Non-functional requirements (NFRs) are commonly distinguished from functional requirements by differentiating how the system shall do something in contrast to what the system shall do. This distinction is not only prevalent in research, but also influences how requirements are handled in practice. NFRs are usually documented separately from functional requirements, without quantitative measures, and with relatively vague descriptions. As a result, they remain difficult to analyze and test. Several authors argue, however, that many so-called NFRs actually describe behavioral properties and may be treated the same way as functional requirements. In this paper, we empirically investigate this point of view and aim to increase our understanding on the nature of NFRs addressing system properties. We report on the classification of 530 NFRs extracted from 11 industrial requirements specifications and analyze to which extent these NFRs describe system behavior. Our results suggest that most "non-functional" requirements are not non-functional as they describe behavior of a system. Consequently, we argue that many so-called NFRs can be handled similarly to functional requirements.
Previously published material. In our previously published paper @cite_4 , we presented a research proposal with the goal of analyzing natural language NFRs taken from industrial requirements specifications to better understand their nature. Our study reported here, relies on and extends our previous study design. We present the results in full detail, and provide a comprehensive discussion on the implications on software engineering disciplines.
@cite_4
2144634407 2346441090 2051952787 2113355018
Nonfunctional requirements (NFRs) have been frequently neglected or forgotten in software design. They have been presented as a second or even third class type of requirement, frequently hidden inside notes. We tackle this problem by treating NFRs as first class requirements. We present a process to elicit NFRs, analyze their interdependencies, and trace them to functional conceptual models. We focus our attention on conceptual models expressed using UML (Unified Modeling Language). Extensions to UML are proposed to allow NFRs to be expressed. We show how to integrate NFRs into the class, sequence, and collaboration diagrams. We also show how use cases and scenarios can be adapted to deal with NFRs. This work was used in three case studies and their results suggest that by using our proposal we can improve the quality of the resulting conceptual models. In this paper, we describe a novel unsupervised approach for detecting, classifying, and tracing non-functional software requirements (NFRs). The proposed approach exploits the textual semantics of software functional requirements (FRs) to infer potential quality constraints enforced in the system. In particular, we conduct a systematic analysis of a series of word similarity methods and clustering techniques to generate semantically cohesive clusters of FR words. These clusters are classified into various categories of NFRs based on their semantic similarity to basic NFR labels. Discovered NFRs are then traced to their implementation in the solution space based on their textual semantic similarity to source code artifacts. Three software systems are used to conduct the experimental analysis in this paper. The results show that methods that exploit massive sources of textual human knowledge are more accurate in capturing and modeling the notion of similarity between FR words in a software system. Results also show that hierarchical clustering algorithms are more capable of generating thematic word clusters than partitioning clustering techniques. In terms of performance, our analysis indicates that the proposed approach can discover, classify, and trace NFRs with accuracy levels that can be adequate for practical applications. Dealing with non-functional requirements (NFRs) has posed a challenge onto software engineers for many years. Over the years, many methods and techniques have been proposed to improve their elicitation, documentation, and validation. Knowing more about the state of the practice on these topics may benefit both practitioners' and researchers' daily work. A few empirical studies have been conducted in the past, but none under the perspective of software architects, in spite of the great influence that NFRs have on daily architects' practices. This paper presents some of the findings of an empirical study based on 13 interviews with software architects. It addresses questions such as: who decides the NFRs, what types of NFRs matter to architects, how are NFRs documented, and how are NFRs validated. The results are contextualized with existing previous work. In most current industrial software engineering projects, the majority of requirements documents are written almost entirely in natural language. However, specifying the requirements in natural language has one major drawback, namely the inherent imprecision, i.e., ambiguity, incompleteness, and inaccuracy, of natural language. Since the requirements document forms the basis of the whole development process, such defects can have severe consequences for the whole project. Therefore, it is important to deal with these defects in a requirements specification right from the start. We present an approach for reducing the problem of imprecision in natural language requirements specifications with the use of natural language patterns, which allow formulating requirements sentences in a less ambiguous, more complete, and more accurate way. To ensure the applicability of our approach we based our patterns on a metamodel for requirements statements for embedded systems. With this metamodel, we ensure that all forms of requirements statements are described with the patterns. We validated the effectiveness of the patterns by using them to rewrite a substantial, previously written, requirements specification to eliminate its imprecisions.