TY - JOUR
T1 - The Concept of Order of Conflict in Requirements Engineering
AU - Salado, Alejandro
AU - Nilchiani, Roshanak
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2014 IEEE.
PY - 2016/3
Y1 - 2016/3
N2 - Conventional approaches to system design use requirements as boundary conditions against which the design activity occurs. Decisions at a given level of the architecture decomposition can result in the flowing down of conflicting requirements, which are easy to fulfill in isolation but extremely difficult when dealt with simultaneously. Designing against such sets of requirements considerably limits system affordability. Existing research on the evaluation of such conflicts primarily seek to determine the level of conflicts between pairs of requirements. We assert in this paper that these methods are incomplete and using traditional methodologies can result in missing significant conflicts between groups of requirements. We provide a mathematical proof for this assertion and present two case studies that support the mathematical proof. We present the concept of "order of conflict." The objective of this paper is to prove why pairwise-based conflicting requirements identification and analysis methods based on pairwise comparisons are flawed.
AB - Conventional approaches to system design use requirements as boundary conditions against which the design activity occurs. Decisions at a given level of the architecture decomposition can result in the flowing down of conflicting requirements, which are easy to fulfill in isolation but extremely difficult when dealt with simultaneously. Designing against such sets of requirements considerably limits system affordability. Existing research on the evaluation of such conflicts primarily seek to determine the level of conflicts between pairs of requirements. We assert in this paper that these methods are incomplete and using traditional methodologies can result in missing significant conflicts between groups of requirements. We provide a mathematical proof for this assertion and present two case studies that support the mathematical proof. We present the concept of "order of conflict." The objective of this paper is to prove why pairwise-based conflicting requirements identification and analysis methods based on pairwise comparisons are flawed.
KW - Conflict identification
KW - conflicting requirements
KW - satellite communication
KW - system architecture
KW - system theory
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84899596259&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84899596259&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1109/JSYST.2014.2315597
DO - 10.1109/JSYST.2014.2315597
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:84899596259
SN - 1932-8184
VL - 10
SP - 25
EP - 35
JO - IEEE Systems Journal
JF - IEEE Systems Journal
IS - 1
M1 - 6807513
ER -