Imen Benzarti

2papers

2 Papers

3.0SEMay 5
Two Integration Pathways in Human-Centered Requirements Engineering: A Systematic Mapping Study of Structural Gaps

Imen Benzarti, Ikram Darif, Abderrahmane Leshob et al.

Human-centered Requirements Engineering (HC-RE) integrates user cognition, emotions, and social interactions into the RE process through contributions from disciplines such as psychology, cognitive science, design thinking, and human-computer interaction. Despite growing interest, how these multidisciplinary contributions are structured and why they remain fragmented across the RE lifecycle is not well understood. This systematic mapping study analyzes 56 primary studies across seven dimensions, including RE phases, user involvement techniques, contributing disciplines, and evaluation methods. Results show that 70\% of approaches involve multidisciplinary contributions, yet only 39% have been empirically evaluated and 48% address only the elicitation phase. A cross-study analysis reveals a structural separation between two parallel integration traditions: a Cognitive-Formal (C-F) pathway grounded in goal-based frameworks and formal modeling, and a Participatory-Iterative (P-I) pathway grounded in scenario-based frameworks and iterative design. Each pathway has developed complementary strengths, but their near-total disconnection explains the persistent lifecycle concentration and theory-practice gap observed in the corpus. The findings identify the absence of translation mechanisms between human-centered artifacts and formal RE specifications as the field's primary structural gap, provide a structured research agenda organized into four priority tiers, and establish the empirical foundation for Experience-Centered Requirements Engineering, a direction in which user experience is explicitly operationalized as a first-class concern in requirements specification.

10.2SEApr 20
From Business Problems to AI Solutions: Where Does Transformation Support Fail

Abir Trabelsi, Imen Benzarti, Hafedh Mili et al.

Translating business problems into well-specified machine learning solutions is a prerequisite for successful AI systems, yet this upstream translation is still one of the least supported steps in existing methodologies. We conduct a structured narrative literature review of 18 approaches spanning requirements engineering (RE), machine learning (ML) project management, and automation. We organize these approaches into a taxonomy of four families and compare them across six input artifact categories, six output artifact categories, and a transformation framework of seven stages, grounded in RE refinement theory and ML lifecycle process. Our study shows that most approaches list ML task or algorithm specification among their expected outputs, yet only four provide partial guidance for deriving it, and none provides systematic guidance. We characterize this gap as the Analytics Translation Problem (ATP) and derive five research recommendations addressing multi-formulation exploration, task derivation guidance, constraint-algorithm filtering, probabilistic traceability, and data-triggered revision.