en

  55. Allen R, Garlan D (1994) Formalizing architectural connection. In: Proceedings of the 16th international conference on software engineering, pp 71–80. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=257734.257745

  56. Cimatti A et al (1998) Formal verification of a railway interlocking system using model checking. J Formal Aspects Comput 10:361–380. https://doi.org/10.1007/s001650050022

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  57. Heitmeyer C, Jeffords R, Labaw B (1996) Automated consistency checking of requirements specifications. ACM Trans Softw Eng Methodol 5(3):231–261. https://doi.org/10.1145/234426.234431

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Heninger K (1980) Specifying software requirements for complex system: new techniques and their application. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 6(1):2–13. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSE.1980.230208

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Levenson N, Heimdahl M, Hildreth H (1994) Requirements specification for process control systems. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 20(9):684–706. https://doi.org/10.1109/32.317428

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Giacomo GD, Lesperance Y, Levesque H (2000) Congolog, a concurrent programming language based on the situation calculus. J Artif Intell 121(1–2):109–169. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0004-3702(00)00031-X

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  61. McCarthy J, Hayes P (1969) Some philosophical problems from the standpoint of artificial intelligence. Mach Intell 4:463–504. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-934613-03-3.50033-7

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  62. Mylopoulos J et al (1990) Telos: representing knowledge about information systems. ACM Trans Inf Syst 8(4):325–362. https://doi.org/10.1145/102675.102676

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Castro J, Kolp M, Mylopoulos J (2002) Towards requirements-driven information systems engineering: the tropos project. Inf Syst 27(6):365–389. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0306-4379(02)00012-1

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  64. Fuxman A, Pistore M, Mylopoulos J, Traverso P (2001) Model checking early requirements specifications in tropos. In: Proceedings of the 5th international symposium on requirements engineering (RE), pp 174–181. https://doi.org/10.1109/ISRE.2001.948557

  65. Liaskos S, Mylopoulos J (2010) On temporally annotating goal models. In: Proceedings of the 4th international i* workshop—iStar10, pp 62–66

    Google Scholar 

  66. Liaskos S, McIlraith SA, Mylopoulos J (2009) Towards augmenting requirements models with preferences. In: IEEE/ACM international conference on automated software engineering, pp 565–569. https://doi.org/10.1109/ASE.2009.91

  67. Sebastiani R, Giorgini P, Mylopoulos J (2004) Simple and minimum-cost statisfiability for goal models. In: Proceedings of the 16th international conference on advanced information systems engineering (CAiSE’04), pp 20–35. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-25975-6_4

    Google Scholar 

  68. Koliadis G, Ghose A (2006) Relating business process models to goal-oriented requirements models in KAOS. In: Advances in knowledge acquisition and management, pacific rim knowledge acquisition workshop (PKAW), pp 25–39. https://doi.org/10.1007/11961239_3

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  69. Hinge K, Ghose A, Koliadis G (2009) Process SEER: a tool for semantic effect annotation of business process models. In: Proceedings of the 13th IEEE international conference on enterprise distributed object computing (EDOC), pp 54–63. https://doi.org/10.1109/EDOC.2009.24

  70. Ghose A, Koliadis G (2008) PCTk: a toolkit for managing business process compliance. In: Proceedings of the 2nd international workshop on Juris-Informatics (JURISIN’08)

    Google Scholar 

  71. Kaiya H, Horai H, Saeki M (2002) AGORA: attributed goal-oriented requirements analysis method. In: Proceedings of the IEEE joint international conference on requirements engineering, pp 13–22. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICRE.2002.1048501

  72. Yamamoto K, Saeki M (2007) Using attributed goal graphs for software component selection: an application of goal-oriented analysis to decision making. In: 26th international conference on conceptual modeling ER ’07 tutorials, posters, panels and industrial contributions, vol 83, pp 215–220. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1386957.1386992

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Environmental Science, Informatics and Statistics, Ca’ Foscari University, Venice, Italy

    Novarun Deb

  2. Department of Computer Science and Engineering, University of Calcutta, Kolkata, India

    Nabendu Chaki

Authors
  1. Novarun Deb
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Nabendu Chaki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Novarun Deb .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Deb, N., Chaki, N. (2020). State-of-the-Art. In: Business Standard Compliance and Requirements Validation Using Goal Models. Services and Business Process Reengineering. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-2501-8_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-2501-8_2

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-15-2500-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-15-2501-8

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation