東華大學圖書館 |

語系: 繁體中文

說明(常見問題)

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

登入

回首頁

切換: 標籤 | MARC模式 | ISBD

FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

A Quantitative Comparison of the Effects of Modeling Approaches on System Verification Using a Controlled Challenge Problem.

紀錄類型:	書目-電子資源 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	A Quantitative Comparison of the Effects of Modeling Approaches on System Verification Using a Controlled Challenge Problem./
作者:	Barrett, Donald A.
面頁冊數:	1 online resource (223 pages)
附註:	Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 83-03, Section: B.
Contained By:	Dissertations Abstracts International83-03B.
標題:	Engineering. -
電子資源:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=28717294click for full text (PQDT)
ISBN:	9798535596655

A Quantitative Comparison of the Effects of Modeling Approaches on System Verification Using a Controlled Challenge Problem.
Barrett, Donald A.

A Quantitative Comparison of the Effects of Modeling Approaches on System Verification Using a Controlled Challenge Problem. - 1 online resource (223 pages)

Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 83-03, Section: B.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--The George Washington University, 2021.

Includes bibliographical references

To reduce program risks, engineering methods capitalizing on modeling and machine assistance have been extensively investigated within systems engineering (and more specifically requirements engineering) literature over the past 20 years. However, there are few quantitative comparisons between model-based approaches and legacy document-centric approaches. Studies have shown that the lack of data regarding improvements of modeling has decelerated the adoption of model-based practices. To help address this gap, a screening experiment was conducted to compare the effects of modeling on an engineer's ability to determine if a system has met its originating requirements. First, a notional acquisition program was created based on an unmanned aerial system, including originating requirements as well as both document and model-based design artifacts. Requirements were captured in both a traditional requirements document and a goal-oriented requirements engineering model. System implementation data was captured in both traditional document artifacts and a SysML model. Participants of varying experience levels used randomized combinations of document and model-based approaches to determine whether the notional system met its requirements. The experiment measured the review duration and accuracy, permitting analysis of the effects of model-based approaches for both requirements and system implementation data. The results of the experiment showed that use of a requirements model did not statistically affect the review. A system implementation model was shown to improve novice participants' reviews but did not statistically affect experienced participants. The results of this research should inform future research on the use of models, particularly the return on the modeling investment.

Electronic reproduction.
Ann Arbor, Mich. :
ProQuest,
2023

Mode of access: World Wide Web

ISBN: 9798535596655Subjects--Topical Terms:

586835
Engineering.
Subjects--Index Terms:

Requirements EngineeringIndex Terms--Genre/Form:

542853
Electronic books.

A Quantitative Comparison of the Effects of Modeling Approaches on System Verification Using a Controlled Challenge Problem.
LDR:03168nmm a2200361K 4500 001 2358069
005 20230725094941.5
006 m o d
007 cr mn ---uuuuu
008 241011s2021 xx obm 000 0 eng d
020 $a 9798535596655
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI28717294
035 $a AAI28717294
040 $a MiAaPQ $b eng $c MiAaPQ $d NTU
100 1 $a Barrett, Donald A. $3 3698601
245 1 2 $a A Quantitative Comparison of the Effects of Modeling Approaches on System Verification Using a Controlled Challenge Problem.
264 0 $c 2021
300 $a 1 online resource (223 pages)
336 $a text $b txt $2 rdacontent
337 $a computer $b c $2 rdamedia
338 $a online resource $b cr $2 rdacarrier
500 $a Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 83-03, Section: B.
500 $a Advisor: Sarkani, Shahram; Mazzuchi, Thomas.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--The George Washington University, 2021.
504 $a Includes bibliographical references
520 $a To reduce program risks, engineering methods capitalizing on modeling and machine assistance have been extensively investigated within systems engineering (and more specifically requirements engineering) literature over the past 20 years. However, there are few quantitative comparisons between model-based approaches and legacy document-centric approaches. Studies have shown that the lack of data regarding improvements of modeling has decelerated the adoption of model-based practices. To help address this gap, a screening experiment was conducted to compare the effects of modeling on an engineer's ability to determine if a system has met its originating requirements. First, a notional acquisition program was created based on an unmanned aerial system, including originating requirements as well as both document and model-based design artifacts. Requirements were captured in both a traditional requirements document and a goal-oriented requirements engineering model. System implementation data was captured in both traditional document artifacts and a SysML model. Participants of varying experience levels used randomized combinations of document and model-based approaches to determine whether the notional system met its requirements. The experiment measured the review duration and accuracy, permitting analysis of the effects of model-based approaches for both requirements and system implementation data. The results of the experiment showed that use of a requirements model did not statistically affect the review. A system implementation model was shown to improve novice participants' reviews but did not statistically affect experienced participants. The results of this research should inform future research on the use of models, particularly the return on the modeling investment.
533 $a Electronic reproduction. $b Ann Arbor, Mich. : $c ProQuest, $d 2023
538 $a Mode of access: World Wide Web
650 4 $a Engineering. $3 586835
650 4 $a Accuracy. $3 3559958
650 4 $a Usability. $3 3681540
650 4 $a Interoperability. $3 3683437
650 4 $a User experience. $3 3543994
650 4 $a Ontology. $3 530874
650 4 $a Communication. $3 524709
650 4 $a Systems design. $3 3433840
650 4 $a Payloads. $3 3685274
650 4 $a Requirements analysis. $3 3681869
650 4 $a User interface. $3 3681528
650 4 $a Systems development. $3 3690566
650 4 $a Variance analysis. $3 3544969
650 4 $a Systems science. $3 3168411
653 $a Requirements Engineering
653 $a Systems engineering
655 7 $a Electronic books. $2 lcsh $3 542853
690 $a 0537
690 $a 0459
690 $a 0790
710 2 $a ProQuest Information and Learning Co. $3 783688
710 2 $a The George Washington University. $b Systems Engineering. $3 1032058
773 0 $t Dissertations Abstracts International $g 83-03B.
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=28717294 $z click for full text (PQDT)