WP4 Models and Contents Quality Assessment

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Project Scope Management
Advertisements

ISBN Chapter 3 Describing Syntax and Semantics.
Formal Methods in Software Engineering Credit Hours: 3+0 By: Qaisar Javaid Assistant Professor Formal Methods in Software Engineering1.
July 11 th, 2005 Software Engineering with Reusable Components RiSE’s Seminars Sametinger’s book :: Chapters 16, 17 and 18 Fred Durão.
CSC 402 Requirements Engineering 1. 2 Problem Definition Requirements Definition informal statement of need for system natural language statement of what.
Chapter 5: Project Scope Management
Software Requirements
SE 555 Software Requirements & Specification Requirements Validation.
Describing Syntax and Semantics
Chapter 5: Project Scope Management
Chapter 4 Capturing the Requirements 4th Edition Shari L. Pfleeger
ANALYSIS OF SOFTWARE REQUIREMENTS S.Gnesi IEI-CNR Pisa Joint work with F.Fabbrini, M.Fusani, G.Lami.
Statistical Natural Language Processing. What is NLP?  Natural Language Processing (NLP), or Computational Linguistics, is concerned with theoretical.
Chapter 6– Artifacts of the process
The 2nd International Conference of e-Learning and Distance Education, 21 to 23 February 2011, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia Prof. Dr. Torky Sultan Faculty of Computers.
S/W Project Management
Software Engineering 2003 Jyrki Nummenmaa 1 REQUIREMENT SPECIFICATION Today: Requirements Specification Requirements tell us what the system should.
SE-02 SOFTWARE ENGINEERING LECTURE 3 Today: Requirements Analysis Requirements tell us what the system should do - not how it should do it. Requirements.
VTT-STUK assessment method for safety evaluation of safety-critical computer based systems - application in BE-SECBS project.
Chapter 5 Defining and Managing Project and Product Scope Copyright 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 5-1.
Information Technology Project Management, Seventh Edition Note: See the text itself for full citations.
Software Engineering – University of Tampere, CS DepartmentJyrki Nummenmaa REQUIREMENT SPECIFICATION Today: Requirements Specification.
Verification and Validation in the Context of Domain-Specific Modelling Janne Merilinna.
1 Introduction to Software Engineering Lecture 1.
Requirements Engineering Methods for Requirements Engineering Lecture-30.
The Role of Experience in Software Testing Practice Zahra Molaei Soheil Hedayatitezengi Comp 587 Prof. Lingard 1 of 21.
FDT Foil no 1 On Methodology from Domain to System Descriptions by Rolv Bræk NTNU Workshop on Philosophy and Applicablitiy of Formal Languages Geneve 15.
Requirement Elicitation Review – Class 8 Functional Requirements Nonfunctional Requirements Software Requirements document Requirements Validation and.
Information Technology Project Management, Seventh Edition.
©Ian Sommerville 2004Software Engineering, 7th edition. Chapter 6 Slide 1 Software Requirements (utvalgte foiler fra Kap 6 og 7 i Sommerville)
Laurea Triennale in Informatica – Corso di Ingegneria del Software I – A.A. 2006/2007 Andrea Polini XVII. Verification and Validation.
Jeremy Nimmer, page 1 Automatic Generation of Program Specifications Jeremy Nimmer MIT Lab for Computer Science Joint work with.
DARE: Domain analysis and reuse environment Minwoo Hong William Frakes, Ruben Prieto-Diaz and Christopher Fox Annals of Software Engineering,
WP8: Demonstrators (UniCam – Regione Marche)
Project Planning: Scope and the Work Breakdown Structure
Business process management (BPM)
Lecture 3 Prescriptive Process Models
Definition CASE tools are software systems that are intended to provide automated support for routine activities in the software process such as editing.
Software Requirements
Writing Requirements Lecture # 23.
Object-Oriented Software Engineering Using UML, Patterns, and Java,
KM3NeT 2.0 Kick-off meeting, Athens,
Alfonso Pierantonio Università degli Studi dell’Aquila
Scenario used in the live demos
WP5: Collaborative Contents Management
Future-oriented Benchmarking Through Social Media Analysis
Business process management (BPM)
Introduction to Control Flow Patterns and BizAgi
Chapter 5: Project Scope Management
CAPE Internal Assessment
Software Requirements
Requirements Analysis and Specification
Chapter 5: Project Scope Management
By Dr. Abdulrahman H. Altalhi
Daniel Amyot and Jun Biao Yan
Chapter 5: Project Scope Management
Presented By: Bill Curtis-Davidson
Object-Oriented Analysis
Lecture Software Process Definition and Management Chapter 3: Descriptive Process Models Dr. Jürgen Münch Fall
Methontology: From Ontological art to Ontological Engineering
Chapter 9 Use Cases.
Managing a Web Server and Files
ece 627 intelligent web: ontology and beyond
Software Requirements Specification Document
Requirements Document
Chapter 5 Understanding Requirements.
Dr. Jiacun Wang Department of Software Engineering Monmouth University
Starter: 1. Suggest two more pieces of observational data that could be collected by the psychologist, one qualitative and one quantitative.    2. One.
Managing Project Work, Scope, Schedules, and Cost
Put the Lesson Title Here
Presentation transcript:

WP4 Models and Contents Quality Assessment Stefania Gnesi CNR WP4 Models and Contents Quality Assessment

AGENDA WP 4: Motivation and objectives Timing and deliverables Activity in tasks Task 4.1: Formal Verification of Business Processes Task 4.2: Linguistic Quality Evaluation Task 4.3: Feedback-based Quality Evaluation Conclusions

WP 4:Models and Contents Quality Assessment WP4 investigates on the quality assessment of the BP model specifications, and its related learning contents. The quality assessment will be based on both: formal verification and natural languages processing techniques.

WP4: objectives The collaborative approach to the definition of models and contents makes highly desirable the availability of automatic tools for quality assessment of BPs so to direct the activity of the community in order to have better learning material. Natural languages processing techniques will be applied for quality assessment of collaboratively provided contents to investigate on interaction patterns for BPs modeling typically used within the public administrations. 3 different tasks: Task 4.1: Formal Verification of Business Processes Task 4.2: Linguistic Quality Evaluation Task 4.3: Feedback-based Quality Evaluation

WP 4 Gantt

Deliverables D4.1: Quality Assessment Strategies for BP Models (UNICAM) (M18) The deliverable will report the results of the formal verification strategies research activities, and it will specifically describe the verification strategies which will be included within the Learn PAd platform.

D4.2: Quality Assessment Strategies for Contents (CNR) (M21) Deliverables D4.2: Quality Assessment Strategies for Contents (CNR) (M21) The deliverable will report the results of the linguistic quality assessment research activities, and it will specifically describe the strategies which will be included within the Learn PAd platform.

Deliverables D4.3: Quality Assessment Mechanisms Implementation (CNR) (M27) This deliverable will be constituted by the final release of the software quality assessment mechanisms included in the Learn PAd platform.

Task 4.1: Formal Verification of Business Processes The business process model must be analysed and improved to make sure (i) It actually includes all desired instances and (ii) It does not contain any undesired properties: Definition of modeling guidelines for process expert. Basic guidelines should address the way of graphically designing the BP model, and the way of editing the text in the BP model. Guidelines ease the automatic processing task. Standard verification activities for business process models will be implemented by mapping the BP in Petri Nets based notations. Verification activities will also consider possible data structure specified within BP models. In a PA this information typically relates to documents for which the status change according to the different activities performed by one office.

Verification of Process Models Relevant Properties: Soundness Option to Complete: a process instance, once started, can always complete No dead activities: a process model does not contain any dead activity, i.e., for each activity there exists at least one completed trace producible on that model and containing this activity Proper Completion: when a process instance completes there exists no related activity of this instance which is still running or enabled

Mapping BPMN models to Petri Net Verification of Process Models Into Practice NoMagic Modelling Environment BOC Modelling Environment XWIKI pages As soon as the models satisfy the requested properties BP Verification Mapping BPMN models to Petri Net Model Unfolding Properties Assessement

Task 4.2: Linguistic Quality Evaluation This task aims at: defining and implementing automated procedures to verify that the textual content that describes the tasks of a business process (i.e., the XWiki documents) provides information that is consistent with respect to the business process model itself: automatically identifyng ambiguous sentences and vague terms in natural language descriptions, and estimates quantitative indexes concerning the linguistic quality of the contents.

NLP Rule-based Machine Learning Domain Jargon Ambiguity Readability

Task 4.2: Linguistic Quality Evaluation Categories of lexical and syntactical ambiguities Optionality: unclear optional choices (and/or, if necessary, optionally) Subjectivity: usage of terms that may involve the judgment of the reader (similar, take into account, better, as possible) Vagueness: usage of generic terms (acceptable, accurate, relevant, effective) Weakness: usage of verbs that indicate possibility (can, could, might, would)

Task 4.2: Linguistic Quality Evaluation Experiments with the QuARS tool for ambiguity detection requirements have been performed on a set of PA documents: novel classes of linguistic problems have to be defined for PA documents with respect to those classes detected through QuARS.  a set of PA documents has been retrieved from the Web, and a set of interviews have been performed with civil servants to highlight linguistic problems that are typical of PA documents. 

Task 4.2:Questionnaire Results (Partial)

Task 4.2: Linguistic Quality Evaluation . 

Task 4.3: Feedback-based Quality Evaluation The plan is to define a collaborative assessment of linguistic content basing on Machine Learning approach: to employ user feedbacks to define guidelines for writing high-quality Xwiki documents from the point of view of the user. to define a human annotated data-set to train machine learning algorithms that automatically identify poorly written (e.g., incomplete, difficult to understand, poorly structured) XWiki documents.

Thank you for your attention! Questions?

Software Tool Chain in Detail