The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Goal-directed requirements acquisition
Open accessAbstract
Requirements analysis includes a preliminary acquisition step where a global model for the specification of the system and its environment is elaborated. This model, called requirements model, involves concepts that are currently not supported by existing formal specification languages, such as goals to be achieved, agents to be assigned, alternatives to be negotiated, etc. The paper presents an approach to requirements acquisition which is driven by such higher-level concepts. Requirements models are acquired as instances of a conceptual meta-model. The latter can be represented as a graph where each node captures an abstraction such as, e.g., goal, action, agent, entity, or event, and where the edges capture semantic links between such abstractions. Well-formedness properties on nodes and links constrain their instances-that is, elements of requirements models. Requirements acquisition processes then correspond to particular ways of traversing the meta-model graph to acquire appropriate instances of the various nodes and links according to such constraints. Acquisition processes are governed by strategies telling which way to follow systematically in that graph; at each node specific tactics can be used to acquire the corresponding instances. The paper describes a significant portion of the meta-model related to system goals, and one particular acquisition strategy where the meta-model is traversed backwards from such goals. The meta-model and the strategy are illustrated by excerpts of a university library system.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The entity-relationship model—toward a unified view of data
Chen, P. P.-S. (1976) · ACM Transactions on Database Systems · doi:10.1145/320434.320440 · Cited by 4,708
Cited by
Tropos: An Agent-Oriented Software Development Methodology
Bresciani, P., Perini, A., Giorgini, P., Giunchiglia, F., & Mylopoulos, J. (2004) · Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems · doi:10.1023/b:agnt.0000018806.20944.ef · Cited by 1,747
Four dark corners of requirements engineering
Zave, P., & Jackson, M. (1997) · ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology · doi:10.1145/237432.237434 · Cited by 734
Handling obstacles in goal-oriented requirements engineering
van Lamsweerde, A., & Letier, E. (2000) · IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering · doi:10.1109/32.879820 · Cited by 648
Self-citationA survey on engineering approaches for self-adaptive systems
Krupitzer, C., Roth, F. M., VanSyckel, S., Schiele, G., & Becker, C. (2015) · Pervasive and Mobile Computing · doi:10.1016/j.pmcj.2014.09.009 · Cited by 443
Supporting scenario-based requirements engineering
Sutcliffe, A. G., Maiden, N. A. M., Minocha, S., & Manuel, D. (1998) · IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering · doi:10.1109/32.738340 · Cited by 337
Metadata
- Authors
- Dardenne, A., van Lamsweerde, A., & Fickas, S.
- Venue
- Science of Computer Programming
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 1993-04
- Volume
- 20
- Issue
- 1-2
- Pages
- 3-50
- ISSN
- 0167-6423 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2017739343
- Cited by
- 1,976
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 20.74
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Goal-directed requirements acquisition. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/0167-6423(93)90021-g
- The paper
- Dardenne, A., van Lamsweerde, A., & Fickas, S. (1993). Goal-directed requirements acquisition. Science of Computer Programming. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-6423(93)90021-g
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.