Goal-oriented specification of adaptation requirements engineering in adaptive systems

ABSTRACT

Adaptive software is being used increasingly frequently by various users, such as the medical community, software industry, and in response to terror attacks. Therefore, understanding the requirements of an adaptive system is crucial to developing them correctly. Developers need to be able to reason about the requirements of a system's adaptive behavior. Adaptation semantics are intended to describe how systems behave during adaptation. Previously, Zhang and Cheng formally specified three commonly occurring adaptation semantics in terms of Adapt operator-extended LTL (A-LTL). This paper presents goal-oriented specifications of these three adaptation semantics. These specifications, specified with the KAOS methodology, provide a graphical wrapper to the formal A-LTL specifications of the semantics. The combination of the goal-oriented, graphical KAOS specifications and A-LTL specifications provides the benefits of formal specifications as well as the benefits of an easier to understand, graphical, and more intuitive presentation of adaptive systems requirements. This work also provides a means to incorporate the adaptation semantics into the goal-oriented requirements specifications of an adaptive system.

References

1. K. S. Barber, M. T. MacMahon, and C. E. Martin. Distributed software decision support systems for heterogeneous coordination in chemical and biological response. In Proceedings from: Scientific Conference on Chemical and Biological Defense Research, 2001.
2. J. Castro, M. Kolp, and J. Mylopoulos. Towards requirements-driven information systems engineering: The tropos project, 2002.
3. Cediti. Objectiver, http://www.objectiver.com.
4. D. M. Chess, C. Palmer, and S. R. White. Security in an autonomic computing environment. IBM System Journal, 42(1):107--118, 2003.
5. D. Cohen, M. S. Feather, K. Narayanaswamy, and S. S. Fickas. Automatic monitoring of software requirements. In ICSE '97: Proceedings of the 19th international conference on Software engineering, pages 602--603, New York, NY, USA, 1997. ACM Press.
6. A. Dardenne, A. van Lamsweerde, and S. Fickas. Goal-directed requirements acquisition. Science of computer Programming, 20:3--50, 1993.
7. R. Darimont and A. van Lamsweerde. Formal refinement patterns for goal-driven requirements elaboration. In Foundations of Software Engineering, pages 179--190, 1996.
8. M. Feather, S. Fickas, A. van Lamsweerde, and C. Ponsard. Reconciling system requirements and runtime behavior. In IWSSD: Proceedings of the 9th international workshop on Software specification and design, page 50, 1998.
9. A. Fuxman, M. Pistore, J. Mylopoulos, and P. Traverso. Model checking early requirements specifications in tropos, 2001.
10. E. Letier. Reasoning about Agents in Goal-Oriented Requirements Engineering. PhD thesis, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium, 2001.
11. P. K. McKinley, S. M. Sadjadi, E. P. Kasten, and B. H. C. Cheng. Composing adaptive software. IEEE Computer, 37(7):56--64, 2004.
12. J. Mylopoulos and J. Castro. Tropos: A framework for requirements-driven software development, 2000.
13. A. Perini, P. Bresciani, F. Giunchiglia, P. Giorgini, and J. Mylopoulos. A knowledge level software engineering methodology for agent oriented programming, May 2001. Autonomous Agents, Montreal CA.
14. S. M. Sadjadi, P. K. McKinley, and E. P. Kasten. Architecture and operation of an adaptable communication substrate. In Proceedings of the Ninth IEEE International Workshop on Future Trends of Distributed Computing Systems (FTDCS'03), pages 46--55, San Juan, Puerto Rico, May 2003.
15. I. S.-M. Software. Towards preserving correctness.
16. A. Sutcliffe, S. Fickas, and M. M. Sohlberg. Personal and contextual requirements engineering. In Proceedings of the 13th IEEE International Conference on Requirements Engineering), pages 19--30, Washington D.C., USA, 2005. IEEE Computer Society.
17. A. van Lamsweerde, R. Darimont, and P. Massonet. Goal-directed elaboration of requirements for a meeting scheduler: Problems and lessons learnt. pages 194--203.
18. A. van Lamsweerde and E. Letier. Handling obstacles in goal-oriented requirements engineering. Software Engineering, 26(10):978--1005, 2000.
19. E. Yu. Modelling strategic relationships for process reengineering. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Toronto, Department of Computer Science, 1995.
20. Y. Yu, A. Lapouchnian, S. Liaskos, and J. Mylopoulos. Towards requirements-driven autonomic systems design. In ICSE: Proceedings of the 2005 Workshop on Design and evolution of autonomic application software, pages 1--7, 2005.
21. Y. Yu, J. Mylopoulos, A. Lapouchnian, S. Liaskos, and J. C. S. P. Leite. From stakeholder goals to high-variability software designs. Technical Report CSRG-509, University of Toronto, 2005.
22. Y. Yu, Y. Wang, S. Easterbrook, A. Lapouchnian, S. Liaskos, and J. Leite. Configuring common personal software: a requirements-driven approach, 2005. Technical Report CSRG-512, University of Toronto, 2005.
23. J. Zhang, B. Cheng, Z. Yang, and P. McKinley. Enabling safe dynamic component-based software adaptation. In Architecting Dependable Systems, Springer Lecture Notes for Computer Science. Springer-Verlag, 2005.
24. J. Zhang and B. H. C. Cheng. Using temporal logic to specify adaptive program semantics. Journal of Systems and Software Special Issue on Architecting Dependable Systems, 2006.

Index Terms

• Software and its engineering

  • Software creation and management

    • Designing software

      • Requirements analysis