ArticlePDF Available

Non-Functional Requirements Research: Survey

  • Agbe Technolgies

Abstract and Figures

NFRs are important since the system architecture greatly depends on the NFRs [20]. Mostly NFR Literature has considered only for key challenges and issues related to NFR. In context of such a need a roadmap for important issues is required. In this paper survey has been presented on interesting ongoing work in the field of non functional requirements and tried to figure out the approaches and methods that are suggested in literature to deal with these issues.
Content may be subject to copyright.
International Journal of Science and Engineering Applications
Volume 3 Issue 6, 2014, ISSN-2319-7560 (Online) 172
Non-Functional Requirements Research: Survey
Harsimran Kaur,
ASU, Gurgaon
Dr. Ashish Sharma
GLA University, Mathura
Abstract NFRs are important since the system architecture greatly depends on the NFRs [20]. Mostly NFR Literature has considered only
for key challenges and issues related to NFR. In context of such a need a roadmap for important issues is required. In this paper survey has been
presented on interesting ongoing work in the field of non functional requirements and tried to figure out the approaches and methods that are
suggested in literature to deal with these issues.
Index Terms Non Functional Requirements, Modeling, Identification, Formalization, Quantification, Automation
    ent (NFR) in
software system engineering, a software requirement that
describes not what the software will do, but how the software
will do it, for example, software performance requirements,
software external interface requirements, design constraints,
and software quality attributes. Nonfunctional requirements
are difficult to test; therefore, they are usually evaluated
 ]. In the past relatively little attention has
and developers have relied mostly on their own intuitions, in
an ad hoc way. In the years, the topic has attracted increasing
interest from researchers, as testified by the many specialized
events and workshops, as well as by the growing percentage
of NFR papers in software engineering conferences.
There has been a considerable increase in the quantity of NFR
research over the past few years (see Figure 1(b)). Despite the
excellent work in the surveys listed earlier, there remains, to
date, no comprehensive survey of the whole field of study
concerning trends in research. This paper provides a range of
options (Road map) for future research in area of non
functional requirements.
The paper is organized as follows: Section 2 describes the
result summary of the literature survey. Section 3 discusses
the eight categories of research, and reviews the contributions
from various research groups and the growing trend. Section 4
presents the conclusion and Future Work.
The goal of our paper is to categorize the issues of NFR. We
used the five digital libraries to search: ACM Digital Library,
SpringerLink, ScienceDirect, Google Scholar, IEEE Xplore,
ACM Digital Library, We classify these papers into eight
1. Identification and Specification: Studies on notion(facet),
classification and types of NFR.
2. Elicitation: Studies on requirements elicitation methods to
empower requirement centered on NFRs.
3. Modeling (Informal): Studies on an approach to record
and model non-functional requirements using UML and
Relational Diagrams.
4. Modeling (formal): Studies on semantic concepts for the
specification of non functional properties.
Fig 1(a) Paper in each category
Fig 1(b) NFR Publication growth overtime
Quantification: Studies which explore number of avenues
related to specification, design which deals and effect
quantification of NFR.
5. Testing: Studies on issues, challenges while consider
NFR, resulting from quality concern of stakeholders.
International Journal of Science and Engineering Applications
Volume 3 Issue 6, 2014, ISSN-2319-7560 (Online) 173
6. Automation: Studies on tools that assist the requirement
Analyst while dealing with NFRs.
7. Evaluation: Studies on the degree to which NFR
contributes to the improvement of software quality.
Assignment of category to each paper has been based on the
main objective of the paper. Thus, in our classification some
papers may be into another category by other researchers. For
example many of the papers related to elicitation are presented
by using any modeling language so we put them in the
category of Modelling. Similarly identification and elicitation
can be done by a single approach but we put them in different
categories on the basis of focused concept used in the paper
are Figure 1(a) shows the proportion of papers that fall into
each of the different NFR area subject categories while Figure
1(b) shows the histogram charting NFR publication growth
over time,
A. Identification and Specification
We surveyed different definitions and classification schemes
proposed by different researchers. Critical Evaluation has been
done as shown in Table 1. No Formal definition for NFR is
found in literature except this: f: I O 
int) which is defined by Chung etal [23]. NFR Framework is
one of the prominent works that has been done in this field.
For the specification of NFR there are three categories of
approaches available in literature as shown in table 2. NFR
Framework is the one of the important work which later on
extended by number of researchers in order to solve the
problem in their application domain [70]. Beside NFR
Framework KAOS [103] and work with the help of UML has
been found in literature which we are going to discussed in
modelling. Formal language for NFR becomes a necessity but
a familiar problem with formal methods in specifying such
requirements is the high cost and difficulty of using them.
Some of the work on formalization is shown in Table 2. There
are few papers on the formal specification languages. Methods
of supervised learning have been proposed in the literature to
address the problem of identification and classification of
NFR. Within the ECSS, ISO, and IEEE standards, a number of
views and concepts are provided to describe various types of
candidate portability requirements at the system, software, and
hardware level [2].
B. Elicitation
There are only very few approaches and tools to elicit NFR.
Many of the techniques and tools available are for functional
requirements. Classification for the approaches used in
elicitation of NFR as shown in Table 3 is based on different
categories of approaches [108][116]. Ullah etal. has identified
several key issues like conflicts of requirements, integration of
NFR with FR and ambiguous specification of system features.
They have found some of the solutions of these stated
problems based on the available literature.
C. Modelling (informal)
A survey of the different works shows that most of them
use UML with some extensions to add NFRs with the
functional requirements models as shown in Table 4. UML
proven to be successful modelling language to bring the
revolution in NFR specification and modelling. Number of
tools like Rational Rose, Smart Draw and Enterprise architect
are available for UML.There are other approaches like
Relational Model, Petrinets, Multimodel, NFR Framework,
NFR Framework + that can be used to specify NFRs as
mentioned in Table 4.
D. Formal Modelling
Formal methods offer a mathematical way to specify and
analyze the behavior of NFR in a system together with a
related tool support. Some relevant work done in this field by
different researchers is discussed below. UML-B has been
used for a real-time control system security concerns using an
action systems approach [98]. There is requirement of tool
support for UML-B. RoZ tool is used for modelling the airport
security. It uses Z notation [63]. Another approach called
KAMI is implemented as a distributed framework with a
plugin architecture, which allows new tools to be incorporated
to support other modeling notations and analysis procedures
[34]. The approach is based on formal (probabilistic) models
that are used at design time to reason about dependability of
the application in quantitative terms. Another approach based
on semantic concepts which form the basis of a semantic
framework for the specification non-functional properties of
component-based software [126][127]. Probabilistic way of
characterizing the implementation of software non-functional
requirements is proposed in [114]. SysML has been adopted as
the modeling language by [107], since it enables requirement
definition and can be formally extended. [90] has presented a
semiformal approach for reasoning and refining functional
requirements. Non Functional properties has expressed as NF-
actions, NF-statements and NF-attribute. An another approach
[83] aimed at lessen the risk of such misuses of quality
models. It is centered on the definition of a language called
NoFun which is to be used as a formal language for the
exhaustive description of software quality. Borges and Mota
[16] integrate UML class diagrams and OhCircus by written
UML elements in terms of OhCircus constructs. OhCircus is a
formal specification language which uses Z, CSP, calculus of
Morgan and object-oriented theories. Casamayor [19, 20]
propose a semi-supervised text categorization approach for the
automatic identification and classification of non-functional
requirements. Detection and classification of NFRs is
performed using semi-supervised learning techniques. One
more interesting work is shown in [26] which discuss an
algebraic formalization of model based on graph theory which
they use to prove safe termination in systems compliant with
Ravenscar Computation Model ( RCM), and show how to use
the MAST+ static analyzer to verify the timing aspects. But
till lot of work need to be done in this direction as mentioned
in [19][21][23].
International Journal of Science and Engineering Applications
Volume 3 Issue 6, 2014, ISSN-2319-7560 (Online)
Table 1. Different Classification Schemes Proposed in Literature
Research proposal
Critical Evaluation
Paper provides for the first time a clear, well-defined
framework for assessing the often slippery issues
associated with software quality, via the consistent and
mutually supportive sets of definitions, distinctions and
guidelines [14].
No emphasis has been found
attributes of those NFRs.
A Software Quality Measurement Manual was
produced which contained procedures and guidelines
for assisting software system developers in setting
quality goals, applying metrics and making quality
It was assumed to be efficient
model. Later it modified in 2000
where requirements are classified on
the basis of product revision and
Roman IEEE
Computer (1985)
It classifies requirements into interface, performance,
operating, lifecycle, economic and political
It is complex classification.
(1992) [100]
It considers organization, product and external aspects
of requirement.
This model is accepted by many
organizations but it could not sort
the Non Functional Requirement
specification issues.
FURPS and FURPS+ is an acronym that represents the
model. It introduces dimensions of quality.
Architectural integrity is not covered
in the model
ISO/IEC 9126
(2001) [52]
Distinguishes four types of quality levels
Quality in use, external quality, internal quality and
process quality which helps to provide process oriented
It sets standard for software
practitioner to make the meaning of
NFR and important NFR like
performance clear to developers and
users. But it is only limited to few
Martin Glinz
(2005) [39]
Presents New Classification of Requirements
Provides new notion to the NFRs but
classification has no practical
usefulness in daily life. It can be
simplified further.
Jureta etal.(2006)
This classification provides four categories: functional
hardgoal, non functional hardgoal, functional softgoal
and nonfunctional softgoal.
It is driven by nonfunctional
Martin Glinz
(2007) [40]
Proposed New Definition to requirements and Specify
classification rules based on Aspect-Oriented
Definition and Classification is less
ambiguous than traditional
definitions. Its Practical aspect needs
to be find out.
Dewi Mairiza
etal.(2010) [70]
It offers a novel classification of NFRs types based on
types of systems and application domains.
It presents comprehensive lists of
NFR types which helps developer to
identify NFR for their particular
system. But the Terminology present
does not improve the notion of
Chi-Lun Liu
(2010) [66]
Proposes top level NFR ontology helpful in conflict
detection between NFRs which is extended from
Nothing has been done for
improving NFR facet in it.
Table 2: Categorization of Approaches used in Identification
Informal Approach(I)
Semi-Formal Approach(S)
Formal Approach(F)
International Journal of Science and Engineering Applications
Volume 3 Issue 6, 2014, ISSN-2319-7560 (Online) 175
Table 3: Classification of approaches used in elicitation of NFRs
Process-oriented and qualitative method for
handling NFRs
NFR method consists of quality attributes,
based on quality model
i* framework and meta-model are presented in
these approach.
Approaches set the and focused on gathering
only the minimum set of information on quality
Table 4: Informal Modelling of NFR
Use Case and Goal Driven
Integrates FR with NFR at design level by using use case elements.
Extended Use Case (2006)[11]
To separate(cross-cut) the concerns at the requirements level(on tha basis of
application domain) that can be achieved by checking concerns that produce
spread and tangled representation that are difficult to understand and maintain.
Extended elements helps to express and integrate NFR and challenges to
requirement analyst with the FR.
OONFR(2001) [26][27]
UML Class Diagram is proposed which use LEL of UofD as input and class
diagram has signals of what elements (classes, attributes, operations and
relationship) are responsible for NFR.
Extended UML(2007)[123]
Dependency notation is introduced in UML to model design decisions.
Extending UML with NFR
Meta-Model to represent concepts in NFR Framework and made extension in
UML and NFR Framework to integrate the notations of two modeling languages.
Novel Framework with
UML design is integrated to NFRs for the purpose of reengineering process of
legacy systems.
Layered Model(Conceptual
Additional layer is added to traditional architectural model for satisfying NFR
UMLsec (2002) [53]
UML extension mechanism based on formal semantics to evaluate security
aspects of system design
SecureUML (2002) [68]
UMl extension mechanism to specify information for access control in the design
of application.
Abuse Case Model(2002)[68]
Extended Use Case Model to capture and analyze security requirements by
specifying check on interaction between system and actors.
Architectural pattern(2005) [61]
Improving system dependability and trustworthiness by improving the modeling
of NFR(operationalizable NFRs, and checkable NFRs)
NFR Framework with Role
Activity Model (2007)[3]
Remodelling business process to better representation and realization of NFR
aspects of processes by linking RAD with NFR graphic facility.
Use Case extended to Control
Focus is made on operating conditions by adding control cases to 4+2 view of
architecture(UML Process view)
DERAF(2007) [69]
Combines the use of aspects with RT-UML, aiming to separate the handling of
non-functional from functional requirements in the Model Driven Design of
Integrated Model(2007) [113]
Approach is based on building a base quality model that relies on an explicit
meta-model. Purpose models are also needed to support the planning and
realization of quality assurance are derived from the base model by quantifying
the relations modeled in the base model.
XML-NFR(2007) [117]
It is also step to integrate with functional requirements design model based on
International Journal of Science and Engineering Applications
Volume 3 Issue 6, 2014, ISSN-2319-7560 (Online) 176
simple language XML but not solved many issues of NFR.
Pluggable Framework (Wireless
Sensor networks)(2008) [15]
It allows WSN applications in TinyDDS(Data Distributed Services) to have fine-
grained control over non-functional properties and specialize in their own
RASF(2008) [45]
A Multi-Agent Systems (MAS) approach in Reactive Autonomic Systems (RAS)
whose specifications are mentioned in single formal framework.
XML with Petri-Nets(2008)[31]
The intermediate model is based on XML and indicates the relationship between
the entities of design models and analysis models by minimizing the gaps
Extended PLUS (UML Based
Model) (2009) [79]
It provide a unified and systematic framework for analysis modeling of NFRs in
Software Product Lines by integrating it with Lines PLUS.
It represents NFR as how non-functional requirements are related between them
and to system components forming the overall system architecture.
KAMI(2009) [38][103]
Approach relies on run-time monitoring and uses the data collected by the
probes to detect if the behavior of the open environment in which the application
is situated can lead to a failure of the application
NFR with AORE(2010)[114]
It map non-functional requirements into function and architectures through non-
functional scenario template which improves traceability from requirement
analysis level to implement level.
Configuration Models(2012)
Mapping nonfunctional aspects to given commercial-off-the-shelf modules
which makes possible the integration of commercial software modules into
Relational Model (2011) [59]
It introduce change management mechanism that trace the the impact of NFRs
on the other constructs in the ontology such as FR or NFR operationalization and
vice versa.
Multimodel Approach(2012)
Besides the refinement of NFR it allows the validation of its fulfillment through
the application of metrics that are associated to each NFR.
Design Patterns
Approach(2001) [44]
It provides guidance and reasoning support when applying patterns
during the design of a software system.
UML with OCL [83]
Non functionality is described by means of a notation called NoFun, which
allows us to introduce non-functional attributes of software
(2011) [91]
Provides solution for telecommunication systems for modeling product families,
targeting cost sensitivity non-functional requirements and performing cost
Domain Specific Modelling
Approach(NFR+ Framework)
The solution enables a full bi-directional traceability from the requirements to
models to the implementation.
UML for intrusion
specification(2006) [49]
UML notations extended to suit the context of intrusion scenarios that allows
developers to specify intrusions
E. Quanitification
There are very few languages to state non-functionality in
form so that it can be quantified. One of the language [35][83]
is NoFun which provides a common framework in which
people can formulate, analyse and compare their proposals
about non-functionality. A measure for reusability is refined
by this language.The combination of both NoFun and the
implementation selection algorithm can be an aid to software
specification, design, reusability and maintenance. Stephan
Jacobs [54] of Ericsson presented a case study on improving
requirement engineering. From the concepts offered in
Planguage Jacobs proposed that Gist, Scale, Meter, Past,
Record, Must, Plan and Wish should be made visible in our
requirements specifications by using keywords in bold letters.
GIST is a rough summary of the requirement. According to
Jacobs SCALE defines the unit in which the requirements has
to be measured. METER defines the way how the
measurement will be performed. PAST and RECORD are
benchmarks. Past is a value which is typical for (own)
products developed in the past. MUST, PLAN and WISH
envisage the future. Must, Plan and Wish characterize the
system that is to be built. Affleck [5] extends the previous
quantitative reasoning extension into a single objective
optimization model that aims to selectively choose
operationalizations in order to increase the overall satisfaction
of non-functional requirements. One metric is proposed in [1]
International Journal of Science and Engineering Applications
Volume 3 Issue 6, 2014, ISSN-2319-7560 (Online) 177
that can be used in the early stages of software development
projects to estimate effort of new projects. Affleck [4] presents
a process-orientated, lightweight, quantitative extension to the
NFR Framework; focusing on providing quantitative support
to the decision process and how decisions affect the system.
Some key issues related to NFR quantification are discussed
in [85][90].They discussed issues related to sharing of
information between customer and supplier as it is must for
optimal quantification. Requirements Convergence Plan can
be used to create better NFR quantification circumstances for
customers and suppliers. Another evaluation model of NFR is
proposed in [94] which mainly focusing on the user
maintenance and operation issues. This model consists of NFR
categories, NFR metrics, description level grading and weight
to each NFR. Another contribution to quantification of NFR is
made by Bin [119] by proposing three methods for calculating
non-functional properties. The cumulative method is applied
to calculation of energy cost, memory cost, and number of
defects and so on. The multiplicative method is applied to
calculation of non-functional properties which can be
described by probability, such as reliability, confidentiality.
The graphic method is applied to calculation of consumed
time. Paper also proposes a 0-1 programming method for
selecting the best non-functional requirement implementation
strategies. Bhatti etal.[13] tries to quality metrics on the basis
of UML diagrams.
F. Testing
[97] has mentioned prevalent testing issues in the light of
NFR. There is a great need to work on specification for
testability, design for testability and code for testability as
mentioned in previous sections of paper. They also mention
certain research direction for future exploration in their paper.
One of the solutions is to have aspect-oriented techniques. It
offers a promising approach for capturing such issues under
verification. In the Literature we found very few testing
techniques (NFR) proposed that too are application based as
mentioned in Table [5].
G. Automation
Automation of process is necessary for speed up the
development process. Not only requirements have to be
carefully considered but they also have to be implemented.
But there need to validate the implementation which can be
easily done with the help of tool. Tool can potentially help
agile software development teams in reasoning about and
visually modeling NFRs as first-class artifacts early on during
requirements gathering and analysis phases. It is better to
create a simple and open toolkit that in turn can be adapted to
a variety of projects and architectures [30]. Since there is need
to handle NFRs automatically various tools have been
proposed by researchers as enlisted in Table 6.
H. Evaluation
Evaluation means NFR importance degree assessment given
         . Some
important evaluation has been done in [12][81][105] [123]
NFR needs to look after starting from the early stages of
software development. There is a need to chance the facet of
NFRs while specifying it in SRS. Most of the literature is
based on NFR elicitation and NFR Framework (informal
approach). Some formal approach needs to be work out.
According to Singh et al. number of models are available for
Functional Requirements like Four Variable Model,
COCOMO. Model and Reference Model etc. but no
standardized model has been found opted for NFR [21][97]. It
is due to informal presentation, NFR still a challenge in the
field of requirement engineering.
To complete the specification for NFRs besides the four
variables (NAT, REQ, IN, OUT) of four variable model new
variable can be introduced or new model can be introduced
from scratch for dealing with NFRs. Extensions to this model
is also suggested in [77]. Similarly Reference Model can be
extended for NFR as mentioned by Chung.[21].
As proposed in [97] NFR can be handled more concretely by
MBT, some approach needs to be work out for handling real
life situations.
Aspects help to achieve modularity in software development
process. The use of AO to deal with NFR has already been
proposed in [69].
In this paper we surveyed different aspects of NFR. We are
likely to focus on formal modeling of NFR in future work. As
it is the foremost challenge that need to be overcome if we
want NFR to be quantified. Some of the issues related to NFR
are mentioned in Table 7 found from the literature survey.
Table 5. Testing issues based on application
Solution Proposed
Web Based application[89]
Verification during testing
Metrics for the navigability
Load and Performance Testing
Quality verification of mobile phones
Lack of Tool Support
Classify types of NFR
Aspect-oriented techniques
International Journal of Science and Engineering Applications
Volume 3 Issue 6, 2014, ISSN-2319-7560 (Online) 178
Tool or Approach Name
Jan Ladiges etal.(2013) [62]
Presented a set of non-functional
requirements on automated
production facilities.
Approach used detects unintentional changes
in its behavior after performing modifications.
Farid and
Modeling for Agile Processes (NORMAP)
Cesare etal.(2012) [84]
Non-Functional requirements can be directly
expressed within the BPMN model.
Janne Merilinna etal.(2012)[75]
Supported by a tool enables to
do that in the context of
Domain-Specific Modeling
Bi-directional traceability link between
requirements and implementation is
maintained by NFR+ Framework.
Kristoffer Dyrkorn(2008)[30]
Present an open-source toolkit
that enables automated
testing of non-functional
Provides developers and project managers
with reports about the system under
Jane Cleland etal.(2007)[24]
Technique for automating the
detection and classification of
non-functional Requirements.
Approach is used to detect and classify
requirements specifications containing
scattered and non-categorized
Lawrence Chung etal.(1996)
Address tool support for the
change process
Approach is based on existing NFR
Al Balushi etal.(2007)[6]
Quality ontology-guided NFR elicitation tool
Identification and Specification
Need to change the notion while specifying
NFR in RFP [39][40]
Formal Techniques [20][21]
Aspect oriented documentation of attributes
and constraints [69][108]
Formal Modeling
Need to develop formal models like
Four Variable Model[21][77]
Reference model[21]
Formal models helps in quantification of
NFR [77][81][93]
Clear Identification and
Specification(Formal techniques)
Automated Tool
Tool for empowering analyst by providing
knowledge repository, detecting NFR
conflict and to assess impact of NFRs in
early stages [5][30].
International Journal of Science and Engineering Applications
Volume 3 Issue 6, 2014, ISSN-2319-7560 (Online) 179
[1] Abdukalykov, R.; Hussain, I.; Kassab, M.; Ormandjieva, O.,
"Quantifying the Impact of Different Non-functional
Requirements and Problem Domains on Software Effort
Estimation," Software Engineering Research, Management and
Applications (SERA), 2011 9th International Conference on ,
vol., no., pp.158,165, 10-12 Aug. 2011
[2] Abran A. , k. T. Al-Sarayreh, and J. J. Cuadrado-Gallego, 'A
Standards-based Reference Framework for System Portability
Requirements', Computer Standards and Interfaces Journal,
Elsevier, Vol 35, 2013, pp. 380-395.
[3] Aburub, F., Odeh, M., Beeson, I.: Modelling non-functional
requirements of business processes. Information and Software
Technology 49, 11621171 (2007)
[4] Affleck A., Krishna, A. and Achuthan, N.R. (2013). Optimal
Selection of Operationalizations for Non-Functional
Requirements. In Proc. Conceptual Modelling 2013 (APCCM
2013) Adelaide, Australia. CRPIT, 143. Ferrarotti, F. and
Grossmann, G. Eds., ACS. 69-78
[5] Affleck, A.; Krishna, A., "Supporting quantitative reasoning of
non-functional requirements: A process-oriented
approach," Software and System Process (ICSSP), 2012
International Conference on , vol., no., pp.88,92, 2-3 June 2012.
[6] Al Balushi T. H., P. R. F. Sampaio, D. Dabhi, and P.
Loucopoulos, "ElicitO: a quality ontology-guided NFR
elicitation tool," in Proceedings of the 13th international
working conference on Requirements engineering:
foundation for software quality (REFSQ'07), Springer-Verlag,
Berlin, Heidelberg, pp. 306-319, 2007.
[7] Allen H. Dutoita and Barbara Paechb Rationale-Based Use Case
Specification Requirements Eng (2002) 7:319 2002 Springer-
Verlag London Limited
[8] Ameller, D.; Ayala, C.; Cabot, J.; Franch, X., "How do software
architects consider non-functional requirements: An exploratory
study," Requirements Engineering Conference (RE), 2012 20th
IEEE International , vol., no., pp.41,50, 24-28 Sept. 2012
[9] Anandha G.S. Mala and G.V. Uma, "Elicitation of non
functional requirement preference for actors of Usecase from
domain model," PKAW 2006, LNAI 4303, Springer-Verlag
Berlin Heidelberg, pp. 238-243, 2006.
[10]           
Lago, and J. Lesbegueries, "Monitoring service choreographies
from multiple sources, " in Proc. of 4th International Workshop
on Software Engineering for Resilient Systems (SERENE
2012), ser. LNCS, vol. 7527. Springer, Sept. 2012, pp. 134-149.
[11] Berenbach Brian and Mark Gall.(2006) Toward a Unified Model
for Requirements Engineering. ICGSE, 0:237238.
[12] Berntsson Svensson, R., Gorschek, T., Regnell, B., Torkar, R.,
Shahrokni, A., Feldt, R., Aurum, A.: Prioritization of quality
requirements state of practice in eleven companies. In: RE 2011,
pp. 6978. IEEE (2011)
[13] Bhatti Shahid Nazir, ACM (Software Engineering Notes)
Deducing the complexity to quality of a system using
UML ISSN: 0163-5948, Volume 34, Pages 1-7, USA.
[14] Boehm B. et al. (1976). Quantitative Evaluation of Software
Quality. Proceedings of the 2nd IEEE International Conference
on Software Engineering. 592-605.
[15] Boonma, P.; Suzuki, J., "Middleware Support for Pluggable
Non-Functional Properties in Wireless Sensor
Networks," Services - Part I, 2008. IEEE Congress on , vol., no.,
pp.360,367, 6-11 July 2008
[16] Borges R. and A. Mota, Integrating UML and Formal Methods,
Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science, 184, pp. 97-
112, 2003
[17] Bret Pettichord. (October 2002), Design for Testability ,Pacific
Northwest Software Quality Conference, Portland, Oregon.
[18] Cancila D. , R. Passerone , T. Vardanega and M. Panunzio
"Toward correctness in the specification and handling of non-
functional attributes of high-integrity real-time embedded
systems", IEEE Trans. Ind. Informat., vol. 6, no. 2, pp.181 -
194 2010
[19] Casamayor A, Godoy D, Campo M (2009) Semi-supervised
classification of non-functional requirements: an empirical
analysis. Rev Iberoam Intel Artif 13(44): 3545.
[20] Casamayor A, Godoy D, Campo M (2010) Identification of non-
functional requirements in textual specifications: a semi-
supervised learning approach. Inform Softw Technol 52(4):
436445. doi:10.1016/j.infsof.2009.10.010
[21] Chung L. , Kendra Cooper , Anna Yi, Developing adaptable
software architectures using design patterns: an NFR approach,
Computer Standards & Interfaces, v.25 n.3, p.253-260, June
[22] Chung L. a, Brian A. Nixon b and Eric Yu c Dealing with
Change: An Approach Using Non-functional Requirements 1
Requirements Eng (1996) 1:238-260-9 1996 Springer-Verlag
London Limited
[23]        -
     
Kluwer Academic Publishers.
[24] Cleland-Huang Jane, Raffaella Settimi, Xuchang Zou , Peter
Solc Automated classification of non-functional requirements
Requirements Eng (2007) 12:103120 Springer-Verlag London
Limited 2007
[25] Curtis B. in blog for Consortium for IT Software Quality
[26] Cysneiros Luiz Marcio and Julio Cesar Sampaio Leite (2001).
Using UML to reflect Non-functional Requirements. In
CASCON, page 2.
[27] Cysneiros Luiz Marcio, Member,Julio Cesar Sampaio do Prado
Leite, Member,(MAY 2004) Nonfunctional Requirements:From
Elicitation to Conceptual Models, IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON
[28] do Prado Sampaio.T. Borgida et al. (2009). On Non-Functional
Requirements in Software Engineering (Eds.): Mylopoulos
Festschrift, LNCS 5600, pp. 363379, 2009.© Springer-Verlag
Berlin Heidelberg.
[29] Dobson G., S. Hall, and G. Kotonya. A domain-independent
ontology for non-functional requirements. In ICEBE '07:
Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on e-Business
Engineering, pages 563-566, Washington, DC, USA, 2007.
IEEE Computer Society.
[30]         -
        
SIGPLAN conference on Object-oriented programming systems
languages and applications, New York, NY, USA, 2008.
[31] Emadi, S.; Shams, F., "An approach to non-functional
requirements analysis at software architecture level," Computer
and Information Technology, 2008. CIT 2008. 8th IEEE
International Conference on , vol., no., pp.736,741, 8-11 July
[32]   
      
Internet Quality Week 2000 Conference., San Francisco, CA
May 31-June 2 2000, Session 8A2.
International Journal of Science and Engineering Applications
Volume 3 Issue 6, 2014, ISSN-2319-7560 (Online) 180
[33] Farid W.M. and F. J. Mitropoulos, "Novel lightweight
engineering artifacts for modeling non-functional requirements
in agile processes", Proc. IEEE SoutheastCon 2012
(SoutheastCon 2012), Mar. 2012.
[34] Filieri A., C. Ghezzi, and G. Tamburrelli, "A formal approach
to adaptive software: continuous assurance of non-functional
requirements," Formal Aspects of Computing, vol. 24, no. 2, pp.
163-186, 2012.
[35] Franch X. "Systematic Formulation of Non-functional
Characteristics of Software," Proc. 3rd IEEE Int',l Conf.
Requirements Eng. (ICRE), IEEE CS Press, Los Alamitos,
Calif., 1998, pp. 174-181.
[36] Friess, Wolfgang; Kubica, Stefan, "Implementing Non-
Functional Requirements (29 March 2006) ¿ A Layered
Modeling Approach," Model-Based Testing, ITGA FA 6.2
Workshop on and GI/ITG Workshop on Non-Functional
Properties of Embedded Systems, 2006 13th GI/ITG Conference
-Measuring, Modelling and Evaluation of Computer and
Communication (MMB Workshop) , vol., no., pp.1,7, 27-
[37] Galster M. and E. Bucherer, "A Taxonomy for Identifying and
Specifying Non-Functional Requirements in Service-Oriented
Development," IEEE Congress on Services, IEEE Press, 2008,
pp. 345-352.
[38] Ghezzi C.and G. Tamburrelli. Reasoning on non-functional
requirements for integrated services. In RE'09, Atlanta, USA,
[39] Glinz M., "Rethinking the notion of non-functional
requirements," in Third World Congress for Software Quality,
Munich, Germany, 2005, pp. 55-64.
[40] Glinz, M. "On non-functional requirements," in 15th IEEE
International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE '07),
2007, pp. 21-26.
[41] Gonzalez-Huerta, J., Insfran, E., Abrahao, S., McGregor, J.D.:
Non-functional Requirements in Model-Driven Software
Product Line Engineering. In: 4th Int. Workshop on Non-
functional System Properties in Domain Specific Modeling
Languages, Insbruck, Austria (2012)
[42] Grady R and Caswell D, Software Metrics: Establishing a
Company-wide Program, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New
Jersey, 1987
[43] Grimshaw D.J., W. Godfrey and G.W. Draper, "Non-Functional
Requirements Analysis: Deficiencies in Structured
Methods," Information &, Software Technology, vol. 43, no. 11,
pp. 629-635, 2001.
[44] Gross Daniel and Eric Yu From Non-Functional Requirements
to Design through Patterns Requirements Eng (2001) 6:1836
Springer-Verlag London Limited
[45] Heng Kuang; Ormandjieva, O., "Self-Monitoring of Non-
functional Requirements in Reactive Autonomic Systems
Framework: A Multi-agent Systems Approach," Computing in
the Global Information Technology, 2008. ICCGI '08. The Third
International Multi-Conference on , vol., no., pp.186,192, July
27 2008-Aug. 1 2008
[46] Hosono S., T. Hara, Y. Shimomura and T. Arai, Prioritizing
Service Functions with Non-Functional Requirements, CIRP
Industrial Product-Service Systems Conf., 2010, pp.133-140.
[48] Huang J.C., R. Settimi, X. Zou, and P. Solc, "The detection and
classification of non-functional requirements with application to
early aspects," Center for Requirements Engineering, School of
Computer Science, Telecommunications and Information
Systems, DePaul Üniversity, In 14th IEEE International
Requirements Engineering Conference (RE´06), 2006.
[49] Hussein, M.; Zulkernine, M., "UMLintr: a UML profile for
specifying intrusions," Engineering of Computer Based
Systems, 2006. ECBS 2006. 13th Annual IEEE International
Symposium and Workshop on , vol., no., pp.8 pp.,288, 27-30
March 2006
[50] IEEE (1993). IEEE Recommended Practice for Software
Requirements Specifications.IEEE Standard 830-1993.
[51]   -win quality requirements
management  Software Eng. 11(1):
pp. 141-174, 2001.
[52] ISO/IEC 9126-1:2001(E): Software Engineering - Product
Quality - Part 1: Quality Model(2001)
[53] J¨urjens Jan.(2002) UMLsec: Extending UML for Secure
     ings of the 5th
International Conference on The Unified Modeling Language,
pages 412425, London, UK, Springer-Verlag.
[54] Jacobs S., "Introducing Measurable Quality Requirements: A
Case Study," Proc. Fourth Int',l Symp. Requirements Eng., pp.
172-179, 1999.
[55] Jane Cleland-Huang, Toward improved traceability of non-
functional requirements, Proceedings of the 3rd international
workshop on Traceability in emerging forms of software
engineering, November 08-08, 2005, Long Beach, California
[56] Jaramillo A.F., "Non-functional requirements elicitation from
business process models", IEEE Doctoral Paper 2011.
[57] Jureta, I.J., Faulkner, S., Schobbens, P.-Y.: A more expressive
softgoal conceptualization for quality requirements analysis. In:
Embley, D.W., Olivé, A., Ram, S. (eds.) ER 2006. LNCS, vol.
4215, pp. 281295. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)
[58] Kaiya H., A. Osada, and K. Kaijiri, "Identifying stakeholders
and their preferences about NFR by comparing use case
diagrams of several existing systems," IEICE - Trans. Inf. Syst.
E91-D, pp. 897-906, April 2008.
[59] Kassab, M.; Ormandjieva, O.; Daneva, M., "Relational-model
based change management for non-functional requirements:
Approach and experiment," Research Challenges in Information
Science (RCIS), 2011 Fifth International Conference on , vol.,
no., pp.1,9, 19-21 May 2011
[60] Kavakli E. and P. Loucopoulos, "Goal Modeling in
Requirements Engineering: Analysis and Critique of Current
Methods", Information Modeling Methods and Methodologies:
Advanced Topics of Database Research, IGI Publishing, 2005,
pp. 102-124.
[61] L. Xu, H. Ziv, and T. A. Alspaugh, et. al., "An architectureal
pattern for non- functional dependability requirements".
Systems & Software, Vol.79, No. 10, pp.1370-1378.
[62] Ladiges, J.; Fay, A.; Haubeck, C.; Lamersdorf, W.,
"Operationalized definitions of non-functional requirements on
automated production facilities to measure evolution effects
with an automation system," Emerging Technologies & Factory
Automation (ETFA), 2013 IEEE 18th Conference on , vol., no.,
pp.1,6, 10-13 Sept. 2013
[63] Ledru Y., R. Laleau, M. Lemoine, S. Vignes, D. Bert, V.
Donzeau-Gouge, C. Dubois, and F. Peureux. An attempt to
combine UML and formal methods to model airport security.
In Forum of the 18th International Conference on Advanced
Information Systems Engineering, pages 47-50, Luxembourg,
[64] Lera, I.; Puigjaner, R.; Semantic Layered Architecture to
integrate FR/NFR in Software Performance Engineering.
WOSP/SIPEW 2010, poster
[65] Liu Xiaoqing; Azmoodeh, M.; Georgalas, N., "Specification of
non-functional requirements for contract specification in the
NGOSS framework for quality management and product
International Journal of Science and Engineering Applications
Volume 3 Issue 6, 2014, ISSN-2319-7560 (Online) 181
evaluation,"Software Quality, 2007. WoSQ'07: ICSE
Workshops 2007. Fifth International Workshop on , vol., no.,
pp.,, 20-26 May 2007
[66] Liu, (2010) -Based Conflict Analysis Method in
Non-978-0-7695-4147-1/10 IEEE.
[67] Livson B.U., A practical approach to software quality assurance,
ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes, v.13 n.3, p.45-48,
July 1988
[68] Lodderstedt Torsten, David A. Basin, and J¨urgen Doser.(2002)
SecureUML: A UMLBased Modeling Language for Model-
Driven        
International Conference on The Unified Modeling Language,
pages 426441, London, UK, 2002. Springer-Verlag.
[69] M.A. Wehrmeister, E. P. Freitas, C. E. Pereira, and F. Wagner,
"An Aspect-Oriented Approach for Dealing with Non-
Functional Requirements in Model-Driven Development of
Distributed Embedded Real-Time Systems", 10th IEEE
Symposium on Object Oriented Real-Time Distributed
Computing, 2007.
[70] Mairiza al. (2010) , An investigation into the notion of non-
func      -
317, ACM New York, NY, USA
[71] Matoussi, R. Laleau. (October 2008) A Survey of Non-
Functional Requirements in Software Development Proces,
Technical Report TRLACL.
[72] McCall, J.A., Matsumoto, M.T. (1980). Software Quality
Measurement Manual, Vol. II. Rome Air Development Center,
[73] Mehta, R. and Chung, L. "Dependencies among Architectural
Components and their Impacts towards Non-Functional
Requirements," IEEE Software, Special Issue on Twin Peaks of
Requirements and Architecture(2013).
[74] Mens, Tom; Wermelinger, Michel; Ducasse, Stane; Demeyer,
Serge; Hirschfeld, Robert and Jazayeri, Mehdi (2005).
Challenges in Software Evolution. In 8th conference on on
Principles ofSoftware Evolution, p.13-22, September 05-
06, 2005
[75] Merilinna Janne etal. NFR+ framework method to support bi-
directional traceability of non-functional requirements Springer-
Verlag 2012
[76] Metsa, J.; Katara, M.; Mikkonen, T., "Testing Non-Functional
Requirements with Aspects: An Industrial Case Study," Quality
Software, 2007. QSIC '07. Seventh International Conference
on , vol., no., pp.5,14, 11-12 Oct. 2007
[77] Miller, S.P. and Tribble, A.C. 2001. Extending the Four-
Variable Model to Bridge the System-Software Gap.
In Proceedings of the Twentith IEEE/AIAA Digital Avionics
[78] Mylopoulos J., L. Chung, B. Nixon (1992). Representing and
Using Nonfunctional Requirements: A Process- Oriented
Approach. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 18, 6
(June 1992). 483-497.
[79] Nguyen, Q.L., "Non-functional requirements analysis modeling
for software product lines," Modeling in Software Engineering,
2009. MISE '09. ICSE Workshop on , vol., no., pp.56,61, 17-18
May 2009
[80] Norian, M., Bagheri, E., Du, W.: Non-functional Properties in
Software Product Lines: A Taxonomy for classification. In proc.
of 24th International Conference on Software Engineering and
Knowledge Engineering (SEKE 2012), 2012.
[81] Okubo, T.; Yoshioka, N.; Kaiya, H., "Security Driven
Requirements Refinement and Exploration of Architecture with
Multiple NFR Points of View," High-Assurance Systems
Engineering (HASE), 2014 IEEE 15th International Symposium
on , vol., no., pp.201,205, 9-11 Jan. 2014
[82] Osterweil, L.J., "A Future for Software Engineering?," Future of
Software Engineering, 2007. FOSE '07 , vol., no., pp.1,11, 23-
25 May 2007.
[83] P. Botella, X. Burgués, X. Franch, M. Huerta, G. Salazar.
"Modelling Non-Functional Requirements". Proceedings of
Jornadas Ingeniería de Requisitos Aplicados (JIRA), 2001
[84] Pavlovski C.J. J. and Zou, "Non-Functional Requirements in
Business Process Modeling", Proc. of 5th Asia-Pacific
Conference on Conceptual Modelling, Wollongong, NSW,
Australia. CRPIT, 2008, Vol. 79, pp. 103-112.
[85] Poort, E.R., Key, A., de With, P.H.N., van Vliet, H.: Issues
Dealing with Non-Functional Requirements across the
Contractual Divide. In: WICSA/ECSA 2012, pp. 315319
[86] Pressman, R. S. (2005). Software Engineering: A Practitioner's
Approach (6th ed.). New York:- McGraw-Hill Publication.
[87] 
to non-    
Journal of Computer Science Issues, Vol. 8, Issue 6, No 2.
[88] Roman, G.-C.: A TaxonoTaxonomy of Current Issues in
Requirements Engineering. IEEE Computer, 1421 (April 1985)
[89] Romano Breno, Gláucia Braga e Silva, Henrique Fernandes de
Campos, Ricardo Godoi Vieira, Adilson Marques da Cunha,
Fábio Fagundes Silveira, Alexandre Carlos Brandão Ramos,
"Software Testing for Web-Applications Non-Functional
Requirements," itng, pp.1674-1675, 2009 Sixth International
Conference on Information Technology: New Generations, 2009
[90] Rosa N., P. Freire Cunha, and G. Ribeiro Justo. An Approach
for Reasoning and Refining Non-Functional Requirements.
Journal of the Brazilian Computer Society, 10:62-84, 2004.
[91] Saadatmand, M., Cicchetti, A., Sjödin, M.: Uml-based modeling
of non-functional requirements in telecommunication systems.
In: The Sixth International Conference on Software Engineering
Advances, ICSEA 2011 (2011)
[92] Sadana, V.; Liu, X.F., "Analysis of Conflicts among Non-
Functional Requirements Using Integrated Analysis of
Functional and Non-Functional Requirements," Computer
Software and Applications Conference, 2007. COMPSAC 2007.
31st Annual International , vol.1, no., pp.215,218, 24-27 July
[93] Sadiq, J.; Mohsin, A.; Arif, F., "Quantifying Non-functional
Requirements in Service Oriented Development," Frontiers of
Information Technology (FIT), 2011 , vol., no., pp.224,229, 19-
21 Dec. 2011
doi: 10.1109/FIT.2011.48
[94] 
      
Conference on Software Process and Product Measurement,
978-0-7695-4840-1/12 IEEE
[95] Salazar-Zárate G., P. Botella. "Use of UML for Non-Functional
Aspects". Proceedings of 13th International Conference
Software & Systems Engineering and their Applications
(ICSSEA), 2000.
[96] Schmeling, B.; Charfi, A.; Thome, R.; Mezini, M., "Composing
Non-functional Concerns in Web Services," Web Services
(ECOWS), 2011 Ninth IEEE European Conference on , vol.,
no., pp.73,80, 14-16 Sept. 2011
[97] ISSUES
         International
Journal of Software Engineering & Applications (IJSEA), Vol.3,
International Journal of Science and Engineering Applications
Volume 3 Issue 6, 2014, ISSN-2319-7560 (Online) 182
[98] Snook Colin , Michael Butler, UML-B: Formal modeling and
design aided by UML, ACM Transactions on Software
Engineering and Methodology (TOSEM), v.15 n.1, p.92-122,
January 2006
[99]           
Hatala , Ebrahim Bagheri, Automated planning for feature
model configuration based on functional and non-functional
requirements, Proceedings of the 16th International Software
Product Line Conference, September 02-07, 2012, Salvador,
[100] Sommerville (2006).6th edition Ed. Addison Wesley,
[101] Song Xiping; Hwong, B.; Ros, J., "Lessons from
Developing Nonfunctional Requirements for a Software
Platform," Software, IEEE , vol.29, no.2, pp.74,80, March-April
[102] Subramanian Nary , Lawrence Chung, Software
architecture adaptability: an NFR approach, Proceedings of the
4th International Workshop on Principles of Software Evolution,
September 10-11, 2001, Vienna, Austria
[103] Supakkul Sam and Lawrence Chung.(2004) Integrating
FRs and NFRs: A Use Case and Goal Driven Approach. Proc.
SERA 04, pages 3037,.
[104] Taeg Jung Keo; Gil-Haeng Lee, "A systematic software
development process for non-functional
requirements," Information and Communication Technology
Convergence (ICTC), 2010 International Conference on , vol.,
no., pp.431,436, 17-19 Nov. 2010
[105] Thakurta R (2012) A framework for prioritization of
quality requirements for inclusion in a software project.
Software quality journal. Springer, New York
[106] Tonu Subrina A. and Ladan Tahvildari. Towards a
Framework to IncorporateIn Proceedings of IEEE WCRE
Workshop on Reverse Engineering to Requirements (RETR),
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA, pages 1318, November 2005.
[107] Tsadimas, A.; Nikolaidou, Mara; Anagnostopoulos, D.,
"Handling Non-functional Requirements in Information System
Architecture Design," Software Engineering Advances, 2009.
ICSEA '09. Fourth International Conference on , vol., no.,
pp.59,64, 20-25 Sept. 2009
[108] Ullah Saeed, Muzaffar Iq bal, Aamir Mehmood Khan,(
2011) A Survey on Issues in Non-Functional Requirements
Elicitation Computer Networks and Information Technology
(ICCNIT), 2011 International Conference on 978-1-61284-941-
6/11 IEEE.
[109] Umar, M.; Khan, N.A., "Analyzing Non-Functional
Requirements (NFRs) for software development," Software
Engineering and Service Science (ICSESS), 2011 IEEE 2nd
International Conference on , vol., no., pp.675,678, 15-17 July
[110] Van Lamsweerde Axel. Goal-Oriented Requirements
Engineering: A Guided      
Fifth IEEE International Symposium on Requirements
 
IEEE Computer Society.
[111] Vanhanen J., M.V.Mantyla, and J. Ithonen, " Lightweight
elicitation and analysis of software product quality goals a
multiple industrial case study," Third International Workshop on
Software Product Management (IWSPM), pp. 42-52, September
[112] vensson, R.B.; Gorschek, T.; Regnell, B.; Torkar, R.;
Shahrokni, A.; Feldt, R.; Aurum, A., "Prioritization of quality
requirements: State of practice in eleven
companies," Requirements Engineering Conference (RE), 2011
19th IEEE International , vol., no., pp.69,78, Aug. 29 2011-Sept.
2 2011
[113] Wagner, S.; Deissenboeck, F., "An Integrated Approach to
Quality Modelling," Software Quality, 2007. WoSQ'07: ICSE
Workshops 2007. Fifth International Workshop on , vol., no.,
pp.1,1, 20-26 May 2007
[114] Wei B., Z. Jin, and L. Liu, "A formalism for extending the
NFR Framework to support the composition of the goal trees,"in
17th Asia Pacific Software Engineering Conference, 2010, pp.
[115] Wei B.and Z. Jin, "Characterizing the implementation of
software non-functional requirements from probabilistic
perspective,"in COMPSAC, 2011, to appear.
[116] Wen C. Too, Sa'adah Hassan, Jamilah Din, and Abdul
Azim Abd. Ghani, Towards Improving NFR Elicitation in
Software Development, International Journal of Information
Technology & Computer Science ( IJITCS ) (ISSN No : 2091-
1610 )Volume 7 : No : 1 : Issue on January / February, 2013
[117] Xu Lihua , Hadar Ziv, Debra Richardson, and Zhixiong
Liu. Towards Modeling Non-Functional Requirements in
Software Architecture. 2005.
[118] Ye Fei; Zhu Xiaodong, "An XML-Based Software Non-
Functional Requirements Modeling Method," Electronic
Measurement and Instruments, 2007. ICEMI '07. 8th
International Conference on , vol., no., pp.2-375,2-380, Aug. 16
2007-July 18 2007
[119] Yin Bin , Jin Zhi, Chen Xiaohong An approach for
selecting implementation strategies of non-functional
requirements in Proceedings of the Fourth Asia-Pacific
Symposium on Internetware Article No. 20 ACM New York,
NY, USA ©2012.
[120] Yrjönen A, Merilinna J (2010) Tooling for the full
traceability of non-functional requirements within model-driven
development. In: 6th ECMFA traceability workshop (ECMFA-
[121] Yu E., "Towards modelling and reasoning support for
early-phase requirements engineering," Proc. of the 3rd IEEE
International Symposium on Requirements Engineering (RE'
97), pp. 226-235, 1997.
[122] Zheng X.; Xiaomei Liu; Shulin Liu, "Use Case and Non-
functional Scenario Template-Based Approach to Identify
Aspects," Computer Engineering and Applications (ICCEA),
2010 Second International Conference on , vol.2, no., pp.89,93,
19-21 March 2010
[123] Zhu Liming and Ian Gorton. UML Profiles for Design
Decisions and Non- Functional Requirements. In 2ndIntl.
Workshop on SHAringand Reusing architectural Knowledge,
[124] Zhu Ming-Xun , Xin-Xing Luo , Xiao-Hong Chen ,
Desheng Dash Wu, A non-functional requirements tradeoff
model in Trustworthy Software, Information Sciences: an
International Journal, 191, p.61-75, May, 2012
[125] Zou J. and C.J. Pavlovski, "Modeling Architectural Non
Functional Requirements: From Use Case to Control Case",
Proc. of IEEE International Conference on e-Business
Engineering (ICEBE '06), Shanghai China, 2006, pp. 315-322.
[126] Zschaler S., "Towards a Semantic Framework for
Nonfunctional Specifications of Component-Based Systems",
Proc. 30th EUROMICRO Conf., Rennes, France, Aug./Sep.
2004, pages 92-99, IEEE Computer Science, Sept. 2004.
[127]Zschaler, S.: Formal specification of non-functional properties
of component-based software systems: A semantic framework
and some applications thereof. Software and Systems Modelling
(SoSyM) 9, 161201 (2009)
... There is a lack of tools or methodologies to automatically classify and cluster the collected SRs. On the one hand, some works are found in the literature with the goal of non-functional SR classification [16][17][18]. On the other hand, functional SR clustering has never been considered in the literature. ...
... Their technique used linguistic relations among requirement statements to extract thematic roles. Recently, Kaur et al. surveyed a wide range of techniques interested in NFRs[16]. ...
Full-text available
Software applications have become a fundamental part in the daily work of modern society as they meet different needs of users in different domains. Such needs are known as software requirements (SRs) which are separated into functional (software services) and non-functional (quality attributes). The first step of every software development project is SR elicitation. This step is a challenge task for developers as they need to understand and analyze SRs manually. For example, the collected functional SRs need to be categorized into different clusters to break-down the project into a set of sub-projects with related SRs and devote each sub-project to a separate development team. However, functional SRs clustering has never been considered in the literature. Therefore, in this paper, we propose an approach to automatically cluster functional requirements based on semantic measure. An empirical evaluation is conducted using four open-access software projects to evaluate our proposal. The experimental results demonstrate that the proposed approach identifies semantic clusters according to well-known used measures in the subject.
... In this work, we focus on NFRs as quality requirements. Despite the NFR-related challenges, progress in the area of NFR exploration has been made, including, for example, definitions (e.g., [7]), taxonomies (e.g., [9]), classification methods (e.g., [10]), modeling approaches (e.g., [5]), management methods (e.g., [11]), and industrial studies (e.g., [12]). ...
Machine Learning (ML) is an application of Artificial Intelligence (AI) that uses big data to produce complex predictions and decision-making systems, which would be challenging to obtain otherwise. To ensure the success of ML-enabled systems, it is essential to be aware of certain qualities of ML solutions (performance, transparency, fairness), known from a Requirement Engineering (RE) perspective as non-functional requirements (NFRs). However, when systems involve ML, NFRs for traditional software may not apply in the same ways; some NFRs may become more prominent or less important; NFRs may be defined over the ML model, data, or the entire system; and NFRs for ML may be measured differently. In this work, we aim to understand the state-of-the-art and challenges of dealing with NFRs for ML in industry. We interviewed ten engineering practitioners working with NFRs and ML. We find examples of (1) the identification and measurement of NFRs for ML, (2) identification of more and less important NFRs for ML, and (3) the challenges associated with NFRs and ML in the industry. This knowledge paints a picture of how ML-related NFRs are treated in practice and helps to guide future RE for ML efforts.
Modern systems implement multiple and complex operations to manage the user demand, thereby ensuring adequate quality levels. They are usually made of a collection of interconnected (autonomous) subsystems, with a common goal to be pursued, that are perceived as a whole, single, integrated facility.
Full-text available
In the recent years, the software product lines paradigm has gained interest in both industry and academia. As in traditional software development, the concept of quality is crucial for the success of software product line practices and both functional and nonfunctional characteristics must be involved in the development process in order to achieve a high quality software product line. Therefore, many efforts have been made towards the development of quality-based approaches in order to address non-functional properties in software product line development. In this paper, we propose a taxonomy that characterizes and classifies various approaches for employing non-functional properties in software product lines development. The taxonomy not only highlights the major concerns that need to be addressed in the area of quality-based software product lines, but also helps to identify various research gaps that need to be filled in future work in this area.
Full-text available
Software Development has started experiencing the need of consideration of NFR (Non Functional Requirements) for producing high quality acceptable software. Mostly software engineering literature has considered only for testing Functional Requirements. In context of such a need this work attempts to consider NFR, resulting from quality concerns of stakeholder, along with their impact and effect on testing .We identify and bring out issues, in testing of NFR that warrant, purposeful and meaningful considerations. KEYWORDS Testing issues, Non-functional Requirements, Testability, FR (Functional Requirement.), Goal Centric Traceability (GCT), GRL (Goal Oriented Requirement Language), SIG (Soft goal Interdependency Graph), soft goal.
Component-based software engineering (CBSE) is viewed as an opportunity to deal with the increasing complexity of modern-day software. Along with CBSE comes the notion of component markets, where more or less generic pieces of software are traded, to be combined into applications by third-party application developers. For such a component market to work successfully, all relevant properties of components must be precisely and formally described. This is especially true for non-functional properties, such as performance, memory foot print, or security. While the specification of functional properties is well understood, non-functional properties are only beginning to become a research focus. This paper discusses semantic concepts for the specification of non-functional properties, taking into account the specific needs of a component market. Based on these semantic concepts, we present a new specification language QML/CS that can be used to model non-functional product properties of components and component-based software systems.
Improving requirements engineering was initiated in a department at Ericsson Eurolab after an analysis showed that many of the problems in software development had their root cause in insufficient understanding of the customer and in unclear requirements. The Gilb Style method was employed. After a year of experience and several projects using this method, the biggest benefit was a change of culture towards requirements. The common understanding of requirements drastically increased.
Conference Paper
Adaptation of software systems is almost an inevitable process, due to the change in customer requirements, needs for faster development of new, or maintenance of existing, software systems, etc. No doubt numerous techniques have been developed to deal with adaptation of software systems. In this paper we present an overview of some of these techniques. As the first step in the development of software solution it is our opinion that software architecture should itself be adaptable for the final software system to be adaptable. In order to systematically support adaptation at the architectural level, this paper adapts the NFR (Non-Functional Requirements) Framework and treats software adaptability requirement as a goal to be achieved during development. Through this adaptation, then, consideration of design alternatives, analysis of tradeoffs and rationalization of design decisions are all carried out in relation to the stated goals, and captured in historical records. This NFR approach can also be adapted to a knowledge-based approach for (semi-)automatically generating architectures for adaptable software systems and we also discuss how this can be achieved.
This report describes a comprehensive and practical approach to software quality assurance (SQA). The emphasis is on SQA organization, management and task profile on corporate basis. The relationships between SQA and systems engineering, software developer, project office, subcontractors, customer, and independent verification, validation and testing IVV&T are discussed. The SQA role in software configuration management (SCM) is covered. Software engineering methods, standards and tools that contribute to software quality are described. SQA manpower qualifications and the assignments SQA is capable of fulfilling as a function of the quality and quantity of available manpower are analyzed. The paper is based on the author's experience as manager of the Israel Aircraft Industries Ltd Engineering Division SQA from 1978-1986. No project specific data is presented and the approach presented should be valid both for embedded computer systems and data processing quality assurance.
Conference Paper
Despite considerable research on ontologies for representing requirements models (and metamodels), little progress has been made in using ontologies to represent non-functional requirements. Non-functional requirements define the overall qualities of the resulting system. Because they are restrictions on system services, non-functional requirements are often of critical importance, and functional requirements may need to be sacrificed to meet them. However, because of their diverse nature, non-functional requirements are often expressed in non-standard domain-specific ways. This paper describes a nonfunctional requirements ontology that can be used to structure and express constraints as part of quality of service specification. The approach is illustrated using a small case-study.