Goulão, M., V. Amaral, and M. Mernik,
"Quality in model-driven engineering: a tertiary study",
Software Quality Journal, vol. 24, issue 3, pp. 601-633, 2016.
Abstracthttp://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11219-016-9324-8
Model-driven engineering (MDE) is believed to have a significant impact in software quality. However, researchers and practitioners may have a hard time locating consolidated evidence on this impact, as the available information is scattered in several different publications. Our goal is to aggregate consolidated findings on quality in MDE, facilitating the work of researchers and practitioners in learning about the coverage and main findings of existing work as well as identifying relatively unexplored niches of research that need further attention. We performed a tertiary study on quality in MDE, in order to gain a better understanding of its most prominent findings and existing challenges, as reported in the literature. We identified 22 systematic literature reviews and mapping studies and the most relevant quality attributes addressed by each of those studies, in the context of MDE. Maintainability is clearly the most often studied and reported quality attribute impacted by MDE. Eighty out of 83 research questions in the selected secondary studies have a structure that is more often associated with mapping existing research than with answering more concrete research questions (e.g., comparing two alternative MDE approaches with respect to their impact on a specific quality attribute). We briefly outline the main contributions of each of the selected literature reviews. In the collected studies, we observed a broad coverage of software product quality, although frequently accompanied by notes on how much more empirical research is needed to further validate existing claims. Relatively, little attention seems to be devoted to the impact of MDE on the quality in use of products developed using MDE.
Santos, M., C. Gralha, M. Goulão, J. Araújo, A. Moreira, and J. Cambeiro,
"What is the Impact of Bad Layout in the Understandability of Social Goal Models?",
24th IEEE International Conference on Requirements Engineering, Beijing, China, IEEE, 12-16, Sep., 2016.
AbstractThe i* community has published guidelines, including model layout guidelines, for the construction of models. Our goal is to evaluate the effect of the layout guidelines on the i* novice stakeholders’ ability to understand and review i* models. We conducted a quasi-experiment where participants were given two understanding and two reviewing tasks. Both tasks involved a model with a bad layout and another model following the i* layout guidelines. We evaluated the impact of layouts by combining the success level in those tasks and the required effort to accomplish them. Effort was assessed using time, perceived complexity (with NASA TLX), and eye-tracking data. Participants were more successful in understanding than in reviewing tasks. However, we found no statistically significant difference in the success, time taken, or perceived complexity, between tasks conducted with models with a bad layout and models with a good layout. Most participants had little to no prior knowledge in i*, making them more representative of stakeholders with no requirements engineering expertise. They were able to understand the models fairly well after a short tutorial, but struggled when reviewing models. Adherence to the existing i* layout guidelines did not significantly impact i* model understanding and reviewing performance.
Silva, L., A. Moreira, J. Araújo, C. Gralha, M. Goulão, and V. Amaral,
"Exploring Views for Goal-Oriented Requirements Models",
35th International Conference on Conceptual Modeling, ER2016, Gifu, Japan, 14-17 Nov., 2016.
Abstracthttp://er2016.cs.titech.ac.jp/
Requirements documents and models need to be used by many stakeholders with dierent technological prociency, during software development. Each stakeholder may need to understand the entire (or simply part of the) requirements artifacts. To empower those stakeholders, views of the requirements should be congurable to their particular needs. Information visualization techniques may help in this process. In this paper, we propose dierent views aimed at highlighting information that is relevant for a particular stakeholder, helping him to query requirements artifacts. We oer three kinds of visualization capturing language and domain elements, while providing a gradual model overview: the big picture view, the syntax-based view, and the concern-based view. We instantiate these views with i* models and introduce an implementation prototype in the iStarLab tool.
Bombonatti, D., C. Gralha, A. Moreira, J. Araújo, and M. Goulão,
"Usability of Requirements Techniques: A Systematic Literature Review",
The 31st ACM/SIGAPP Symposium on Applied Computing, Pisa, Italy, ACM/SIGAPP, 4-8 Apr., 2016.
AbstractThe usability of requirements engineering (RE) techniques has been recognised as a key factor for their successful adoption by industry. RE techniques must be accessible to stakeholders with different backgrounds, so they can be empowered to effectively and efficiently contribute to building successful systems. When selecting an appropriate requirements engineering technique for a given context, one should consider the usability supported by each of the candidate techniques. The first step towards achieving this goal is to gather the best evidence available on the usability of RE approaches by performing a systematic literature review, to answer one research question: How is the usability of requirements engineering techniques and tools addressed? We systematically review articles published in the Requirements Engineering Journal, one of the main sources for mature work in RE, to motivate a research roadmap to make RE approaches more accessible to stakeholders with different backgrounds.