Requirements Engineering 

About: Requirements Engineering is an academic journal published by Springer Science+Business Media. The journal publishes majorly in the area(s): Requirements engineering & Requirements analysis. It has an ISSN identifier of 0947-3602. Over the lifetime, 1519 publications have been published receiving 41117 citations. The journal is also known as: Requirements engineering journal.

Towards modelling and reasoning support for early-phase requirements engineering

Abstract: Requirements are usually understood as stating what a system is supposed to do, as apposed to how it should do it. However, understanding the organizational context and rationales (the "Whys") that lead up to systems requirements can be just as important for the ongoing success of the system. Requirements modelling techniques can be used to help deal with the knowledge and reasoning needed in this earlier phase of requirements engineering. However most existing requirements techniques are intended more for the later phase of requirements engineering, which focuses on completeness, consistency, and automated verification of requirements. In contrast, the early phase aims to model and analyze stakeholder interests and how they might be addressed, or compromised, by various system-and-environment alternatives. This paper argues, therefore, that a different kind of modelling and reasoning support is needed for the early phase. An outline of the i* framework is given as an example of a step in this direction. Meeting scheduling is used as a domain example.

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.

Value-based requirements engineering: exploring innovative e-commerce ideas

Abstract: Innovative e-commerce ideas are characterised by commercial products yet unknown to the market, enabled by information technology such as the Internet and technologies on top of it. How to develop such products is hardly known. We propose an interdisciplinary approach, e3-value, to explore an innovative e-commerce idea with the aim of understanding such an idea thoroughly and evaluating it for potential profitability. Our methodology exploits a requirements engineering way of working, but employs concepts and terminology from business science, marketing and axiology. It shows how to model business requirements and improve business---IT alignment, in sophisticated multi-actor value constellations that are common in electronic commerce. In addition to the e3-value approach methodology, we also present the action research-based development of our methodology, by using one of the longitudinal projects we carried out in the field of online news article provisioning.

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.

Eliciting security requirements with misuse cases

Abstract: Use cases have become increasingly common during requirements engineering, but they offer limited support for eliciting security threats and requirements. At the same time, the importance of security is growing with the rise of phenomena such as e-commerce and nomadic and geographically distributed work. This paper presents a systematic approach to eliciting security requirements based on use cases, with emphasis on description and method guidelines. The approach extends traditional use cases to also cover misuse, and is potentially useful for several other types of extra-functional requirements beyond security.