MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Towards Requirements Specification Collaboration Forum for Embedded Software Systems

2023· article· en· W4390117343 on OpenAlexaff
Asma Fariha, Sanaa Alwidian, Akramul Azim

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Software Engineering Methodologies
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRequirements elicitationRequirements analysisComputer scienceRequirements managementSoftware requirements specificationRequirements engineeringSoftware engineeringSystem requirementsSystems Modeling LanguageStakeholderFunctional requirementRequirement prioritizationSoftware requirementsSystem requirements specificationUser requirements documentSystems engineeringProcess (computing)SoftwareUnified Modeling LanguageSoftware developmentSoftware designEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Effective requirements specification for embedded software systems relies heavily on the collaboration between stakeholders to articulate accurate functional and non-functional requirements. At present, requirement engineers manually coordinate the sophisticated task of correct stakeholders selection for requirements and compilation of feedback in the embedded software domain. Because embedded software has an extensive number of stakeholders, the absence of an efficient collaboration platform causes a prolonged project completion time, elevated maintenance costs, or project failure. In this preliminary research paper, a stakeholder collaboration platform is proposed using an auto-encoder-based recommender system and SysML modeling language for embedded software systems. In the proposed framework, forums are the collaboration space for stakeholders to contribute to requirements analysis and specifications and are generated from the requirements diagram of the SysML modeling language. Owners of the requirements will be directly assigned to the forum from the SysML requirement profile information. To ensure adequate stakeholder engagement in the requirements specification process, the Collaborative Denoising Auto-Encoder (CDAE) recommender system is used for advanced auto-recommendations of requirement forums to stakeholders. This approach facilitates feedback collection and analysis to refine requirements specifications. The automatic forum creation and the advanced recommendation process of this framework will add no overhead to the requirements engineers or analysts; at the same time, a centralized collaboration platform for the stakeholders will save requirements analysis time and avoid future conflicts.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.331
Threshold uncertainty score0.429

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.096
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.262 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Software Engineering MethodologiesFrench-language works237,207