Natural Language Requirements Testability Measurement Based on Requirement Smells
March 26, 2024 Β· Declared Dead Β· π Neural computing & applications (Print)
"No code URL or promise found in abstract"
Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner
Authors
Morteza Zakeri-Nasrabadi, Saeed Parsa
arXiv ID
2403.17479
Category
cs.SE: Software Engineering
Cross-listed
cs.AI,
cs.LG
Citations
3
Venue
Neural computing & applications (Print)
Last Checked
4 months ago
Abstract
Requirements form the basis for defining software systems' obligations and tasks. Testable requirements help prevent failures, reduce maintenance costs, and make it easier to perform acceptance tests. However, despite the importance of measuring and quantifying requirements testability, no automatic approach for measuring requirements testability has been proposed based on the requirements smells, which are at odds with the requirements testability. This paper presents a mathematical model to evaluate and rank the natural language requirements testability based on an extensive set of nine requirements smells, detected automatically, and acceptance test efforts determined by requirement length and its application domain. Most of the smells stem from uncountable adjectives, context-sensitive, and ambiguous words. A comprehensive dictionary is required to detect such words. We offer a neural word-embedding technique to generate such a dictionary automatically. Using the dictionary, we could automatically detect Polysemy smell (domain-specific ambiguity) for the first time in 10 application domains. Our empirical study on nearly 1000 software requirements from six well-known industrial and academic projects demonstrates that the proposed smell detection approach outperforms Smella, a state-of-the-art tool, in detecting requirements smells. The precision and recall of smell detection are improved with an average of 0.03 and 0.33, respectively, compared to the state-of-the-art. The proposed requirement testability model measures the testability of 985 requirements with a mean absolute error of 0.12 and a mean squared error of 0.03, demonstrating the model's potential for practical use.
Community Contributions
Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!
π Similar Papers
In the same crypt β Software Engineering
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Microservices: yesterday, today, and tomorrow
π
π
The Cartographer
A Survey of Machine Learning for Big Code and Naturalness
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
An Overview on Smart Contracts: Challenges, Advances and Platforms
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Slither: A Static Analysis Framework For Smart Contracts
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
ContractFuzzer: Fuzzing Smart Contracts for Vulnerability Detection
Died the same way β π» Ghosted
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Federated Learning: Strategies for Improving Communication Efficiency
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
In-Datacenter Performance Analysis of a Tensor Processing Unit
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Deep Convolutional Neural Networks for Computer-Aided Detection: CNN Architectures, Dataset Characteristics and Transfer Learning
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted