An Empirical Evaluation of the Requirements Engineering Tool for Socio-Technical Systems

2018 IEEE 7th International Workshop on Empirical Requirements Engineering (EmpiRE) Pub Date : 2018-08-01 DOI:10.1109/EmpiRE.2018.00012

Msury Mahunnah, K. Taveter, Raimundas Matulevičius

{"title":"An Empirical Evaluation of the Requirements Engineering Tool for Socio-Technical Systems","authors":"Msury Mahunnah, K. Taveter, Raimundas Matulevičius","doi":"10.1109/EmpiRE.2018.00012","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"One of the major problems of requirements engineering is the lack of sufficient empirical evidence that evaluates the benefits of modelling tools for Model-Driven Engineering (MDE). In this paper, we report on the results of empirical study that compares the modelling effort and effectiveness of the novel software tool for modelling requirements of sociotechnical systems against modelling on paper. We have asked 8 persons who received 2 different treatments – modelling on software against modelling on paper to create 2 requirements models – goal and domain models – for 2 different case studies. The study finds that modelling effort with a software tool nearly equals to modelling effort on paper while modelling effectiveness with a tool is higher than modelling effectiveness on paper. The major limitation of this study is the use of students as participants and the use of small sample size. In the future work, we will conduct another empirical study with a large sample size of professionals that aims to increase the confidence in the results obtained from this empirical study.","PeriodicalId":247431,"journal":{"name":"2018 IEEE 7th International Workshop on Empirical Requirements Engineering (EmpiRE)","volume":"61 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2018 IEEE 7th International Workshop on Empirical Requirements Engineering (EmpiRE)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/EmpiRE.2018.00012","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 3

Abstract

One of the major problems of requirements engineering is the lack of sufficient empirical evidence that evaluates the benefits of modelling tools for Model-Driven Engineering (MDE). In this paper, we report on the results of empirical study that compares the modelling effort and effectiveness of the novel software tool for modelling requirements of sociotechnical systems against modelling on paper. We have asked 8 persons who received 2 different treatments – modelling on software against modelling on paper to create 2 requirements models – goal and domain models – for 2 different case studies. The study finds that modelling effort with a software tool nearly equals to modelling effort on paper while modelling effectiveness with a tool is higher than modelling effectiveness on paper. The major limitation of this study is the use of students as participants and the use of small sample size. In the future work, we will conduct another empirical study with a large sample size of professionals that aims to increase the confidence in the results obtained from this empirical study.

查看原文本刊更多论文

社会技术系统需求工程工具的实证评价

需求工程的主要问题之一是缺乏足够的经验证据来评估模型驱动工程(MDE)建模工具的好处。在本文中，我们报告了实证研究的结果，比较了用于社会技术系统建模需求的新型软件工具与纸上建模的建模工作和有效性。我们请了8个人，他们接受了两种不同的处理——软件建模和纸上建模——为两个不同的案例研究创建了两个需求模型——目标模型和领域模型。研究发现，使用软件工具建模的工作量与纸上建模的工作量几乎相等，而使用工具建模的有效性高于纸上建模的有效性。本研究的主要限制是使用学生作为参与者和使用小样本量。在未来的工作中，我们将进行另一项大样本专业人员的实证研究，旨在增加对本实证研究结果的信心。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

2018 IEEE 7th International Workshop on Empirical Requirements Engineering (EmpiRE)

自引率

0.00%

发文量