Colette Rolland

Bio: Colette Rolland is an academic researcher from University of Paris. The author has contributed to research in topics: Requirements engineering & Information system. The author has an hindex of 44, co-authored 178 publications receiving 7200 citations. Previous affiliations of Colette Rolland include Paris-Sorbonne University & University of Geneva.

Requirements engineering paper classification and evaluation criteria: a proposal and a discussion

Abstract: In recent years, members of the steering committee of the IEEE Requirements Engineering (RE) Conference have discussed paper classification and evaluation criteria for RE papers. The immediate trigger for this discussion was our concern about differences in opinion that sometimes arise in program committees about the criteria to be used in evaluating papers. If program committee members do not all use the same criteria, or if they use criteria different from those used by authors, then papers might be rejected or accepted for the wrong reasons. Surely not all papers should be evaluated according to the same criteria. Some papers describe new techniques but do not report on empirical research; others describe new conceptual frameworks for investigating certain RE problems; others report on industrial experience with existing RE techniques. Other kinds of papers can also be easily recognized. All of these types of papers should be evaluated according to different criteria. But we are far from a consensus about what classes of paper we should distinguish, and what the criteria are for each of these classes.

Guiding goal modeling using scenarios

Abstract: Even though goal modeling is an effective approach to requirements engineering, it is known to present a number of difficulties in practice. The paper discusses these difficulties and proposes to couple goal modeling and scenario authoring to overcome them. Whereas existing techniques use scenarios to concretize goals, we use them to discover goals. Our proposal is to define enactable rules which form the basis of a software environment called L'Ecritoire to guide the requirements elicitation process through interleaved goal modeling and scenario authoring. The focus of the paper is on the discovery of goals from scenarios. The discovery process is centered around the notion of a requirement chunk (RC) which is a pair . The paper presents the notion of RC, the rules to support the discovery of RCs and illustrates the application of the approach within L'Ecritoire using the ATM example. It also evaluates the potential practical benefits expected from the use of the approach.

A Multi-Model View of Process Modelling

Abstract: map as well as its associated guidelines. The map is a navigational structure which supports the dynamic selection of the intention to be achieved next and the appropriate strategy to achieve it, whereas guidelines help in the operationalisation of the selected intention. The paper presents the map and guidelines and exemplifies the approach using the CREWS-L’Ecritoire method for requirements engineering.

A proposal for a scenario classification framework

Abstract: The requirements engineering, information systems and software engineering communities recently advocated scenario-based approaches which emphasise the user/system interaction perspective in developing computer systems. Use of examples, scenes, narrative descriptions of contexts, mock-ups and prototypes-all these ideas can be called scenario-based approaches, although exact definitions are not easy beyond stating that these approaches emphasise some description of the real world. Experience seems to tell us that people react to ‘real things’ and that this helps in clarifying requirements. Indeed, the widespread acceptance of prototyping in system development points to the effectiveness of scenario-based approaches. However, we have little understanding about how scenarios should be constructed, little hard evidence about their effectiveness and even less idea about why they work. The paper is an attempt to explore some of the issues underlying scenario-based approaches in requirements engineering and to propose a framework for their classification. The framework is a four-dimensional framework which advocates that a scenario-based approach can be well defined by itsform, content, purpose andlife cycle. Every dimension is itself multifaceted and a metric is associated with each facet. Motivations for developing the framework are threefold: (a) to help in understanding and clarifying existing scenario-based approaches; (b) to situate the industrial practice of scenarios; and (c) to assist researchers develop more innovative scenario-based approaches.

Towards a generic model for situational method engineering

Abstract: The work presented in this paper is related to the area of Situational Method Engineering (SME) which focuses on project-specific method construction. We propose a generic process model supporting the integration of different existing SME approaches. This model shall help the method engineer either selecting one SME approach or combining several approaches that best fit the situation of the method engineering project at hand. The generic model presented in this paper already contains three SME techniques: (1) to assemble method chunks (2) to extend an existing method and (3) to generate a method by abstraction/instantiation of a model/meta-model. The paper presents and illustrates these three techniques and show how other SME techniques could be integrated in the model.

A metrics suite for object oriented design

Abstract: Given the central role that software development plays in the delivery and application of information technology, managers are increasingly focusing on process improvement in the software development area. This demand has spurred the provision of a number of new and/or improved approaches to software development, with perhaps the most prominent being object-orientation (OO). In addition, the focus on process improvement has increased the demand for software measures, or metrics with which to manage the process. The need for such metrics is particularly acute when an organization is adopting a new technology for which established practices have yet to be developed. This research addresses these needs through the development and implementation of a new suite of metrics for OO design. Metrics developed in previous research, while contributing to the field's understanding of software development processes, have generally been subject to serious criticisms, including the lack of a theoretical base. Following Wand and Weber (1989), the theoretical base chosen for the metrics was the ontology of Bunge (1977). Six design metrics are developed, and then analytically evaluated against Weyuker's (1988) proposed set of measurement principles. An automated data collection tool was then developed and implemented to collect an empirical sample of these metrics at two field sites in order to demonstrate their feasibility and suggest ways in which managers may use these metrics for process improvement. >

Systematic mapping studies in software engineering

Abstract: BACKGROUND: A software engineering systematic map is a defined method to build a classification scheme and structure a software engineering field of interest. The analysis of results focuses on frequencies of publications for categories within the scheme. Thereby, the coverage of the research field can be determined. Different facets of the scheme can also be combined to answer more specific research questions. OBJECTIVE: We describe how to conduct a systematic mapping study in software engineering and provide guidelines. We also compare systematic maps and systematic reviews to clarify how to chose between them. This comparison leads to a set of guidelines for systematic maps. METHOD: We have defined a systematic mapping process and applied it to complete a systematic mapping study. Furthermore, we compare systematic maps with systematic reviews by systematically analyzing existing systematic reviews. RESULTS: We describe a process for software engineering systematic mapping studies and compare it to systematic reviews. Based on this, guidelines for conducting systematic maps are defined. CONCLUSIONS: Systematic maps and reviews are different in terms of goals, breadth, validity issues and implications. Thus, they should be used complementarily and require different methods (e.g., for analysis).

Goal-oriented requirements engineering: a guided tour

Abstract: Goals capture, at different levels of abstraction, the various objectives the system under consideration should achieve. Goal-oriented requirements engineering is concerned with the use of goals for eliciting, elaborating, structuring, specifying, analyzing, negotiating, documenting, and modifying requirements. This area has received increasing attention. The paper reviews various research efforts undertaken along this line of research. The arguments in favor of goal orientation are first briefly discussed. The paper then compares the main approaches to goal modeling, goal specification and goal-based reasoning in the many activities of the requirements engineering process. To make the discussion more concrete, a real case study is used to suggest what a goal-oriented requirements engineering method may look like. Experience, with such approaches and tool support are briefly discussed as well.

A comparative analysis of methodologies for database schema integration

Abstract: One of the fundamental principles of the database approach is that a database allows a nonredundant, unified representation of all data managed in an organization. This is achieved only when methodologies are available to support integration across organizational and application boundaries.Methodologies for database design usually perform the design activity by separately producing several schemas, representing parts of the application, which are subsequently merged. Database schema integration is the activity of integrating the schemas of existing or proposed databases into a global, unified schema.The aim of the paper is to provide first a unifying framework for the problem of schema integration, then a comparative review of the work done thus far in this area. Such a framework, with the associated analysis of the existing approaches, provides a basis for identifying strengths and weaknesses of individual methodologies, as well as general guidelines for future improvements and extensions.