What Do We Know about Alignment of Requirements Engineering and Software Testing?

Pertti Karhapää, Alireza Haghighatkhah, M. Oivo
{"title":"What Do We Know about Alignment of Requirements Engineering and Software Testing?","authors":"Pertti Karhapää, Alireza Haghighatkhah, M. Oivo","doi":"10.1145/3084226.3084265","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Context: The alignment of different software engineering activities for coordinated functioning and optimized product development is of great importance, particularly in industrial-scale development. The link between intermediate activities has been researched extensively, but the link between requirements engineering (RE) and software testing (ST) is a relatively less explored area. Objective: The objective of this study is to aggregate, structure, and classify all existing research regarding alignment of RE and ST published by the end of 2015. Method: We conducted a systematic mapping study (SMS) and aggregated all studies relevant to our scope. The primary studies are analyzed in terms of publication trend, focus area, i.e., how alignment is supported, the application domain and benefits and challenges, methodological data, and scientific rigor and industrial relevance. Results: There is a growing interest towards the topic. Several different techniques have been identified to improve RE and ST alignment. Test generation from requirements specification has received most attention. Alignment of RE and ST is particularly important for large safety-critical domains. While many challenges have been reported, the supporting evidence for benefits is scarce. Frameworks/methods/techniques is the most frequent contribution type. Solution proposal and evaluation research were the most frequently applied research type. Case study research was the most frequently applied research method, however, almost half of the studies did not clearly report any research method. Conclusion: Despite the numerous approaches that are proposed, it is not clear what approach is suitable in what context and why. To support industry in RE and ST alignment, guidelines and tool support are needed. The supporting evidence for claimed benefits is very limited. Overall, the research area is in its early stages and an increase in both the number and rigor of empirical studies are required.","PeriodicalId":192290,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering","volume":"102 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-06-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3084226.3084265","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

Context: The alignment of different software engineering activities for coordinated functioning and optimized product development is of great importance, particularly in industrial-scale development. The link between intermediate activities has been researched extensively, but the link between requirements engineering (RE) and software testing (ST) is a relatively less explored area. Objective: The objective of this study is to aggregate, structure, and classify all existing research regarding alignment of RE and ST published by the end of 2015. Method: We conducted a systematic mapping study (SMS) and aggregated all studies relevant to our scope. The primary studies are analyzed in terms of publication trend, focus area, i.e., how alignment is supported, the application domain and benefits and challenges, methodological data, and scientific rigor and industrial relevance. Results: There is a growing interest towards the topic. Several different techniques have been identified to improve RE and ST alignment. Test generation from requirements specification has received most attention. Alignment of RE and ST is particularly important for large safety-critical domains. While many challenges have been reported, the supporting evidence for benefits is scarce. Frameworks/methods/techniques is the most frequent contribution type. Solution proposal and evaluation research were the most frequently applied research type. Case study research was the most frequently applied research method, however, almost half of the studies did not clearly report any research method. Conclusion: Despite the numerous approaches that are proposed, it is not clear what approach is suitable in what context and why. To support industry in RE and ST alignment, guidelines and tool support are needed. The supporting evidence for claimed benefits is very limited. Overall, the research area is in its early stages and an increase in both the number and rigor of empirical studies are required.
关于需求工程和软件测试的一致性我们知道些什么?
上下文:为协调功能和优化产品开发而对不同软件工程活动进行对齐是非常重要的,特别是在工业规模的开发中。中间活动之间的联系已经得到了广泛的研究,但是需求工程(RE)和软件测试(ST)之间的联系是一个相对较少探索的领域。目的:本研究的目的是对截至2015年底发表的所有关于RE和ST对齐的现有研究进行汇总、结构和分类。方法:我们进行了系统的地图研究(SMS),并汇总了与我们研究范围相关的所有研究。主要研究从出版趋势、重点领域(即如何支持一致性)、应用领域、利益和挑战、方法数据、科学严谨性和工业相关性等方面进行了分析。结果:人们对这个话题的兴趣越来越大。已经确定了几种不同的技术来改善RE和ST对齐。从需求规范中生成测试受到了广泛的关注。RE和ST的一致性对于大型安全关键领域尤为重要。虽然报告了许多挑战,但支持益处的证据很少。框架/方法/技术是最常见的贡献类型。解决方案建议和评价研究是最常用的研究类型。案例研究是最常用的研究方法,然而,几乎一半的研究没有明确报告任何研究方法。结论:尽管提出了许多方法,但尚不清楚哪种方法适用于什么情况以及为什么适用。为了支持行业在RE和ST方面的一致性,需要指导方针和工具支持。所声称的好处的支持证据非常有限。总体而言,该研究领域处于早期阶段,需要增加实证研究的数量和严谨性。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信