Index of /~chung/ftp
Name Last modified Size Description
Parent Directory -
CAiSE91.ps 1997-06-18 12:03 303K
CAiSE91.ps.Z 1997-06-18 12:03 115K
CAiSE93.ps 1997-06-18 12:03 199K
ICSE95.ps 1997-06-18 12:03 4.2M
ICSE95Long.ps 1997-06-18 12:04 780K
ICSQ.ps 1997-06-18 12:04 91K
ICSQ94.ps.Z 1997-06-18 12:04 43K
ICSQ94Slides.ps 1997-06-18 12:04 633K
IWASS95.ps 1997-06-18 12:04 223K
MappingAssistant.nh.pro 1997-06-18 12:04 8.9K
MappingAssistant.xv.pro 1997-06-18 12:04 17K
MappingClient.pro 1997-06-18 12:04 282K
NFRAssistant.ps 1997-06-18 12:04 1.2M
NFRAssistant.ps.Z 1997-06-18 12:04 196K
RE95.ps 1997-06-18 12:04 105K
RE95Long.ps.Z 1997-06-18 12:04 110K
RE95Slides.ps 1997-06-18 12:04 126K
bookChap3.ps 1997-06-18 12:04 232K
chung.html._relocated_ 1997-06-18 12:04 4.5K
greenspan.ps 1997-06-18 12:04 209K
idef0.ps 1997-06-18 12:04 504K
idef1x.ps 1997-06-18 12:04 1.2M
maile.html 1997-06-18 12:04 1.7K
mainmenu 1997-06-18 12:04 1.0K
method.tar 1997-06-18 12:04 6.5M
screen1 1997-06-18 12:04 1.8K
screen2 1997-06-18 12:04 4.1K
screen3 1997-06-18 12:04 6.2K
screen4 1997-06-18 12:04 1.8K
CSA.ps 1998-01-13 13:52 73K
DKBS-TR-93-1.ps.Z 1998-03-10 10:38 848K
ASE98.ps 1998-05-13 11:27 234K
re99doc.1.1-1.2-mite..> 1998-11-18 10:52 627K
tran.doc 1999-01-15 16:49 86K
tran.ps 1999-01-15 16:49 539K
SA_Slicing.ps 1999-08-16 10:11 231K
Conf_AoM99.ps 1999-08-16 10:12 269K
AoM99_Jour.ps 1999-08-20 15:54 6.8M
BetterEDI.doc 1999-09-23 18:51 125K
IJCIM.ps 1999-09-23 18:57 6.7M
OO-EDI2.DOC 1999-09-28 12:28 1.2M
bookChap4OLD.ps 1999-10-21 12:05 391K
REJdraft.ps 2000-03-13 11:50 363K
OIM.doc 2000-05-23 00:50 161K
OIM.pdf 2000-05-23 00:50 92K
OIM.submission._relo..> 2000-05-23 00:52 1.9K
CSI.doc 2000-07-14 20:54 167K
JAIST.doc 2000-07-26 14:48 625K
JAIST.pdf 2000-07-26 14:49 463K
ISPSE00.doc 2000-09-30 10:31 277K
submission.doc 2000-11-22 10:21 479K
wicsa1.final.doc 2001-01-07 20:59 374K
x1myl.lo.pdf 2001-01-07 21:46 165K
WICSA99.pdf 2001-01-12 14:39 3.5M
v.5c.doc 2001-02-06 12:12 859K
v.5c.pdf 2001-02-06 12:12 289K
sqm.doc 2001-02-08 11:01 84K
ICSM.pdf 2001-02-08 15:43 243K
sqm.pdf 2001-03-08 17:44 56K
Presentation.ppt 2001-03-15 13:48 1.4M
POMSAA-Poster.doc 2001-05-17 15:37 916K
TSE.ps 2001-05-18 12:28 315K
ICSMshort.pdf 2001-05-18 18:21 143K
POMSAA-Poster.pdf 2001-05-18 18:32 186K
IWPSE.pdf 2001-08-04 12:20 145K
CAiSE93.ps.Z 2001-08-28 13:36 84K
NFRApproach.ppt 2001-09-06 13:50 227K
temp.ps 2001-10-24 11:52 91K
MBRE.pdf 2001-11-06 11:19 40K
mbre_01.ppt 2001-11-27 10:23 124K
ukc2001-chung.doc 2002-02-05 00:58 804K
yi-serp02.ppt 2002-07-01 15:55 384K
SEKE.doc 2002-07-08 12:56 207K
INCOSE_paper_CARE.doc 2002-07-08 12:57 702K
INCOSE_paper_CARE.pdf 2002-07-08 12:57 61K
INCOSE_paper_CARE_ab..> 2002-07-08 12:57 3.3K
AAG.doc 2002-08-31 15:39 1.3M
AAG.pdf 2002-09-01 10:48 664K
Adaptable_UI_Generat..> 2002-09-16 12:59 630K
science_acasa.pdf 2003-05-15 11:04 315K
science_proteus.pdf 2003-05-15 11:04 416K
science_sa3.pdf 2003-05-15 11:04 315K
science_standard.pdf 2003-05-15 11:04 60K
SEKE_submission_fina..> 2003-05-15 11:31 90K
kust.gk.doc 2003-05-16 10:40 146K
lv.ppt 2003-06-20 10:44 1.7M
ACASA03.ppt 2003-06-20 14:35 375K
Haklin_Kimm_2003_08.doc 2003-06-23 12:58 20K
Systems_Engineering_..> 2003-07-23 14:43 410K
CSY.doc 2003-07-24 15:55 948K
CACM.f.doc 2003-07-31 11:50 307K
ICTS-2003.0731.doc 2003-07-31 16:51 950K
ICTS-2003/ 2003-08-11 14:45 -
RE04_Chung_Subramani..> 2004-02-03 10:31 484K
sera04-final.pdf 2004-04-02 12:17 137K
INCOSE03_final.doc 2004-04-06 12:02 210K
jsa.pdf 2004-04-06 12:06 215K
Workshop.doc 2004-04-12 13:39 35K
SERA04.ppt 2004-05-03 18:45 3.2M
MPEC04_final.pdf 2004-05-07 10:52 37K
chung_cooper_IWSSA_2..> 2004-05-07 10:55 72K
chung_cooper_IWSSA_f..> 2004-06-15 11:54 1.4M
IWSSA04.ppt 2004-06-20 17:43 556K
ShinJSCP.pdf 2004-10-21 11:07 184K
IWSSA05.ppt 2005-06-27 11:33 920K
MPEC05-CC-8.ppt 2005-07-15 22:43 420K
SNPD2005_revised.ppt 2005-07-15 22:50 665K
IWSSA05_2.ppt 2005-07-16 15:02 1.6M
ICSM05.doc 2005-07-20 21:58 401K
VMSIS_2005.doc 2005-07-22 19:15 292K
VMSIS_2005.pdf 2005-07-22 19:15 95K
CAT_intro_v5.2.rename 2005-07-25 03:00 649K
CAiSE91.pdf 2005-09-09 11:24 395K
OIM.submission 2006-05-09 08:16 1.9K
chung.html 2006-05-09 08:16 4.5K
Huawei-Jul22.ppt 2007-07-21 22:25 1.0M
Huawei.ppt 2007-07-22 20:25 969K
BETTER.ppt 2008-04-28 15:48 1.0M
resac09.pdf 2009-01-21 12:34 367K
Thumbs.db 2009-06-02 16:55 8.0K
Bridging-the-Gap.pdf 2009-10-01 16:57 117K
EA_towards_inst.pdf 2009-10-02 13:30 653K
CAiSE93.pdf 2012-06-11 11:43 238K
NFRAssistant.ps.Z
---------------------
Lawrence Chung, and Brian A. Nixon, ``Tool Support for Systematic
Treatment of Non-Functional Requirements." A working memo.
ABSTRACT:
=========
Global quality issues ({\it Non-functional requirements,} {\it NFRs}
or {\it quality requirements}) such as accuracy, performance and
security are often crucial to the success of a software system.
Despite the increasing concerns for such quality issues, relatively
little attention has been paid to the development of tools to
systematically address them and support the process of generating
quality software.
This paper presents the {\it NFR-Assistant}, a prototype CASE tool,
which assists the software developer in systematically representing
non-functional requirements, achieving them, analysing development
trade-offs, rationalising the selection among development alternatives,
and evaluating the level of achievement of NFRs. It is one of the
first tools which offers a semi-formal representation and supports
semi-automatic development process, focussed on non-functional
requirements. The NFR-Assistant has been developed to deal with a
variety of NFRs (accuracy, security and (in progress) performance) and
has been applied to consider quality issues for a variety of types of
systems including credit card, research expense management and (in
part) taxation. The services offered by the Assistant are illustrated
by examples.
CAiSE91.ps.Z
------------
Lawrence Chung, ``Representation and Utilization of Non-Functional
Requirements for Information System Design.'' In R. Anderson,
J. A. Bubenko, Jr. and A. S{\rm \o}lvberg (Editors),
{\it Proceedings, CAiSE '91, 3rd International Conference on Advanced
Information Systems Engineering,} Trondheim, Norway.
Berlin: Springer-Verlag, May 1991, pp.\ 5--30.
ABSTRACT:
=========
The complexity and usefulness of large information systems are
determined partly by their functionality, i.e., what they do, and
partly by global constraints on their accuracy, security, cost,
user-friendliness, performance, and the like.
Even with the growing interest in developing higher-level models and
design paradigms, current technology is inadequate both
{\it representationally} for expressing such global constraints as
formal {\it non-functional} requirements and {\it methodologically}
for utilizing them in generating designs.
We propose both a representational and methodological framework for
non-functional requirements, focusing on accuracy requirements. With
the premise that accuracy is an inherent semantic attribute of
information, we take a first step towards establishing a
representational basis for accuracy. To guide the design process and
justify design decisions, we propose a goal-oriented methodology. In
the methodology, accuracy requirements are treated as (potentially
conflicting) goals, for which two types of methods are presented: one
for decomposing the goals in terms of affected design components, and
the other for contributing, either positively or negatively, to goal
satisfaction. Non-functional requirements are further investigated for
their cooperation and conflicts, which enables the assessment of the
quality of overall design. A detailed illustration demonstrates how
the framework aids a designer's decision-making process by recommending
the types of consultation needed with users in the intended application
domain.
CAiSE93.ps.Z
------------
Lawrence Chung, ``Dealing With Security Requirements During the
Development of Information Systems.'' In Colette Rolland, Fran\c{c}ois
Bodat and Corine Cauvet (Editors), {\it Advanced Information Systems
Engineering,} Proceedings of the 5th International Conference CAiSE '93,
Paris, France, June 8--11, 1993. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 1993,
pp.\ 234--251.
ABSTRACT:
=========
A growing concern for information systems ({\it ISs}) is their
quality, such as security, accuracy, user-friendliness and performance.
Although the quality of an IS is determined largely by the development
process, relatively little attention has been paid to the methodology
for achieving high quality.
A recent proposal \cite{Mylopoulos92} takes a process-oriented approach
to representing non-functional, or quality, requirements ({\it NFRs})
as potentially conflicting or harmonious goals and using them during
the development of software systems. By treating security requirements
as a class of NFRs, this paper applies this process-oriented approach
to designing secure ISs. This involves identification and
representation of various types of security requirements (as goals),
generic design knowledge and goal interactions. This treatment allows
reusing generic design knowledge, detecting goal interactions,
capturing and reasoning about design rationale, %, for instance, and
assessing the degree of goal achievement. Security requirements serve
as a class of criteria for selecting among design decisions, and
justify the overall design. This paper also describes a prototype
design tool, and illustrates it using a credit card system example.
ICSE95.ps.Z
-----------
Lawrence Chung and Brian A. Nixon, ``Dealing with Non-Functional
Requirements: Three Experimental Studies of a Process-Oriented
Approach." To appear in {\it Proceedings, IEEE 17th International
Conference on Software Engineering,} Seattle, Washington, April 24--28,
1995.
ABSTRACT:
=========
Quality characteristics are vital for the success of software systems.
To remedy the problems inherent in ad hoc development, a framework has
been developed to deal with non-functional requirements (quality
requirements or NFRs). Taking the premise that the quality of a
product depends on the quality of the process that leads from
high-level NFRs to the product, the framework's objectives are to
represent NFR-specific requirements, consider design tradeoffs, relate
design decisions to NFRs, justify the decisions, and assist defect
detection.
The purpose of this paper is to give an initial evaluation of the
extent to which the framework's objectives are met. Three small
portions of information systems were studied by the authors using the
framework.
The framework and empirical studies are evaluated herein, both from the
viewpoint of domain experts who have reviewed the framework and
studies, and ourselves as framework developers and users. The systems
studied have a variety of characteristics, reflecting a variety of real
application domains, and the studies deal with three important classes
of NFRs for systems, namely, accuracy, security, and performance.
The studies provide preliminary support for the usefulness of certain
aspects of the framework, while raising some open issues.
ICSE95Long.ps.Z
---------------
A long version (initially submitted) of ICSE94.ps.Z
ICSQ94.ps.Z
-----------
Lawrence Chung, Brian A. Nixon and Eric Yu, ``Using Quality
Requirements to Systematically Develop Quality Software."
{\it Proceedings, Fourth International Conference on Software Quality,}
McLean, VA, U.S.A. October 3--5, 1994.
ABSTRACT:
=========
Although quality issues such as accuracy, security, and performance
are often crucial to the success of a software system, there has been
no systematic way to achieve quality requirements during system
development.
We offer a framework and an implemented tool which treat quality
requirements as {\em goals} to be achieved {\em systematically} during
the system development process. We illustrate the process that a
developer would go through, in building quality into a system.
We have tested the framework on a number of studies involving a
variety of quality requirements, organisational settings, and system
types.
ICSQ94Slides.ps.Z
-----------------
Slides used for presenting ICSQ94.ps.Z
IWASS95.ps.Z
----------------------
Lawrence Chung, Brian Nixon and Eric Yu, ``Using Non-Functional
Requirements to Systematically Select Among Alternatives in
Architectural Design.'' To be Presented at {\it ICSE-17 Workshop
on Architectures for Software Systems,} Seattle, Washington,
April 24--28, 1995.
ABSTRACT:
=========
Quality issues, such as modifiability, performance, reusability, and
comprehensibility, are often crucial to a software system. As such,
these non-functional requirements (or NFRs) should be addressed as
early as possible in a software lifecycle and properly built into a
software architecture before a detailed design proceeds on an otherwise
undesirable path.
The purpose of this paper is to discuss how the treatment of NFRs as
potentially synergistic or conflicting goals serves to systematically
guide selection among architectural design alternatives. During the
architectual design process, goals are decomposed, design alternatives
are analysed with respect to their tradeoffs, design decisions are
rationalised, goal achievement is evaluated, and a selection is made.
Throughout the process, a body of codified NFR-related knowledge is
used.
This approach is illustrated by a preliminary study of architectural
design process for KWIC (Key Word in Context).
RE95.ps.Z
---------
Lawrence Chung, Brian A. Nixon and Eric Yu, ``Using Non-Functional
Requirements to Systematically Support Change.'' To appear in
{\it Proceedings, IEEE 2nd International Symposium on Requirements
Engineering,}York, England, March 27--29, 1995.
ABSTRACT:
=========
Non-Functional requirements (or quality requirements, NFRs) such as
confidentiality, performance and timeliness are often crucial to a
software system. Our NFR-Framework treats NFRs as goals to be achieved
during the process of system development. Throughout the process, goals
are decomposed, design tradeoffs are analysed, design decisions are
rationalised, and goal achievement is evaluated.
This paper shows how an historical record of the treatment of NFRs
during the development process can also serve to systematically support
evolution of the software system. We treat changes in terms of
(i) adding or modifying NFRs, or changing their importance, and
(ii) changes in design decisions or design rationale.
This incremental approach is illustrated by a study of changes in
banking policies at Barclays Bank.
RE95Long.ps.Z
-------------
A long version (initially submitted) of RE95.ps.Z