The discussion at past REFSQ conferences had confirmed the strong need for empirical validation of the effectiveness for our RE methods, but the literature to date, including that of REFSQ, could show more of this validation. This lack was assumed to be at least partly due to the difficulty of finding and persuading the participation of a sufficient number of suitable experimental subjects. To address this lack, the 2011 edition of REFSQ featured a new multi-event Empirical Track.
One event of the Empirical Track was an alive experiment conducted during a plenary session early in the REFSQ conference. The goals of this event, besides that of permitting the conduct of an experiment, were to raise awareness for the necessity and benefits of empirical studies and to show that participating in them is not dangerous to one’s health. Specifically, REFSQ 2011 participants were invited to participate in an experiment about risk estimation. Preliminary results of the experiment were reported in a plenary session at the end of the conference, and the detailed results of the experiment were reported at the following year’s REFSQ.
It is clearly understood in the Requirements Engineering (RE) community that case studies of industry projects are critical for our in-depth understanding of both: (a) the phenomena occurring in projects, processes, systems, and services and (b) the impact of our RE methods on the quality, cost, and deliverability of systems.
Therefore, a second event of the Empirical Track, an empirical fair tried to match (1) industrial sites that wanted experiments done with researchers willing to do them and (2) researchers proposing to do particular experiments with industrial sites willing to let the proposed experiments be done at their sites. To encourage industry participation, the format of this event is a match-making session in which the authors of the accepted proposals present posters on their intended empirical studies and the audience can view them and enter into a good discussion on the studies’ goals, benefits, and procedures. Besides encouraging matches, we wanted to bring together the community of researchers and practitioners who are interested in empirical studies.
In 2012, we introduced a third event to the Empirical Track, in which REFSQ participants were invited to fill out in their spare time, some online questionnaires, each of which requires at most 30 minutes to fill out.
This year’s REFSQ continues the three-event Empirical Track. Accordingly, we issued a call for the following kinds of submissions:
- Alive Empirical Study: a controlled experiment, requiring no more than 90 minutes, that involves all REFSQ participants who want to participate,
- Online Questionnaire: an online questionnaire (survey), designed to require no more than 30 minutes, that is promoted at REFSQ and that can be filled out by all interested REFSQ participants, and in their spare time at the conference.
- Empirical Research Fair Proposal: a poster describing an empirical study that a researcher, or industrial practitioner, would like conducted in an, or in his or her own, industrial setting.
After careful consideration of the submitted proposals, one alive empirical study, four online questionnaires, and four empirical research fair proposals were accepted.
Alive Empirical Study
- A Quasi-Experiment for Studying the Effect of Experience on Elicitation Effectiveness, conducted by Alejandrina M. Aranda, Oscar Dieste, and Natalia Juristo, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, Facultad de Informática, Campus de Montegancedo, Boadilla del Monte, Spain
This experiment aims to evaluate the effect of experience on requirements elicitation. Participants are required to have at least two years of experience in requirements elicitation. Researchers will play the role of customers, whereas participants will perform the role of analysts.The main benefit to participants of this experiment is an improved understanding of the experience–effectiveness relationship in requirements elicitation.
- Using a Pattern Catalogue in Requirements Engineering Activities, conducted by Cristina Palomares, Xavier Franch, and Carme Quer, GESSI Research Group, Universitat Politécnica de Catalunya (UPC), Barcelona, Spain
- A Survey on Lessons Learnt in Requirements Engineering, conducted by Ibtehal Noorwali and Nazim H. Madhavji, Department of Computer Science, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada
- Why do you Install Apps?, conducted by Mariano Ceccato, Alessandro Marchetto, Anna Perini, and Angelo Susi, Fondazione Bruno Kessler, Trento, Italy
- Prioritization of Security Requirements for Cloud Computing, conducted by Georg Herzwurm, Norman Pelzl, Benedikt Krams, and Sixten Schockert, Department for Business Administration and Information Systems II, esp. Business Software, University of Stuttgart, Stuttgart, Germany
The URLs for accessing the online questionnaire will be provided in the plenary sessions, on posters at the conference, on additional sheets in your bag, and once the conference has started, HERE.
Empirical Research Fair
- Automation Supported Requirements Prioritization for Software Testing Purposes, by Michael Felderer, Boban Celebic, Christian Haisjackl, Ruth Breu, University of Innsbruck, Institute of Computer Science Innsbruck, Austria
- Understanding technical debt for better requirements prioritization, by Maya Daneva, University of Twente, the Netherlands
- Necessity of Electronic Requirements Negotiation, by Georg Herzwurm, Benedikt Krams, Sixten Schockert, Department for Business Administration and Information Systems II, esp. Business Software, University of Stuttgart, Stuttgart, Germany
- Using a Pattern Catalogue in Requirements Engineering Activities, by Cristina Palomares, Xavier Franch, Carme Quer, GESSI Research Group, Universitat Politécnica de Catalunya (UPC), Barcelona, Spain
- A Quasi-Experiment for Studying the Effect of Experience on Elicitation Effectiveness, by Alejandrina M. Aranda, Oscar Dieste, and Natalia Juristo, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, Facultad de Informática, Campus de Montegancedo, Boadilla del Monte, Spain
The posters will be displayed also throughout the conference.
Important Dates and Times
|REFSQ Main Conference:||9-11th April 2013|
|Alive Empirical Study:||Wednesday 10 April, 11:00–12:30|
|Empirical Research Fair:||Wednesday 10 April, 16:20–17:30|
|Preliminary Report on Alive Empirical Study:||Thursday 11 April, 14:50–15:10|
Norbert Seyff, University of Zurich, Switzerland
Daniel M. Berry, University of Waterloo, Canada
Sebastian Adam, Fraunhofer IESE, Germany
Ian Alexander, Scenario Plus, UK
Claudia P. Ayala, Technical University of Catalunya, Spain
Maya Daneva, University of Twente, The Netherlands
Deepak Dhungana, Siemens AG, Austria
Christof Ebert, Vector, Germany
Samuel Fricker, Blekinge Institute of Technology, Sweden
Thomas Gehrke, Siemens Rail Automation, Germany
Martin Herget, Siemens Corporate Technology, Germany
Andrea Herrmann, Infoman AG, Germany
Frank Houdek, Daimler AG, Germany
James Hulgan, Seilevel Inc, USA
Andreas Jedlitschka, Fraunhofer IESE, Germany
Eric Knauss, University of Victoria, Canada
Anne Koziolek, University of Zurich, Switzerland
Søren Lauesen, IT-University of Copenhagen, Denmark
Nazim H. Madhavji, University of Western Ontario, Canada
Luisa Mich, University of Trento, Italy
Gil Regev, EPFL and Itecor, Switzerland
Björn Regnell, Lund University, Sweden
Mehrdad Sabetzadeh, Simula Research Laboratory, Norway
Victoria Sakhnini, University of Waterloo, Canada
Camille Salinesi, Université de Paris 1 – Panthéon Sorbonne, France
Erik Simmons, Intel, USA
Karen Smiley, ABB Corporation, USA
Roel Wieringa, University of Twente, Netherlands