Nederlands
Contact
Sitemap
Search
OrganisationEEMCS EPrints Service
 |
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Wieringa, R.J.
(2003)
Methodologies of requirements engineering research and practice: position statement.
In: CERE '03 Comparative Evaluation in Requirements Engineering: The First International Workshop on Comparative Evaluation in Requirements Engineering. Held in conjunction with the 11th IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference, 8 Sept 2003, Monterey Bay, California, USA.
ISBN not assigned
Full text available as:
Official URL: http://www.di.unipi.it/CERE03/cere03-wieringa.pdf AbstractIn this position paper I argue that RE practice is the problem analysis part of a design problem, and that this problem analysis part is a knowledge problem in which the requirements engineer tries to build a theory of a problem domain. RE research is a knowledge problem too, in which the researcher tries to build partial theories of a class of domains. In both cases, models can help to find theories, because models are entities that are more accessible, or more understandable, than their subjects and therefore help to find a theory of their subject. I compare a number of concepts closely related to that of a model, including that of paradigm, benchmark and exemplar. Finally, I argue that the evaluation of RE theories, at whatever level, is not different from the evaluation of any other theory: They should be repeatably and intersubjectively true.
Export this item as: To correct this item please ask your editor Repository Staff Only: edit this item |
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
