Requirements modeling languages for software product lines: A systematic literature review

Por favor, use este identificador para citar o enlazar este ítem: http://hdl.handle.net/10045/97575
Información del item - Informació de l'item - Item information
Título: Requirements modeling languages for software product lines: A systematic literature review
Autor/es: Sepúlveda, Samuel | Cravero Leal, Ania | Cachero, Cristina
Grupo/s de investigación o GITE: Advanced deveLopment and empIrical research on Software (ALISoft)
Centro, Departamento o Servicio: Universidad de Alicante. Departamento de Lenguajes y Sistemas Informáticos
Palabras clave: Requirements engineering | Modeling languages | Software product lines | Systematic literature review
Área/s de conocimiento: Lenguajes y Sistemas Informáticos
Fecha de publicación: ene-2016
Editor: Elsevier
Cita bibliográfica: Information and Software Technology. 2016, 69: 16-36. doi:10.1016/j.infsof.2015.08.007
Resumen: Context: Software product lines (SPLs) have reached a considerable level of adoption in the software industry, having demonstrated their cost-effectiveness for developing higher quality products with lower costs. For this reason, in the last years the requirements engineering community has devoted much effort to the development of a myriad of requirements modelling languages for SPLs. Objective: In this paper, we review and synthesize the current state of research of requirements modelling languages used in SPLs with respect to their degree of empirical validation, origin and context of use, level of expressiveness, maturity, and industry adoption. Method: We have conducted a systematic literature review with six research questions that cover the main objective. It includes 54 studies, published from 2000 to 2013. Results: The mean level of maturity of the modelling languages is 2.59 over 5, with 46% of them falling within level 2 or below -no implemented abstract syntax reported-. They show a level of expressiveness of 0.7 over 1.0. Some constructs (feature, mandatory, optional, alternative, exclude and require) are present in all the languages, while others (cardinality, attribute, constraint and label) are less common. Only 6% of the languages have been empirically validated, 41% report some kind of industry adoption and 71% of the languages are independent from any development process. Last but not least, 57% of the languages have been proposed by the academia, while 43% have been the result of a joint effort between academia and industry. Conclusions: Research on requirements modeling languages for SPLs has generated a myriad of languages that differ in the set of constructs provided to express SPL requirements. Their general lack of empirical validation and adoption in industry, together with their differences in maturity, draws the picture of a discipline that still needs to evolve.
Patrocinador/es: This work was supported by the project DIUFRO DI14-0065, Vicerrectoría de Investigación y Postgrado, Universidad de La Frontera.
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/10045/97575
ISSN: 0950-5849 (Print) | 1873-6025 (Online)
DOI: 10.1016/j.infsof.2015.08.007
Idioma: eng
Tipo: info:eu-repo/semantics/article
Derechos: © 2015 Elsevier B.V.
Revisión científica: si
Versión del editor: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2015.08.007
Aparece en las colecciones:INV - ALISoft - Artículos de Revistas

Archivos en este ítem:
Archivos en este ítem:
Archivo Descripción TamañoFormato 
Thumbnail2016_Sepulveda_etal_InfSoftTech_final.pdfVersión final (acceso restringido)2,43 MBAdobe PDFAbrir    Solicitar una copia


Todos los documentos en RUA están protegidos por derechos de autor. Algunos derechos reservados.