validation method to improve behavioral flows on uml requirements analysis model by cross-checking with state transition model
This addresses the problem of ensuring consistency in requirements analysis for software developers, but it is incremental as it builds on existing cross-checking methods.
The paper tackles the problem of validating required specifications by automatically extracting inconsistencies between a service procedure model and a state transition model derived from the same initial requirements, and reports these to analysts for improvement, with a tool developed and applied to an example to discuss effectiveness.
We propose a method to evaluate and improve the validity of required specifications by comparing models from different viewpoints. Inconsistencies are automatically extracted from the model in which the analyst defines the service procedure based on the initial requirement; thereafter, the analyst automatically compares it with a state transition model from the same initial requirement that has been created by an evaluator who is different from the analyst. The identified inconsistencies are reported to the analyst to enable the improvement of the required specifications. We develop a tool for extraction and comparison and then discuss its effectiveness by applying the method to a requirements specification example.