Integrating requirements: The behavior tree philosophy

Winter, Kirsten, Hayes, Ian J. and Colvin, Robert (2010). Integrating requirements: The behavior tree philosophy. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Software Engineering and Formal Methods (SEFM 2010). Software Engineering and Formal Methods (SEFM 2010), Pisa, Italy, (41-50). 13-18 September 2010. doi:10.1109/SEFM.2010.13

Attached Files (Some files may be inaccessible until you login with your UQ eSpace credentials)
Name Description MIMEType Size Downloads

Author Winter, Kirsten
Hayes, Ian J.
Colvin, Robert
Title of paper Integrating requirements: The behavior tree philosophy
Conference name Software Engineering and Formal Methods (SEFM 2010)
Conference location Pisa, Italy
Conference dates 13-18 September 2010
Proceedings title Proceedings of International Conference on Software Engineering and Formal Methods (SEFM 2010)
Journal name Proceedings - Software Engineering and Formal Methods, SEFM 2010
Place of Publication United States
Publisher IEEE Computer Society
Publication Year 2010
Sub-type Fully published paper
DOI 10.1109/SEFM.2010.13
Open Access Status Not yet assessed
ISBN 9780769541532
Issue Article number 5637406
Start page 41
End page 50
Total pages 10
Language eng
Abstract/Summary Behavior Trees were invented by Geoff Dromey as a graphical modelling notation. Their design was driven by the desire to ease the task of capturing functional system requirements and to bridge the gap between an informal language description and a formal model. Vital to Dromey's intention is the idea of incrementally building the model out of its building blocks, the functional requirements. This is done by graphically representing each requirement as its own Behavior Tree and incrementally merging the trees to form a more complete model of the system. In this paper we investigate the essence of this constructive approach to creating a model in general notation-independent terms and discuss its advantages and disadvantages. The result can be seen as a framework of rules and provides us with a semantic underpinning of requirements integration. Integration points are identified by examining the (implicit or explicit) preconditions of each requirement. We use Behavior Trees as an example of how this framework can be put into practise. © 2010 IEEE.
Keyword Analysis
Behavior tree
Q-Index Code E1
Q-Index Status Confirmed Code
Institutional Status UQ
Additional Notes Session 1: Special Track in Memory of Geoff Dromey

Document type: Conference Paper
Sub-type: Fully published paper
Collections: Official 2011 Collection
School of Information Technology and Electrical Engineering Publications
Version Filter Type
Citation counts: Scopus Citation Count Cited 7 times in Scopus Article | Citations
Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Created: Wed, 09 Feb 2011, 21:29:53 EST by Dr Kirsten Winter on behalf of School of Information Technol and Elec Engineering