scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Conference

IEEE International Conference on Requirements Engineering 

About: IEEE International Conference on Requirements Engineering is an academic conference. The conference publishes majorly in the area(s): Requirements engineering & Requirements analysis. Over the lifetime, 1106 publications have been published by the conference receiving 28176 citations.


Papers
More filters
Proceedings ArticleDOI
19 Nov 2007
TL;DR: The existing definitions of the term 'non-functional requirement' are surveyed, the problems with the current definitions are discussed, and concepts for overcoming these problems are contributed.
Abstract: Although the term 'non-functional requirement' has been in use for more than 20 years, there is still no consensus in the requirements engineering community what non-functional requirements are and how we should elicit, document, and validate them. On the other hand, there is a unanimous consensus that non-functional requirements are important and can be critical for the success of a project. This paper surveys the existing definitions of the term, highlights and discusses the problems with the current definitions, and contributes concepts for overcoming these problems.

728 citations

Proceedings ArticleDOI
29 Sep 2014
TL;DR: In this article, the authors use natural language processing techniques to identify fine-grained app features in the reviews and then extract the user sentiments about the identified features and give them a general score across all reviews.
Abstract: App stores allow users to submit feedback for downloaded apps in form of star ratings and text reviews. Recent studies analyzed this feedback and found that it includes information useful for app developers, such as user requirements, ideas for improvements, user sentiments about specific features, and descriptions of experiences with these features. However, for many apps, the amount of reviews is too large to be processed manually and their quality varies largely. The star ratings are given to the whole app and developers do not have a mean to analyze the feedback for the single features. In this paper we propose an automated approach that helps developers filter, aggregate, and analyze user reviews. We use natural language processing techniques to identify fine-grained app features in the reviews. We then extract the user sentiments about the identified features and give them a general score across all reviews. Finally, we use topic modeling techniques to group fine-grained features into more meaningful high-level features. We evaluated our approach with 7 apps from the Apple App Store and Google Play Store and compared its results with a manually, peer-conducted analysis of the reviews. On average, our approach has a precision of 0.59 and a recall of 0.51. The extracted features were coherent and relevant to requirements evolution tasks. Our approach can help app developers to systematically analyze user opinions about single features and filter irrelevant reviews.

484 citations

Proceedings ArticleDOI
15 Jul 2013
TL;DR: It is found that most of the feedback is provided shortly after new releases, with a quickly decreasing frequency over time, which has an impact on download numbers.
Abstract: Application distribution platforms - or app stores - such as Google Play or Apple AppStore allow users to submit feedback in form of ratings and reviews to downloaded applications. In the last few years, these platforms have become very popular to both application developers and users. However, their real potential for and impact on requirements engineering processes are not yet well understood. This paper reports on an exploratory study, which analyzes over one million reviews from the Apple AppStore. We investigated how and when users provide feedback, inspected the feedback content, and analyzed its impact on the user community. We found that most of the feedback is provided shortly after new releases, with a quickly decreasing frequency over time. Reviews typically contain multiple topics, such as user experience, bug reports, and feature requests. The quality and constructiveness vary widely, from helpful advices and innovative ideas to insulting offenses. Feedback content has an impact on download numbers: positive messages usually lead to better ratings and vice versa. Negative feedback such as shortcomings is typically destructive and misses context details and user experience. We discuss our findings and their impact on software and requirements engineering teams.

466 citations

Proceedings ArticleDOI
11 Sep 2006
TL;DR: In this paper, a formal semantics for feature diagrams is defined at the free feature diagrams (FFD) level, which provides unambiguous definition for all the surveyed feature diagrams variants in one shot.
Abstract: Feature diagrams (FD) are a family of popular modelling languages used for engineering requirements in software product lines. FD were first introduced by Kang as part of the FODA (feature oriented domain analysis) method back in 1990, Since then, various extensions of FODA FD were devised to compensate for a purported ambiguity and lack of precision and expressiveness. However, they never received a proper formal semantics, which is the hallmark of precision and unambiguity as well as a prerequisite for efficient and safe tool automation, In this paper, we first survey FD variants. Subsequently, we generalize the various syntaxes through a generic construction called free feature diagrams (FFD). Formal semantics is defined at the FFD level, which provides unambiguous definition for ail the surveyed FD variants in one shot. All formalisation choices found a clear answer in the original FODA FD definition, which proved that although informal and scattered throughout many pages, it suffered no ambiguity problem. Our definition has several additional advantages: it is formal, concise and generic. We thus argue that it contributes to improve the definition, understanding, comparison and reliable implementation of FD languages

459 citations

Proceedings ArticleDOI
08 Sep 2003
TL;DR: A methodological framework for dealing with security and privacy requirements based on i*, an agent-oriented requirements modeling language is proposed, which supports a set of analysis techniques and helps identify potential system abusers and their malicious intents.
Abstract: Security issues for software systems ultimately concern relationships among social actors stakeholders, system users, potential attackers - and the software acting on their behalf. We propose a methodological framework for dealing with security and privacy requirements based on i*, an agent-oriented requirements modeling language. The framework supports a set of analysis techniques. In particular, attacker analysis helps identify potential system abusers and their malicious intents. Dependency vulnerability analysis helps detect vulnerabilities in terms of organizational relationships among stakeholders. Countermeasure analysis supports the dynamic decision-making process of defensive system players in addressing vulnerabilities and threats. Finally, access control analysis bridges the gap between security requirement models and security implementation models. The framework is illustrated with an example involving security and privacy concerns in the design of agent-based health information systems. In addition, we discuss model evaluation techniques, including qualitative goal model analysis and property verification techniques based on model checking.

410 citations

Performance
Metrics
No. of papers from the Conference in previous years
YearPapers
202165
202056
201967
201869
201781
201667