Standard
The case for dumb requirements engineering tools. / Berry, Daniel; Gacitua, Ricardo
; Sawyer, Peter et al.
Requirements Engineering: Foundation for Software Quality 18th International Working Conference, REFSQ 2012, Essen, Germany, March 19-22, 2012. Proceedings. ed. / Björn Regnell ; Daniela Damian. Berlin: Springer, 2012. p. 211-217 (Lecture Notes in Computer Science; Vol. 7195).
Research output: Contribution in Book/Report/Proceedings - With ISBN/ISSN › Conference contribution/Paper › peer-review
Harvard
Berry, D, Gacitua, R
, Sawyer, P & Tjong, SF 2012,
The case for dumb requirements engineering tools. in B Regnell & D Damian (eds),
Requirements Engineering: Foundation for Software Quality 18th International Working Conference, REFSQ 2012, Essen, Germany, March 19-22, 2012. Proceedings. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 7195, Springer, Berlin, pp. 211-217.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-28714-5_18APA
Berry, D., Gacitua, R.
, Sawyer, P., & Tjong, S. F. (2012).
The case for dumb requirements engineering tools. In B. Regnell , & D. Damian (Eds.),
Requirements Engineering: Foundation for Software Quality 18th International Working Conference, REFSQ 2012, Essen, Germany, March 19-22, 2012. Proceedings (pp. 211-217). (Lecture Notes in Computer Science; Vol. 7195). Springer.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-28714-5_18Vancouver
Berry D, Gacitua R
, Sawyer P, Tjong SF.
The case for dumb requirements engineering tools. In Regnell B, Damian D, editors, Requirements Engineering: Foundation for Software Quality 18th International Working Conference, REFSQ 2012, Essen, Germany, March 19-22, 2012. Proceedings. Berlin: Springer. 2012. p. 211-217. (Lecture Notes in Computer Science). doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-28714-5_18
Author
Berry, Daniel ; Gacitua, Ricardo
; Sawyer, Peter et al. /
The case for dumb requirements engineering tools. Requirements Engineering: Foundation for Software Quality 18th International Working Conference, REFSQ 2012, Essen, Germany, March 19-22, 2012. Proceedings. editor / Björn Regnell ; Daniela Damian. Berlin : Springer, 2012. pp. 211-217 (Lecture Notes in Computer Science).
Bibtex
@inproceedings{5130fe339e16411db3aff43151fab33c,
title = "The case for dumb requirements engineering tools",
abstract = "[Context and Motivation] This paper notes the advanced state of the natural language (NL) processing art and considers four broad categories of tools for processing NL requirements documents. These tools are used in a variety of scenarios. The strength of a tool for a NL processing task is measured by its recall and precision. [Question/Problem] In some scenarios, for some tasks, any tool with less than 100% recall is not helpful and the user may be better off doing the task entirely manually. [Principal Ideas/Results] The paper suggests that perhaps a dumb tool doing an identifiable part of such a task may be better than an intelligent tool trying but failing in unidentifiable ways to do the entire task. [Contribution] Perhaps a new direction is needed in research for RE tools.",
author = "Daniel Berry and Ricardo Gacitua and Peter Sawyer and Tjong, {Sri Fatimah}",
year = "2012",
doi = "10.1007/978-3-642-28714-5_18",
language = "English",
isbn = "978-3-642-28713-8",
series = "Lecture Notes in Computer Science",
publisher = "Springer",
pages = "211--217",
editor = "{Regnell }, {Bj{\"o}rn } and Damian, {Daniela }",
booktitle = "Requirements Engineering: Foundation for Software Quality 18th International Working Conference, REFSQ 2012, Essen, Germany, March 19-22, 2012. Proceedings",
}
RIS
TY - GEN
T1 - The case for dumb requirements engineering tools
AU - Berry, Daniel
AU - Gacitua, Ricardo
AU - Sawyer, Peter
AU - Tjong, Sri Fatimah
PY - 2012
Y1 - 2012
N2 - [Context and Motivation] This paper notes the advanced state of the natural language (NL) processing art and considers four broad categories of tools for processing NL requirements documents. These tools are used in a variety of scenarios. The strength of a tool for a NL processing task is measured by its recall and precision. [Question/Problem] In some scenarios, for some tasks, any tool with less than 100% recall is not helpful and the user may be better off doing the task entirely manually. [Principal Ideas/Results] The paper suggests that perhaps a dumb tool doing an identifiable part of such a task may be better than an intelligent tool trying but failing in unidentifiable ways to do the entire task. [Contribution] Perhaps a new direction is needed in research for RE tools.
AB - [Context and Motivation] This paper notes the advanced state of the natural language (NL) processing art and considers four broad categories of tools for processing NL requirements documents. These tools are used in a variety of scenarios. The strength of a tool for a NL processing task is measured by its recall and precision. [Question/Problem] In some scenarios, for some tasks, any tool with less than 100% recall is not helpful and the user may be better off doing the task entirely manually. [Principal Ideas/Results] The paper suggests that perhaps a dumb tool doing an identifiable part of such a task may be better than an intelligent tool trying but failing in unidentifiable ways to do the entire task. [Contribution] Perhaps a new direction is needed in research for RE tools.
U2 - 10.1007/978-3-642-28714-5_18
DO - 10.1007/978-3-642-28714-5_18
M3 - Conference contribution/Paper
SN - 978-3-642-28713-8
T3 - Lecture Notes in Computer Science
SP - 211
EP - 217
BT - Requirements Engineering: Foundation for Software Quality 18th International Working Conference, REFSQ 2012, Essen, Germany, March 19-22, 2012. Proceedings
A2 - Regnell , Björn
A2 - Damian, Daniela
PB - Springer
CY - Berlin
ER -
