Friday, February 15, 2013

The ACE Framework

The ACE Framework has a language to model argumentation graphs, were the
arguments, conflicts, preferences and inferences between arguments of distinct stakeholders can be explicitly represented. Moreover, ACE algorithms formally identify impasses or consensus.  This paper presents a well conceived way of dealing with viewpoints by explicitly representing them and allowing for the identification of those arguments that have no conflicts, that is which can be said to be accepted by the different stakeholders involved.

The abstract says:
“A requirements engineering artifact is valid relative to the stakeholders of the system-to-be if they agree on the content of that artifact. Checking relative validity involves a discussion between the stakeholders and the requirements engineer. This paper proposes (I) a language for the representation of information exchanged in a discussion about the relative validity of an artifact; (ii) the acceptability condition, which, when it verifies in a discussion captured in the proposed language, signals that the relative validity holds for the discussed artifact and for the participants in the discussion; and (iii) reasoning procedures to automatically check the acceptability condition in a discussions captured by the proposed language.”

More details, see the paper: Analysis of Multi-Party Agreement in Requirements Validation

Using Viewpoints for Requirements Elicitation Interviews

Leite and Gilvaz performed an interesting experiment in using the concept of viewpoints to improve an interview assistant.  This was long ago, but it is a very nice idea.

The abstract says:

 “Requirements elicitation in the context of organizational information systems is a very hard task, being very dependent on the experience and cleverness of the team performing the elicitation. In such a context the use of interviews is common and seen as the major technique for obtaining the requirements from the actors in the organization. We have been working with the idea of a general interview assistant and our first results are promising. We elaborate on our original proposal in order to augment its assistant capability without losing its simplicity. We show how the use of viewpoint analysis improves the inference capability of our assistant.”

More details, see the paper: Requirements elicitation driven by interviews: the use of viewpoints

Sunday, April 19, 2009

Viewpoints Research Institute

Just found out that Alan Kay has named his research institute as the Viewpoints Research Institute.

Tuesday, April 14, 2009

Viewpoint Design in Information Systems

Just found "Consistency in multi-viewpoint design of enterprise information systems" by Remco M. Dijkman, Dick A.C. Quartel, and Marten J. van Sinderen. It was published on Information and Software Technology Volume 50, Issues 7-8, June 2008, Pages 737-752.

"Different stakeholders in the design of an enterprise information system have their own view on that design. To help produce a coherent design this paper presents a framework that aids in specifying relations and consistency rules between such views. The contribution of our framework is that it provides a collection of basic concepts. These basic concepts aid in relating viewpoints by providing: (i) a common
terminology that helps stakeholders to understand each others concepts; and (ii) re-usable consistency rules. We show that our framework can be applied, by performing a case study in which we specify the relations and consistency rules between three RMODP viewpoints"

Thursday, November 29, 2007

Viewpoint Effectiveness

In my thesis I have conducted different case studies to validate the use of the viewpoint analyzer, a tool based on a production system, to help the analysis of viewpoints. Using different descriptions written in VWPL the tool would identify "candidates" for wrong information, inconsistencies and missing information.

The case studies did also pointed out that by having an agenda for discussing discrepancies would increase the overall knowledge about the topic at hand.

The paper below provides a case study that sheds more light of the importance on this agenda for discussion in the process of having better conceptual models.

Proceedings of the 13th IEEE International Conference on
Requirements Engineering, 2005
Do viewpoints lead to better conceptual models? An exploratory case study, by
Easterbrook, S. Yu, E. Aranda, J. Yuntian Fan Horkoff, J. Leica, M. Qadir, R.A.

Viewpoints in Connection with Semiotics

Just found, using, Scholar a work published in Australia.

Australasian Journal of Information Systems, Vol 10, No 1 (2002)
The Viewpoint Paradigm: a semiotic based approach for the intelligibility of a cooperative designing process,
by Pierre-Jean Charrel

Friday, September 21, 2007

Viewpoints '96

In October of 1996, Anthony Finkelstein managed to unite more than 30 researchers to discuss the concept of viewpoint applied to Software Engineering. The International Workshop on Multiple Perspectives in Software Development proceedings has 32 short papers on the topic. It is the more diverse collection of viewpoints literature dealing with the concept of viewpoint in Requirements Engineering.

Below follows a list of all the 32 papers published in the Viewpoints 96 Workshop.

1) Relating viewpoints: a preface to Viewpoints 96
Anthony Finkelstein

2) Multiple view analysis of designs
Boumediene Belkhouche, Cuauhtémoc Lemus Olalde

3) Issues in multiparadigm viewpoint specification
Eerke Boiten, Howard Bowman, John Derrick, Maarten Steen

4) Modularized exception handling
Martin S. Feather

5) Managing interference
Anthony Finkelstein, George Spanoudakis, David Till

6) Multi viewpoint analysis in requirements process
Hisayuki Horai

7) Connecting viewpoints by shared phenomena
Michael Jackson

8) Towards a framework for managing inconsistency between multiple views
Bashar Nuseibeh

9) Solving conflicts produces new contexts
Laurent Perrussel

10) Consistency management for multiple perspective software development
Wai Leung Poon, Anthony Finkelstein

11) Automated assistance for conflict resolution in multiple perspective systems analysis and operation
William N. Robinson

12) Tool support for requirements formalisation
Jaelson F. B. Castro, Christian J. Gautreau, Marco A. Toranzo

13) An architecture for viewpoint environments based on OMG/CORBA
Wolfgang Emmerich

14) Support for constructing environments with multiple views
John C. Grundy, John G. Hosking, Warwick B. Mugridge, Robert W. Amor

15) Multiple view software process support using the MultiView architecture
David Jacobs, Chris Marlin

16) Multiple views based on unparsing canonical representations—the MultiView architecture
Chris Marlin

17) Tool support for multiple viewpoints
Geoff Mullery

18) Generating direct manipulation program editors within the MultiView programming environment
Michael Read, Chris Marlin

19) Supporting viewpoints in Metaview
Paul G. Sorenson, Piotr S. Findeisen, J. Paul Tremblay

20) An approach to conceptual feedback in multiple viewed software requirements modeling
Harry S. Delugach

21) A module concept for ViewPoints
Christian Piwetz, Michael Goedicke

22) Divergent views in goal-driven requirements engineering
Axel van Lamsweerde

23) A convergent systems viewpoint on viewpoints
Jack C. Wileden, Alan Kaplan

24) View-based mechanisms for structured and distributed enactment
Denis Avrilionis, Pierre-Yves Cunin

25) Viewpoints supporting the development of interactive software
T. C. Nicholas Graham

26) Business patterns and viewpoints
Haim Kilov, Ian Simmonds

27) Managing analytical complexity of safety critical systems using viewpoints
J. A. McDermid, A. J. Vickers, S. P. Wilson

28) Viewpoints-based software for management problem-solving interventions
Nikolay Mehandjiev

29) About views for modeling software processes in a role-specific manner
Martin Verlage

30) Viewpoints on viewpoints
Julio Cesar Sampaio do Prado Leite

31) Viewpoints in object database systems
Elisa Bertino, Giovanna Guerrini

32) Providing multiple views for objects by means of surrogates
Naftaly H. Minsky, Partha Pratim Pal