Results 1 
6 of
6
Techniques for Requirements Elicitation
 IN PROCEEDINGS, REQUIREMENTS ENGINEERING '93, EDITED BY STEPHEN FICKAS AND ANTHONY FINKELSTEIN
, 1993
"... This paper surveys and evaluates some techniques for eliciting requirements of computerbased systems, paying particular attention to how they deal with social issues. The methods surveyed include introspection, interviews, questionnaires, and protocol, conversation, interaction, and discourse analy ..."
Abstract

Cited by 134 (9 self)
 Add to MetaCart
This paper surveys and evaluates some techniques for eliciting requirements of computerbased systems, paying particular attention to how they deal with social issues. The methods surveyed include introspection, interviews, questionnaires, and protocol, conversation, interaction, and discourse analyses. Although they are relatively untried in Requirements Engineering, we believe there is much promise in the last three techniques, which grew out of ethnomethodology and sociolinguistics. In particular, they can elicit tacit knowledge by observing actual interactions in the workplace, and can also be applied to the system development process itself.
A Method for simultaneous Search for Refutations and Models by Equational Constraint Solving
 Journal of Symbolic Computation
, 1995
"... this paper selfcontained, we need to recall some fundamental definitions in [Comon and Lescanne, 1989] (in a slightly different formulation). ..."
Abstract

Cited by 46 (10 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
this paper selfcontained, we need to recall some fundamental definitions in [Comon and Lescanne, 1989] (in a slightly different formulation).
Combining decision procedures
 In Formal Methods at the Cross Roads: From Panacea to Foundational Support, Lecture Notes in Computer Science
, 2003
"... Abstract. We give a detailed survey of the NelsonOppen method for combining decision procedures, we show how Shostak's method can be seen as an instance of the NelsonOppen method, and we provide a generalization of the NelsonOppen method to the case of nondisjoint theories. 1 Introduction D ..."
Abstract

Cited by 10 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Abstract. We give a detailed survey of the NelsonOppen method for combining decision procedures, we show how Shostak's method can be seen as an instance of the NelsonOppen method, and we provide a generalization of the NelsonOppen method to the case of nondisjoint theories. 1 Introduction Decision procedures are algorithms that can reason about the validity or satisfiability of classes of formulae in a given decidable theory, and always terminate with a positive or negative answer.
Building Models By Using Tableaux Extended By Equational Problems
, 1993
"... The problem of model construction is known to be a very important one. An extension of semantic tableaux (that can also be applied to the matings and to the connection method) allowing the building of models in a systematic way is presented. This approach is different from the usual one in semantic ..."
Abstract

Cited by 5 (2 self)
 Add to MetaCart
The problem of model construction is known to be a very important one. An extension of semantic tableaux (that can also be applied to the matings and to the connection method) allowing the building of models in a systematic way is presented. This approach is different from the usual one in semantic tableaux, in which model construction is a byproduct of refutation failures (and this only in very particular cases). In fact, we incorporate in the object level, reasoning usually done in an ad hoc manner in the metalevel. Some of the rules introduced by this extension are essentially new. The impossibility of simulating them by the standard tableaux rules and their necessity in extending the class of captured models is shown. These rules and the modified classical ones are based on the use of equational problems. Equational problems are formulae containing only equalities and inequalities, connected by "and", "or" and quantified in a particular way. The method preserves the refutational...
Automated theorem proving: mapping logic into AI
 Proceedings of the International Symposium on Methodologies for Intelligent Systems
, 1986
"... ABSTRACT. Logic can be defined as the formal study of reasoning; if we replace "formal " by "mechanical " we can place almost the entire set of methodologies used in the field of automated theorem proving (ATP) within the scope of logic. Because of the goals of A ..."
Abstract

Cited by 2 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
ABSTRACT. Logic can be defined as the formal study of reasoning; if we replace &quot;formal &quot; by &quot;mechanical &quot; we can place almost the entire set of methodologies used in the field of automated theorem proving (ATP) within the scope of logic. Because of the goals of ATP, if not always the methodologies, ATP has been considered to be within the domain of AI. We explore the methodologies of ATP, including the logics that underlie the theorem provers, and discuss some of the mechanisms that utilize these logics. These include term rewriting systems, mathematical induction, inductionless induction and even mixed integer programming. The ATP field, via resolution, has even provided the foundation for an exciting AI and database programming language, PROLOG. We conclude with a new method for extending the PROLOG system to work with nonHorn clause sets within a positive logic format, particularly simple for &quot;slightly nonHorn &quot; clause sets.