Francis Palma, profile picture
Uploaded byFrancis Palma
PDF, PPTX618 views

Using Interactive Genetic Algorithm for Requirements Prioritization

This document describes using a genetic algorithm to prioritize requirements. It begins with an outline and introduction to the problem of prioritizing software requirements. It then discusses related prioritization techniques from literature and how they have limitations like poor scalability. The document proposes using a genetic algorithm to prioritize requirements, leveraging domain knowledge graphs representing priority and dependencies. It describes representing potential solutions as individuals in a population, calculating fitness by counting disagreements with domain knowledge, and using genetic operators like crossover to evolve better solutions over generations. The goal is to find a prioritized requirements list that best satisfies constraints and delivers value to users.

Technology◦
Related topics:
Genetic Algorithms•

Embed presentation

Download as PDF, PPTX
Using Interactive Genetic Algorithm for Requirements Prioritization Francis Palma Department of Information Engineering and Computer Science UniversitĂĄ degli Studi di Trento francis.palma@studenti.unitn.it December 3, 2010 Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions
Presentation Outline Using Interactive Genetic Algorithm for Requirements Prioritization  Problem description  Related works  Genetic Algorithm  Our approach  Case study  Results  Conclusions 2 Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions
Problem Description Using Interactive Genetic Algorithm for Requirements Prioritization Problem: [Prioritization of Requirements] To find the best ordering of requirements in each successive release to ensure quality & value of the delivered system, trade-off constraints & end-user satisfaction. 3 Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions Do Trade-off between user needs & real constraints Now, highest quality & best valued system!
Using Interactive Genetic Algorithm for Requirements Prioritization 4 1. Acquisition and coding of set of Requirements and Domain Knowledge 2. Apply A Prioritization Technique 3. Output of the ranking Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions Problem Description (cont) Find it!Why Ordered List? Order of implementation satisfy the developers’ constraints & delivers maximum value to the user.
Domain Knowledge: Prio & Dep Using Interactive Genetic Algorithm for Requirements Prioritization 5 Domain knowledge includes two precedence graphs • Prio • Dep How to build them? Prio: For 1st release, initial priorities Dep: For 1st release, dependencies Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions Prio Dep
Classification: State-of-the-Art approaches Using Interactive Genetic Algorithm for Requirements Prioritization 6 Prioritization Approaches Classification using user knowledge either performing pair-wise comparison or not using domain knowledge using both Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions  User Knowledge refers to the awareness of the requirements attributes and the overall system functionalities to be developed
State-of-the-Art approaches (cont) Using Interactive Genetic Algorithm for Requirements Prioritization 7 Pairwise Comparison based approaches Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP): involves comparing all unique pairs of requirements to determine which of the two is of higher priority, and to what extent Bubble Sort: compares two requirements & swap them if they are in the wrong order Cost-Value Approach: each individual requirement is determined on (i) the value to the users (ii) the cost of implementing the requirements. It uses the AHP technique Case Based Ranking (CBRank): exploits a machine learning algorithm to guide the elicitation of user preferences during the prioritization process Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions
State-of-the-Art approaches (cont) Using Interactive Genetic Algorithm for Requirements Prioritization 8 Non-Pairwise comparison based approaches Numerical Assignment: grouping requirements into different priority groups MoScoW: groups all requirements into four priority groups MUST have, SHOULD have, COULD have, and WON’T have. Simple Ranking: requirements are simply ranked from integer 1 to N Binary Search Tree: each node represents a requirement, requirements placed in the left subtree of a node are of lower priority and those placed in the right subtree of a node are of higher priority than the node priority. $100 Method: each stakeholder is asked to assume having $100 to distribute over the requirements in a ratio scale Combining Techniques based approaches Planning Game: combination of two prioritization techniques i.e. Numerical Assignment & Simple Ranking Domain Knowledge based approaches Priority Groups: dividing requirements into separate groups. then groups are ranked by using AHP Genetic Algorithm: optimization is an application of GA & used in the problem of requirements prioritization too; uses domain knowledge Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions
State-of-the-Art approaches (cont) Using Interactive Genetic Algorithm for Requirements Prioritization 9 Summary Approach Cons AHP Scalability Bubble Sort Scalability, time CBRank unable to accept constraints i.e. Dep Cost-Value Approach Time consuming BST Sensitivity; a single error may build wrong tree GA Can’t resolve contradictory; $100 Method Longer; less confidence, biased MoScoW Ambiguous final ordering Simple Ranking unable handling complex scenarios Scalability is a very common problem of all the approaches! Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions
Genetic Algorithm Using Interactive Genetic Algorithm for Requirements Prioritization 10 1. Acquisition and coding of set of Requirements and Domain Knowledge 2. Apply Genetic Algorithm (no user knowledge) 3. Output of the ranking (the most promising individual) Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions
Genetic Algorithm Pseudo Code Using Interactive Genetic Algorithm for Requirements Prioritization 11 The Canonical GA (a simple pseudo code is presented here): 1. choose initial population 2. evaluate each individual’s fitness REPEAT: 3. select best-ranking individuals to reproduce 4. apply crossover operator 5. apply mutation operator 6. evaluate each individual’s fitness until terminating condition (e.g. until at least one individual has the desired fitness or enough generations have passed) Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions
What is Population & Individuals? Using Interactive Genetic Algorithm for Requirements Prioritization 12 Indv. ID Individual Disagree Pr1 < R1, R3, R2, R4, R5, R6, R7, R8, R9 > Pr2 < R2, R3, R4, R1, R5, R8, R6, R7, R9 > Pr3 < R5, R2, R1, R3, R7, R8, R6, R9, R4 > Pr4 < R4, R5, R6, R3, R2, R1, R8, R9, R7 > Pr5 < R7, R8, R6, R5, R2, R3, R4, R9, R1 > Pr6 < R5, R6, R7, R8, R9, R1, R2, R3, R4 > Pr7 < R9, R8, R7, R6, R5, R4, R3, R2, R1 > Pr8 < R8, R9, R6, R7, R4, R5, R2, R3, R1 > Pr9 < R1, R3, R5, R7, R9, R2, R4, R6, R8 > Pr10 < R1, R4, R2, R3, R5, R6, R9, R8, R7 > R1 R3 R2 R4 R5 R6 R7 R8 R9 Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions Population! A set of solution candidates Pr1 An individual, also a solution candidate A requirement as a gene
Using Interactive Genetic Algorithm for Requirements Prioritization 13 How we define Individual’s Fitness? Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions
Domain Knowledge Encoding Using Interactive Genetic Algorithm for Requirements Prioritization 14 Transform the domain knowledge into graphs Req Priorities Dependencies R1 10 R2, R3, R7 R2 20 R3 R3 10 R4 20 R5 30 R4, R8 R6 40 R7 30 R3 R8 20 R9 50 R8, R5 Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions
Disagreement Calculation Using Interactive Genetic Algorithm for Requirements Prioritization 15 Indv. ID Individual Disagree Pr1 < R1, R3, R2, R4, R5, R6, R7, R8, R9 > Pr2 < R2, R3, R4, R1, R5, R8, R6, R7, R9 > Pr3 < R5, R2, R1, R3, R7, R8, R6, R9, R4 > Pr4 < R4, R5, R6, R3, R2, R1, R8, R9, R7 > Pr5 < R7, R8, R6, R5, R2, R3, R4, R9, R1 > Pr6 < R5, R6, R7, R8, R9, R1, R2, R3, R4 > Pr7 < R9, R8, R7, R6, R5, R4, R3, R2, R1 > Pr8 < R8, R9, R6, R7, R4, R5, R2, R3, R1 > Pr9 < R1, R3, R5, R7, R9, R2, R4, R6, R8 > Pr10 < R1, R4, R2, R3, R5, R6, R9, R8, R7 > R1 R3 R2 R4 R5 R6 R7 R8 R9 Conflicts = {(R5, R8), (R6, R7), (R6, R8), (R7, R8)} Prio Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions For Pr1
Disagreement Calculation (cont) Using Interactive Genetic Algorithm for Requirements Prioritization 16 Indv. ID Individuals Disagree Pr1 < R1, R3, R2, R4, R5, R6, R7, R8, R9 > Pr2 < R2, R3, R4, R1, R5, R8, R6, R7, R9 > Pr3 < R5, R2, R1, R3, R7, R8, R6, R9, R4 > Pr4 < R4, R5, R6, R3, R2, R1, R8, R9, R7 > Pr5 < R7, R8, R6, R5, R2, R3, R4, R9, R1 > Pr6 < R5, R6, R7, R8, R9, R1, R2, R3, R4 > Pr7 < R9, R8, R7, R6, R5, R4, R3, R2, R1 > Pr8 < R8, R9, R6, R7, R4, R5, R2, R3, R1 > Pr9 < R1, R3, R5, R7, R9, R2, R4, R6, R8 > Pr10 < R1, R4, R2, R3, R5, R6, R9, R8, R7 > R1 R3 R2 R4 R5 R6 R7 R8 R9 Conflicts = {(R1, R3), (R1, R7), (R1, R2), (R5, R8)} Dep Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions For Pr1
Disagreement Calculation (cont) Using Interactive Genetic Algorithm for Requirements Prioritization 17 Indv. ID Individuals Disagree Pr1 < R1, R3, R2, R4, R5, R6, R7, R8, R9 > 8 Pr2 < R2, R3, R4, R1, R5, R8, R6, R7, R9 > 8 Pr3 < R5, R2, R1, R3, R7, R8, R6, R9, R4 > 16 Pr4 < R4, R5, R6, R3, R2, R1, R8, R9, R7 > 15 Pr5 < R7, R8, R6, R5, R2, R3, R4, R9, R1 > 23 Pr6 < R5, R6, R7, R8, R9, R1, R2, R3, R4 > 29 Pr7 < R9, R8, R7, R6, R5, R4, R3, R2, R1 > 30 Pr8 < R8, R9, R6, R7, R4, R5, R2, R3, R1 > 29 Pr9 < R1, R3, R5, R7, R9, R2, R4, R6, R8 > 17 Pr10 < R1, R4, R2, R3, R5, R6, R9, R8, R7 > 13 Total Conflicts = {(R5, R8), Prio (R6, R7), (R6, R8), (R7, R8), (R1, R3), Dep (R1, R7), (R1, R2), (R5, R8)} … and so on … Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions  dis(pr1, pr2) {(r,s)  pr1* |(r,s)  pr2*}  Disagreement: Between a pair of ordering i.e. Pr1 and Prio, disagreement is the count of pairs that are inverted in two orderings. Lower disagreement defines higher fitness. Formally define:
GA Crossover Operator Using Interactive Genetic Algorithm for Requirements Prioritization 18 We used cut-head/fill-in-tail and cut-tail/fill-in-head… R2 R3 Positions 5-6 as cut points to cut-head/fill-in-tail R6 Pr2 Pr3 Pr2’ R4 R1 R5 R8 R6 R7 R9 R5 R8 R1 R3 R7 R2 R9 R4 R6 R7 R8 R9R2 R3 R4 R1 R5 - variation allows searching out different available niches, find better fitness values and subsequently better solutions - never produce chromosomes containing duplicate genes. Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions
GA Mutation Operator Using Interactive Genetic Algorithm for Requirements Prioritization 19 Mutation is basically a swap operator, we used requirement-pair-swap R2 R3 Pr2 R4 R1 R5 R8 R6 R7 R9 Pr2’ R2 R3 R6 R1 R5 R8 R4 R7 R9 - mutation causes movement in the search space - may produce a stronger chromosome. Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions
GA Selection Operator Using Interactive Genetic Algorithm for Requirements Prioritization 20 We used the Tournament Selection for our approach - allows the selection pressure to be easily adjusted - faster than other selection operators i.e. Roulette Wheel Selection - better convergence Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions
Our IGA Approach Using Interactive Genetic Algorithm for Requirements Prioritization 21 1. Acquisition and coding of set of Requirements and Domain Knowledge 2. Apply Interactive Genetic Algorithm (exploiting User Knowledge) 3. Output of the ranking (the most promising individual) Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions
Our Approach: Pairs to be Elicited Using Interactive Genetic Algorithm for Requirements Prioritization 22 Indv. ID Individuals Disagree Pr1 < R1, R3, R2, R4, R5, R6, R7, R8, R9 > 8 Pr2 < R2, R3, R4, R1, R5, R8, R6, R7, R9 > 8 Pr10 < R1, R4, R2, R3, R5, R6, R9, R8, R7 > 13 Pr4 < R4, R5, R6, R3, R2, R1, R8, R9, R7 > 15 Pr3 < R5, R2, R1, R3, R7, R8, R6, R9, R4 > 16 Pr9 < R1, R3, R5, R7, R9, R2, R4, R6, R8 > 17 Pr5 < R7, R8, R6, R5, R2, R3, R4, R9, R1 > 23 Pr8 < R8, R9, R6, R7, R4, R5, R2, R3, R1 > 29 Pr6 < R5, R6, R7, R8, R9, R1, R2, R3, R4 > 29 Pr7 < R9, R8, R7, R6, R5, R4, R3, R2, R1 > 30 Ranked individuals w. r. t. disagreement Pr1 = < R1, R3, R2, R4, R5, R6, R7, R8, R9 > vs Pr2 = < R2, R3, R4, R1, R5, R8, R6, R7, R9 > TIE PAIRS Pr1, Pr2 (R1, R3), (R2, R3), (R6, R8), (R7, R8) Candidate pairs to be asked to the decision maker Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions
Our Approach: User Feedback Using Interactive Genetic Algorithm for Requirements Prioritization 23 Why ties appear in population? (i) Contradictory information w.r.t. initial constraints (ii) Nothing is expressed explicitly in initial constraints (iii) Common Domain Knowledge but different positions in the individuals Simple example: Why (R7, R8)? Case I: Contradictory w.r.t. Prio & Dep.. Why (R2, R3)? Case III: Common knowledge but different positions TIE PAIRS Pr1, Pr2 (R1, R3), (R2, R3), (R6, R8), (R7, R8) Prio Dep Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions
Our Approach: User Feedback Using Interactive Genetic Algorithm for Requirements Prioritization 24 TIE PAIRS Pr1, Pr2 (R1, R3), (R2, R3), (R6, R8), (R7, R8) Eli User Preference Graph eliOrd Experience & knowledge ‘<‘ or ‘>’ So, user knowledge is playing important role… Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions
Our Approach: New Round with New Constraints Using Interactive Genetic Algorithm for Requirements Prioritization 25  The new evolved population after using GA operators on population:  Crossover  Mutation  Selection  is compared against the new set of constraints graphs Eli DepPrio Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions
Using Interactive Genetic Algorithm for Requirements Prioritization 26 Evaluation of the Approach Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions
The Case Study Using Interactive Genetic Algorithm for Requirements Prioritization 27  Prioritize requirements for a real software system, as part of the project ACube (Ambient Aware Assistance) designing a highly technological monitoring environment to be deployed in nursing homes to support medical and assistance staff  After user requirements analysis phase, 60 user requirements and 49 technical requirements Four macro-scenarios have been identified. ID Macro-Scenario # of requirements FALL Monitoring falls 26 ESC Monitoring escapes 23 MON Monitoring dangerous behavior 21 ALL The three scenarios 49 *ACube is a social welfare project coordinated by Fondazione Bruno Kessler (FBK) and funded by Autonomous Province of Trento under Bando Grandi Progetti, 2006. Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions
Gold Standard (GS) Using Interactive Genetic Algorithm for Requirements Prioritization 28  For each of the four macro-scenarios, we obtained the Gold Standard (GS) prioritization from the Software Architect of the ACube project  The GS prioritization is the ordering given by the software architect to the requirements when planning their implementation during the ACube project. Why Gold Standard?  To measure disagreements with respect to GS.  To evaluate our approach in terms of disagreement against other non-interactive approaches using the same GS. Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions
Using Interactive Genetic Algorithm for Requirements Prioritization 29 Research Questions Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions
R Q 1 Using Interactive Genetic Algorithm for Requirements Prioritization 30 RQ1 (Convergence) Can we observe convergence with respect to the finally elicited fitness function? - Convergence is not obvious immediately, as Eli Graph is evolving at early stages. - Although the full fitness function is known only at end of elicitation process. The best individual in each population converges toward a low value of the final fitness function.Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions YES!
R Q 2 Using Interactive Genetic Algorithm for Requirements Prioritization 31 RQ2 (Role of interaction) Does IGA produce improved prioritizations compared to non-interactive requirement ordering? IGA outperforms substantially GA (and RAND), especially when a higher number of pairwise comparisons can be carried out YES! Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions
R Q 3 Using Interactive Genetic Algorithm for Requirements Prioritization 32 RQ3 (Role of initial precedence constraints) How does initial availability of precedence constraints affect the performance of IGA? - Different type of Domain Knowledge affects IGA significantly - The improvement of IGA over GA is even higher when limited ranking information is available Improves! Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions
R Q 4 Using Interactive Genetic Algorithm for Requirements Prioritization 33 RQ4 (Robustness) Is IGA robust with respect to errors committed by the user during the elicitation of pairwise comparisons? IGA can tolerate user errors up to 20%. YES!Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions
General Discussion Using Interactive Genetic Algorithm for Requirements Prioritization 34  Cost/benefit trade off offered by IGA as compared to AHP is extremely interesting  With an elicitation effort reduced to 10% of the one required by AHP, IGA produces an apprx. ordering which has a quite low disagreement from the requirement positions in the GS.  User Errors tolerance offered by IGA as compared to AHP is highly reasonable  With an elicitation of very significant amount of less pairs than AHP (i.e. pairwise comparisons), it is reasonable even if IGA accepts up to 20% user error, while using AHP even 10% user error can result a total bad ordering. Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions
Conclusions & Future Works Using Interactive Genetic Algorithm for Requirements Prioritization 35  We proposed an Interactive Genetic Algorithm to collect pairwise information useful to prioritize the requirements for a software system.  We also verified the robustness of the algorithm with respect to increasing user feedback errors.  We evaluated the approach in a real project (ACube).  In summary, we contributed A NOVEL APPROACH to prioritize requirements & tested its effectiveness empirically. What’s Next? Algorithm: - refining the algorithm - improving GA operators Experiment - off-line: comparisons with other approaches - on-line: controlled experiments with real object (i.e. human) Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions
Paper Publication Using Interactive Genetic Algorithm for Requirements Prioritization 36 A paper was published from this work and was presented at SSBSE 2010: Paolo Tonella1, Angelo Susi1, and Francis Palma2, "Using Interactive GA for Requirements Prioritization" in 2nd International Symposium on Search Based Software Engineering 2010. 1Fondazione Bruno Kessler, Software Engineering Research Unit; 2Department of Inf. Eng. and Computer Science, University of Trento. Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions
Using Interactive Genetic Algorithm for Requirements Prioritization 37 Thank You! Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions

More Related Content

PPTX
Genetic programming
byMeghna Singh
 
PPT
Using Interactive GA for Requirements Prioritization
byFrancis Palma
 
PDF
A visual guide to item response theory
byahmad rustam
 
PDF
Toward a Natural Genetic / Evolutionary Algorithm for Multiobjective Optimiza...
byStartup
 
PDF
Bert pre_training_of_deep_bidirectional_transformers_for_language_understanding
byThyrixYang1
 
PPTX
Fuzzy Genetic Algorithm
byPintu Khan
 
PDF
Two Level Disambiguation Model for Query Translation
byIJECEIAES
 
PDF
4213ijaia04
byijaia
 
Genetic programming
byMeghna Singh
 
Using Interactive GA for Requirements Prioritization
byFrancis Palma
 
A visual guide to item response theory
byahmad rustam
 
Toward a Natural Genetic / Evolutionary Algorithm for Multiobjective Optimiza...
byStartup
 
Bert pre_training_of_deep_bidirectional_transformers_for_language_understanding
byThyrixYang1
 
Fuzzy Genetic Algorithm
byPintu Khan
 
Two Level Disambiguation Model for Query Translation
byIJECEIAES
 
4213ijaia04
byijaia
 

What's hot

PPTX
Sentiment analysis using naive bayes classifier
byDev Sahu
 
PDF
[WI 2014]Context Recommendation Using Multi-label Classification
byYONG ZHENG
 
PPTX
Optimization technique genetic algorithm
byUday Wankar
 
PDF
Evaluation of subjective answers using glsa enhanced with contextual synonymy
byijnlc
 
PDF
Logic based reasoning test paullin et al 2010
byCheryl Paullin
 
PDF
Memetic search in differential evolution algorithm
byDr Sandeep Kumar Poonia
 
PDF
cushLEPOR uses LABSE distilled knowledge to improve correlation with human tr...
byLifeng (Aaron) Han
 
PPT
Genetic Algorithms
byanas_elf
 
PDF
Text Classification, Sentiment Analysis, and Opinion Mining
byFabrizio Sebastiani
 
PDF
Learn2Sign : Sign language recognition and translation using human keypoint e...
byUniversitat Politècnica de Catalunya
 
PDF
CUHK intern PPT. Machine Translation Evaluation: Methods and Tools
byLifeng (Aaron) Han
 
PPTX
Genetic Algorithm
bySEKHARREDDYAMBATI
 
PDF
Structural Optimization using Genetic Algorithms - Artificial Intelligence Fu...
byAhmed Gamal Abdel Gawad
 
PDF
Efficient Top-N Recommendation by Linear Regression
byMark Levy
 
PDF
Icsm20.ppt
byYann-GaĂŤl GuĂŠhĂŠneuc
 
PDF
A Review of Constraint Programming
byEditor IJCATR
 
PDF
Genetic Algorithm
byBhushan Mohite
 
DOCX
Artificial Intelligence - 1
byMuhd Mu'izuddin
 
PDF
Bb25322324
byIJERA Editor
 
PDF
Genetic Algorithms
byadil raja
 
Sentiment analysis using naive bayes classifier
byDev Sahu
 
[WI 2014]Context Recommendation Using Multi-label Classification
byYONG ZHENG
 
Optimization technique genetic algorithm
byUday Wankar
 
Evaluation of subjective answers using glsa enhanced with contextual synonymy
byijnlc
 
Logic based reasoning test paullin et al 2010
byCheryl Paullin
 
Memetic search in differential evolution algorithm
byDr Sandeep Kumar Poonia
 
cushLEPOR uses LABSE distilled knowledge to improve correlation with human tr...
byLifeng (Aaron) Han
 
Genetic Algorithms
byanas_elf
 
Text Classification, Sentiment Analysis, and Opinion Mining
byFabrizio Sebastiani
 
Learn2Sign : Sign language recognition and translation using human keypoint e...
byUniversitat Politècnica de Catalunya
 
CUHK intern PPT. Machine Translation Evaluation: Methods and Tools
byLifeng (Aaron) Han
 
Genetic Algorithm
bySEKHARREDDYAMBATI
 
Structural Optimization using Genetic Algorithms - Artificial Intelligence Fu...
byAhmed Gamal Abdel Gawad
 
Efficient Top-N Recommendation by Linear Regression
byMark Levy
 
Icsm20.ppt
byYann-GaĂŤl GuĂŠhĂŠneuc
 
A Review of Constraint Programming
byEditor IJCATR
 
Genetic Algorithm
byBhushan Mohite
 
Artificial Intelligence - 1
byMuhd Mu'izuddin
 
Bb25322324
byIJERA Editor
 
Genetic Algorithms
byadil raja
 

Viewers also liked

PPT
An Open Source GIS System for Earthquake Early Warning and Post-Event Emergen...
byMaurizio Pollino
 
PPTX
Validating a smartphone-based pedestrian navigation system prototype - An inf...
byBeniamino Murgante
 
PPTX
A Multiobjective Evolutionary Algorithm for Infrastructure Location in Vehicu...
byJamal Toutouh, PhD
 
PPT
GECCO 08 Poster - IGAP: Interactive Genetic Algorithm Peer to Peer
byJuan Quiroz
 
PPTX
GIS system architecture
byPrasad Patil
 
PDF
Vehicle Tracking System (VTS)
byPentode Technologies Pvt. Ltd.
 
PPTX
Vehicle inspection training
byKristin Franks
 
PDF
What Is GIS?
byAllan Laframboise
 
An Open Source GIS System for Earthquake Early Warning and Post-Event Emergen...
byMaurizio Pollino
 
Validating a smartphone-based pedestrian navigation system prototype - An inf...
byBeniamino Murgante
 
A Multiobjective Evolutionary Algorithm for Infrastructure Location in Vehicu...
byJamal Toutouh, PhD
 
GECCO 08 Poster - IGAP: Interactive Genetic Algorithm Peer to Peer
byJuan Quiroz
 
GIS system architecture
byPrasad Patil
 
Vehicle Tracking System (VTS)
byPentode Technologies Pvt. Ltd.
 
Vehicle inspection training
byKristin Franks
 
What Is GIS?
byAllan Laframboise
 

Similar to Using Interactive Genetic Algorithm for Requirements Prioritization

PDF
Interactive Requirements Prioritization Using Search Based Optimization Techn...
byFrancis Palma
 
PDF
K017446974
byIOSR Journals
 
PPTX
STUDY ON PROJECT MANAGEMENT THROUGH GENETIC ALGORITHM
byAvay Minni
 
PPT
Using Simulation to Investigate Requirements Prioritization Strategies
byCS, NcState
 
PDF
An interactive approach to requirements prioritization using quality factors
byijfcstjournal
 
DOC
Predictive job scheduling in a connection limited system using parallel genet...
byMumbai Academisc
 
PDF
How Clara Labs works behind the scenes (UC Berkeley 2017)
byJason Laska
 
PPSX
Requirement Management
byRavikanth-BA
 
PDF
Recommendation engine Using Genetic Algorithm
byVaibhav Varshney
 
PDF
An Adaptive Hybrid Technique approach of Test Case Prioritization
byINFOGAIN PUBLICATION
 
PPTX
Presentation
byAmar Dhillon
 
PPTX
Time Table Management system
byShaswat Lovee
 
PDF
Genetic Approach to Parallel Scheduling
byIOSR Journals
 
PPSX
Genetic algorithms mahyar
byMahyar Teymournezhad
 
PPTX
Load distribution of analytical query workloads for database cluster architec...
byMatheesha Fernando
 
PDF
Timetable Generator Using Genetic Algorithm
byIRJET Journal
 
PPTX
Genetic Algorithm
byAnkit Chaudhary
 
PPTX
Analysis of Parameter using Fuzzy Genetic Algorithm in E-learning System
byHarshal Jain
 
PDF
A Genetic Algorithm Problem Solver For Archaeology
byAmy Cernava
 
PPT
Requirement prioritization
byAbdul Basit
 
Interactive Requirements Prioritization Using Search Based Optimization Techn...
byFrancis Palma
 
K017446974
byIOSR Journals
 
STUDY ON PROJECT MANAGEMENT THROUGH GENETIC ALGORITHM
byAvay Minni
 
Using Simulation to Investigate Requirements Prioritization Strategies
byCS, NcState
 
An interactive approach to requirements prioritization using quality factors
byijfcstjournal
 
Predictive job scheduling in a connection limited system using parallel genet...
byMumbai Academisc
 
How Clara Labs works behind the scenes (UC Berkeley 2017)
byJason Laska
 
Requirement Management
byRavikanth-BA
 
Recommendation engine Using Genetic Algorithm
byVaibhav Varshney
 
An Adaptive Hybrid Technique approach of Test Case Prioritization
byINFOGAIN PUBLICATION
 
Presentation
byAmar Dhillon
 
Time Table Management system
byShaswat Lovee
 
Genetic Approach to Parallel Scheduling
byIOSR Journals
 
Genetic algorithms mahyar
byMahyar Teymournezhad
 
Load distribution of analytical query workloads for database cluster architec...
byMatheesha Fernando
 
Timetable Generator Using Genetic Algorithm
byIRJET Journal
 
Genetic Algorithm
byAnkit Chaudhary
 
Analysis of Parameter using Fuzzy Genetic Algorithm in E-learning System
byHarshal Jain
 
A Genetic Algorithm Problem Solver For Archaeology
byAmy Cernava
 
Requirement prioritization
byAbdul Basit
 

More from Francis Palma

PDF
Specification and Detection of SOA Antipatterns
byFrancis Palma
 
PDF
Recommendation System for Design Patterns in Software Development
byFrancis Palma
 
PDF
Detection of SOA Antipatterns
byFrancis Palma
 
PDF
Unifying Service Oriented Technologies for the Specification and Detection of...
byFrancis Palma
 
PDF
A Study on the Taxonomy of Service Antipatterns
byFrancis Palma
 
PDF
Specification and Detection of Business Process Antipatterns
byFrancis Palma
 
PPT
Are RESTful APIs Well-designed? Detection of their Linguistic (Anti)Patterns
byFrancis Palma
 
PDF
Investigating the Change-proneness of Service Patterns and Antipatterns
byFrancis Palma
 
PDF
Detection of REST Patterns and Antipatterns: A Heuristics-based Approach
byFrancis Palma
 
PDF
Specification and Detection of SOA Antipatterns in Web Services
byFrancis Palma
 
PDF
Detection of Process Antipatterns: An BPEL Perspective
byFrancis Palma
 
PDF
Specification and Detection of SOA Antipatterns
byFrancis Palma
 
Specification and Detection of SOA Antipatterns
byFrancis Palma
 
Recommendation System for Design Patterns in Software Development
byFrancis Palma
 
Detection of SOA Antipatterns
byFrancis Palma
 
Unifying Service Oriented Technologies for the Specification and Detection of...
byFrancis Palma
 
A Study on the Taxonomy of Service Antipatterns
byFrancis Palma
 
Specification and Detection of Business Process Antipatterns
byFrancis Palma
 
Are RESTful APIs Well-designed? Detection of their Linguistic (Anti)Patterns
byFrancis Palma
 
Investigating the Change-proneness of Service Patterns and Antipatterns
byFrancis Palma
 
Detection of REST Patterns and Antipatterns: A Heuristics-based Approach
byFrancis Palma
 
Specification and Detection of SOA Antipatterns in Web Services
byFrancis Palma
 
Detection of Process Antipatterns: An BPEL Perspective
byFrancis Palma
 
Specification and Detection of SOA Antipatterns
byFrancis Palma
 

Recently uploaded

PDF
Supercharge Your Copilot-Driven Collaboration with Microsoft 365 Agents SDK
byAntti Koskela
 
PPTX
TechSprint Inauguration at SJB Institute of Technology held on 18 December 2025
bysuhasspgdg
 
PDF
UiPath Automation Developer Associate Training Series 2026 - Session 1
byDianaGray10
 
PPTX
Retrieval Augmented Generation- The Synergistic Power of Prompt Engineering
bySemantic SEO BD
 
PDF
How to build hackthon projects from ZERO!
byishantyadav1111
 
PDF
Safer’s Picks: The 5 FME Transformers You Didn’t Know You Needed
bySafe Software
 
PDF
Writing GPU-Ready AI Models in Pure Java with Babylon
byAna-Maria Mihalceanu
 
PPTX
Beyond the Algorithm: Designing Human-Centric Public Service with AI
byAlan Dix
 
PPTX
WEEK 1-introduction of industrial arts grade 7.pptx
byrosierufinomaliongan
 
PDF
From DeFi POC to Production MVP - A 12-16 Week Blueprint.pdf
byniahiggins21
 
PDF
Rustici Software: eLearning standards in the age of AI
byRustici Software
 
PDF
Understanding Foldable 3-Wheel Electric Scooters for Everyday Use
byTopmate
 
PDF
Startup Formation Collapses While Acquisition Activity Hits New High!
byMemoori
 
PDF
Advanced SELinux Management - RHCSA (RH134).pdf
byLinuxCert Guru
 
PPTX
NTG - Data Center Management System Software
byMustafa Kuğu
 
PDF
CI CD Observability, Metrics and DORA - Shifting Left and Cleaning Up! - Febr...
byPeter Souter
 
PDF
NTG -Company Profile_Software_Vendor_Company_in_MENA
byMustafa Kuğu
 
PDF
Designing a Blog Using Wordpress
bymarkzubi50
 
PDF
Why Many Smart Device Platforms Fail to Scale?
byPromeraki Developments
 
PPTX
Working Session — Build a Document Understanding Automation Using an OOTB ML ...
byDianaGray10
 
Supercharge Your Copilot-Driven Collaboration with Microsoft 365 Agents SDK
byAntti Koskela
 
TechSprint Inauguration at SJB Institute of Technology held on 18 December 2025
bysuhasspgdg
 
UiPath Automation Developer Associate Training Series 2026 - Session 1
byDianaGray10
 
Retrieval Augmented Generation- The Synergistic Power of Prompt Engineering
bySemantic SEO BD
 
How to build hackthon projects from ZERO!
byishantyadav1111
 
Safer’s Picks: The 5 FME Transformers You Didn’t Know You Needed
bySafe Software
 
Writing GPU-Ready AI Models in Pure Java with Babylon
byAna-Maria Mihalceanu
 
Beyond the Algorithm: Designing Human-Centric Public Service with AI
byAlan Dix
 
WEEK 1-introduction of industrial arts grade 7.pptx
byrosierufinomaliongan
 
From DeFi POC to Production MVP - A 12-16 Week Blueprint.pdf
byniahiggins21
 
Rustici Software: eLearning standards in the age of AI
byRustici Software
 
Understanding Foldable 3-Wheel Electric Scooters for Everyday Use
byTopmate
 
Startup Formation Collapses While Acquisition Activity Hits New High!
byMemoori
 
Advanced SELinux Management - RHCSA (RH134).pdf
byLinuxCert Guru
 
NTG - Data Center Management System Software
byMustafa Kuğu
 
CI CD Observability, Metrics and DORA - Shifting Left and Cleaning Up! - Febr...
byPeter Souter
 
NTG -Company Profile_Software_Vendor_Company_in_MENA
byMustafa Kuğu
 
Designing a Blog Using Wordpress
bymarkzubi50
 
Why Many Smart Device Platforms Fail to Scale?
byPromeraki Developments
 
Working Session — Build a Document Understanding Automation Using an OOTB ML ...
byDianaGray10
 

Using Interactive Genetic Algorithm for Requirements Prioritization

  • 1.
    Using Interactive Genetic Algorithm for Requirements Prioritization Francis Palma Departmentof Information Engineering and Computer Science UniversitĂĄ degli Studi di Trento francis.palma@studenti.unitn.it December 3, 2010 Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions
  • 2.
    Presentation Outline Using Interactive Genetic Algorithm for Requirements Prioritization Problem description  Related works  Genetic Algorithm  Our approach  Case study  Results  Conclusions 2 Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions
  • 3.
    Problem Description Using Interactive Genetic Algorithm for Requirements Prioritization Problem:[Prioritization of Requirements] To find the best ordering of requirements in each successive release to ensure quality & value of the delivered system, trade-off constraints & end-user satisfaction. 3 Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions Do Trade-off between user needs & real constraints Now, highest quality & best valued system!
  • 4.
    Using Interactive Genetic Algorithm for Requirements Prioritization 4 1. Acquisitionand coding of set of Requirements and Domain Knowledge 2. Apply A Prioritization Technique 3. Output of the ranking Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions Problem Description (cont) Find it!Why Ordered List? Order of implementation satisfy the developers’ constraints & delivers maximum value to the user.
  • 5.
    Domain Knowledge: Prio& Dep Using Interactive Genetic Algorithm for Requirements Prioritization 5 Domain knowledge includes two precedence graphs • Prio • Dep How to build them? Prio: For 1st release, initial priorities Dep: For 1st release, dependencies Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions Prio Dep
  • 6.
    Classification: State-of-the-Art approaches Using Interactive Genetic Algorithmfor Requirements Prioritization 6 Prioritization Approaches Classification using user knowledge either performing pair-wise comparison or not using domain knowledge using both Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions  User Knowledge refers to the awareness of the requirements attributes and the overall system functionalities to be developed
  • 7.
    State-of-the-Art approaches (cont) Using Interactive Genetic Algorithmfor Requirements Prioritization 7 Pairwise Comparison based approaches Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP): involves comparing all unique pairs of requirements to determine which of the two is of higher priority, and to what extent Bubble Sort: compares two requirements & swap them if they are in the wrong order Cost-Value Approach: each individual requirement is determined on (i) the value to the users (ii) the cost of implementing the requirements. It uses the AHP technique Case Based Ranking (CBRank): exploits a machine learning algorithm to guide the elicitation of user preferences during the prioritization process Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions
  • 8.
    State-of-the-Art approaches (cont) Using Interactive Genetic Algorithmfor Requirements Prioritization 8 Non-Pairwise comparison based approaches Numerical Assignment: grouping requirements into different priority groups MoScoW: groups all requirements into four priority groups MUST have, SHOULD have, COULD have, and WON’T have. Simple Ranking: requirements are simply ranked from integer 1 to N Binary Search Tree: each node represents a requirement, requirements placed in the left subtree of a node are of lower priority and those placed in the right subtree of a node are of higher priority than the node priority. $100 Method: each stakeholder is asked to assume having $100 to distribute over the requirements in a ratio scale Combining Techniques based approaches Planning Game: combination of two prioritization techniques i.e. Numerical Assignment & Simple Ranking Domain Knowledge based approaches Priority Groups: dividing requirements into separate groups. then groups are ranked by using AHP Genetic Algorithm: optimization is an application of GA & used in the problem of requirements prioritization too; uses domain knowledge Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions
  • 9.
    State-of-the-Art approaches (cont) Using Interactive Genetic Algorithmfor Requirements Prioritization 9 Summary Approach Cons AHP Scalability Bubble Sort Scalability, time CBRank unable to accept constraints i.e. Dep Cost-Value Approach Time consuming BST Sensitivity; a single error may build wrong tree GA Can’t resolve contradictory; $100 Method Longer; less confidence, biased MoScoW Ambiguous final ordering Simple Ranking unable handling complex scenarios Scalability is a very common problem of all the approaches! Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions
  • 10.
    Genetic Algorithm Using Interactive Genetic Algorithm for Requirements Prioritization 10 1.Acquisition and coding of set of Requirements and Domain Knowledge 2. Apply Genetic Algorithm (no user knowledge) 3. Output of the ranking (the most promising individual) Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions
  • 11.
    Genetic Algorithm PseudoCode Using Interactive Genetic Algorithm for Requirements Prioritization 11 The Canonical GA (a simple pseudo code is presented here): 1. choose initial population 2. evaluate each individual’s fitness REPEAT: 3. select best-ranking individuals to reproduce 4. apply crossover operator 5. apply mutation operator 6. evaluate each individual’s fitness until terminating condition (e.g. until at least one individual has the desired fitness or enough generations have passed) Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions
  • 12.
    What is Population& Individuals? Using Interactive Genetic Algorithm for Requirements Prioritization 12 Indv. ID Individual Disagree Pr1 < R1, R3, R2, R4, R5, R6, R7, R8, R9 > Pr2 < R2, R3, R4, R1, R5, R8, R6, R7, R9 > Pr3 < R5, R2, R1, R3, R7, R8, R6, R9, R4 > Pr4 < R4, R5, R6, R3, R2, R1, R8, R9, R7 > Pr5 < R7, R8, R6, R5, R2, R3, R4, R9, R1 > Pr6 < R5, R6, R7, R8, R9, R1, R2, R3, R4 > Pr7 < R9, R8, R7, R6, R5, R4, R3, R2, R1 > Pr8 < R8, R9, R6, R7, R4, R5, R2, R3, R1 > Pr9 < R1, R3, R5, R7, R9, R2, R4, R6, R8 > Pr10 < R1, R4, R2, R3, R5, R6, R9, R8, R7 > R1 R3 R2 R4 R5 R6 R7 R8 R9 Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions Population! A set of solution candidates Pr1 An individual, also a solution candidate A requirement as a gene
  • 13.
    Using Interactive Genetic Algorithm for Requirements Prioritization 13 How wedefine Individual’s Fitness? Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions
  • 14.
    Domain Knowledge Encoding Using Interactive Genetic Algorithmfor Requirements Prioritization 14 Transform the domain knowledge into graphs Req Priorities Dependencies R1 10 R2, R3, R7 R2 20 R3 R3 10 R4 20 R5 30 R4, R8 R6 40 R7 30 R3 R8 20 R9 50 R8, R5 Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions
  • 15.
    Disagreement Calculation Using Interactive Genetic Algorithm for Requirements Prioritization 15 Indv.ID Individual Disagree Pr1 < R1, R3, R2, R4, R5, R6, R7, R8, R9 > Pr2 < R2, R3, R4, R1, R5, R8, R6, R7, R9 > Pr3 < R5, R2, R1, R3, R7, R8, R6, R9, R4 > Pr4 < R4, R5, R6, R3, R2, R1, R8, R9, R7 > Pr5 < R7, R8, R6, R5, R2, R3, R4, R9, R1 > Pr6 < R5, R6, R7, R8, R9, R1, R2, R3, R4 > Pr7 < R9, R8, R7, R6, R5, R4, R3, R2, R1 > Pr8 < R8, R9, R6, R7, R4, R5, R2, R3, R1 > Pr9 < R1, R3, R5, R7, R9, R2, R4, R6, R8 > Pr10 < R1, R4, R2, R3, R5, R6, R9, R8, R7 > R1 R3 R2 R4 R5 R6 R7 R8 R9 Conflicts = {(R5, R8), (R6, R7), (R6, R8), (R7, R8)} Prio Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions For Pr1
  • 16.
    Disagreement Calculation (cont) Using Interactive Genetic Algorithmfor Requirements Prioritization 16 Indv. ID Individuals Disagree Pr1 < R1, R3, R2, R4, R5, R6, R7, R8, R9 > Pr2 < R2, R3, R4, R1, R5, R8, R6, R7, R9 > Pr3 < R5, R2, R1, R3, R7, R8, R6, R9, R4 > Pr4 < R4, R5, R6, R3, R2, R1, R8, R9, R7 > Pr5 < R7, R8, R6, R5, R2, R3, R4, R9, R1 > Pr6 < R5, R6, R7, R8, R9, R1, R2, R3, R4 > Pr7 < R9, R8, R7, R6, R5, R4, R3, R2, R1 > Pr8 < R8, R9, R6, R7, R4, R5, R2, R3, R1 > Pr9 < R1, R3, R5, R7, R9, R2, R4, R6, R8 > Pr10 < R1, R4, R2, R3, R5, R6, R9, R8, R7 > R1 R3 R2 R4 R5 R6 R7 R8 R9 Conflicts = {(R1, R3), (R1, R7), (R1, R2), (R5, R8)} Dep Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions For Pr1
  • 17.
    Disagreement Calculation (cont) Using Interactive Genetic Algorithmfor Requirements Prioritization 17 Indv. ID Individuals Disagree Pr1 < R1, R3, R2, R4, R5, R6, R7, R8, R9 > 8 Pr2 < R2, R3, R4, R1, R5, R8, R6, R7, R9 > 8 Pr3 < R5, R2, R1, R3, R7, R8, R6, R9, R4 > 16 Pr4 < R4, R5, R6, R3, R2, R1, R8, R9, R7 > 15 Pr5 < R7, R8, R6, R5, R2, R3, R4, R9, R1 > 23 Pr6 < R5, R6, R7, R8, R9, R1, R2, R3, R4 > 29 Pr7 < R9, R8, R7, R6, R5, R4, R3, R2, R1 > 30 Pr8 < R8, R9, R6, R7, R4, R5, R2, R3, R1 > 29 Pr9 < R1, R3, R5, R7, R9, R2, R4, R6, R8 > 17 Pr10 < R1, R4, R2, R3, R5, R6, R9, R8, R7 > 13 Total Conflicts = {(R5, R8), Prio (R6, R7), (R6, R8), (R7, R8), (R1, R3), Dep (R1, R7), (R1, R2), (R5, R8)} … and so on … Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions  dis(pr1, pr2) {(r,s)  pr1* |(r,s)  pr2*}  Disagreement: Between a pair of ordering i.e. Pr1 and Prio, disagreement is the count of pairs that are inverted in two orderings. Lower disagreement defines higher fitness. Formally define:
  • 18.
    GA Crossover Operator Using Interactive Genetic Algorithmfor Requirements Prioritization 18 We used cut-head/fill-in-tail and cut-tail/fill-in-head… R2 R3 Positions 5-6 as cut points to cut-head/fill-in-tail R6 Pr2 Pr3 Pr2’ R4 R1 R5 R8 R6 R7 R9 R5 R8 R1 R3 R7 R2 R9 R4 R6 R7 R8 R9R2 R3 R4 R1 R5 - variation allows searching out different available niches, find better fitness values and subsequently better solutions - never produce chromosomes containing duplicate genes. Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions
  • 19.
    GA Mutation Operator Using Interactive Genetic Algorithmfor Requirements Prioritization 19 Mutation is basically a swap operator, we used requirement-pair-swap R2 R3 Pr2 R4 R1 R5 R8 R6 R7 R9 Pr2’ R2 R3 R6 R1 R5 R8 R4 R7 R9 - mutation causes movement in the search space - may produce a stronger chromosome. Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions
  • 20.
    GA Selection Operator Using Interactive Genetic Algorithmfor Requirements Prioritization 20 We used the Tournament Selection for our approach - allows the selection pressure to be easily adjusted - faster than other selection operators i.e. Roulette Wheel Selection - better convergence Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions
  • 21.
    Our IGA Approach Using Interactive Genetic Algorithmfor Requirements Prioritization 21 1. Acquisition and coding of set of Requirements and Domain Knowledge 2. Apply Interactive Genetic Algorithm (exploiting User Knowledge) 3. Output of the ranking (the most promising individual) Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions
  • 22.
    Our Approach: Pairsto be Elicited Using Interactive Genetic Algorithm for Requirements Prioritization 22 Indv. ID Individuals Disagree Pr1 < R1, R3, R2, R4, R5, R6, R7, R8, R9 > 8 Pr2 < R2, R3, R4, R1, R5, R8, R6, R7, R9 > 8 Pr10 < R1, R4, R2, R3, R5, R6, R9, R8, R7 > 13 Pr4 < R4, R5, R6, R3, R2, R1, R8, R9, R7 > 15 Pr3 < R5, R2, R1, R3, R7, R8, R6, R9, R4 > 16 Pr9 < R1, R3, R5, R7, R9, R2, R4, R6, R8 > 17 Pr5 < R7, R8, R6, R5, R2, R3, R4, R9, R1 > 23 Pr8 < R8, R9, R6, R7, R4, R5, R2, R3, R1 > 29 Pr6 < R5, R6, R7, R8, R9, R1, R2, R3, R4 > 29 Pr7 < R9, R8, R7, R6, R5, R4, R3, R2, R1 > 30 Ranked individuals w. r. t. disagreement Pr1 = < R1, R3, R2, R4, R5, R6, R7, R8, R9 > vs Pr2 = < R2, R3, R4, R1, R5, R8, R6, R7, R9 > TIE PAIRS Pr1, Pr2 (R1, R3), (R2, R3), (R6, R8), (R7, R8) Candidate pairs to be asked to the decision maker Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions
  • 23.
    Our Approach: UserFeedback Using Interactive Genetic Algorithm for Requirements Prioritization 23 Why ties appear in population? (i) Contradictory information w.r.t. initial constraints (ii) Nothing is expressed explicitly in initial constraints (iii) Common Domain Knowledge but different positions in the individuals Simple example: Why (R7, R8)? Case I: Contradictory w.r.t. Prio & Dep.. Why (R2, R3)? Case III: Common knowledge but different positions TIE PAIRS Pr1, Pr2 (R1, R3), (R2, R3), (R6, R8), (R7, R8) Prio Dep Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions
  • 24.
    Our Approach: UserFeedback Using Interactive Genetic Algorithm for Requirements Prioritization 24 TIE PAIRS Pr1, Pr2 (R1, R3), (R2, R3), (R6, R8), (R7, R8) Eli User Preference Graph eliOrd Experience & knowledge ‘<‘ or ‘>’ So, user knowledge is playing important role… Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions
  • 25.
    Our Approach: NewRound with New Constraints Using Interactive Genetic Algorithm for Requirements Prioritization 25  The new evolved population after using GA operators on population:  Crossover  Mutation  Selection  is compared against the new set of constraints graphs Eli DepPrio Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions
  • 26.
    Using Interactive Genetic Algorithm for Requirements Prioritization 26 Evaluation ofthe Approach Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions
  • 27.
    The Case Study Using Interactive Genetic Algorithmfor Requirements Prioritization 27  Prioritize requirements for a real software system, as part of the project ACube (Ambient Aware Assistance) designing a highly technological monitoring environment to be deployed in nursing homes to support medical and assistance staff  After user requirements analysis phase, 60 user requirements and 49 technical requirements Four macro-scenarios have been identified. ID Macro-Scenario # of requirements FALL Monitoring falls 26 ESC Monitoring escapes 23 MON Monitoring dangerous behavior 21 ALL The three scenarios 49 *ACube is a social welfare project coordinated by Fondazione Bruno Kessler (FBK) and funded by Autonomous Province of Trento under Bando Grandi Progetti, 2006. Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions
  • 28.
    Gold Standard (GS) Using Interactive Genetic Algorithmfor Requirements Prioritization 28  For each of the four macro-scenarios, we obtained the Gold Standard (GS) prioritization from the Software Architect of the ACube project  The GS prioritization is the ordering given by the software architect to the requirements when planning their implementation during the ACube project. Why Gold Standard?  To measure disagreements with respect to GS.  To evaluate our approach in terms of disagreement against other non-interactive approaches using the same GS. Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions
  • 29.
  • 30.
    R Q 1 Using Interactive Genetic Algorithmfor Requirements Prioritization 30 RQ1 (Convergence) Can we observe convergence with respect to the finally elicited fitness function? - Convergence is not obvious immediately, as Eli Graph is evolving at early stages. - Although the full fitness function is known only at end of elicitation process. The best individual in each population converges toward a low value of the final fitness function.Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions YES!
  • 31.
    R Q 2 Using Interactive Genetic Algorithmfor Requirements Prioritization 31 RQ2 (Role of interaction) Does IGA produce improved prioritizations compared to non-interactive requirement ordering? IGA outperforms substantially GA (and RAND), especially when a higher number of pairwise comparisons can be carried out YES! Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions
  • 32.
    R Q 3 Using Interactive Genetic Algorithmfor Requirements Prioritization 32 RQ3 (Role of initial precedence constraints) How does initial availability of precedence constraints affect the performance of IGA? - Different type of Domain Knowledge affects IGA significantly - The improvement of IGA over GA is even higher when limited ranking information is available Improves! Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions
  • 33.
    R Q 4 Using Interactive Genetic Algorithmfor Requirements Prioritization 33 RQ4 (Robustness) Is IGA robust with respect to errors committed by the user during the elicitation of pairwise comparisons? IGA can tolerate user errors up to 20%. YES!Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions
  • 34.
    General Discussion Using Interactive Genetic Algorithm for Requirements Prioritization 34 Cost/benefit trade off offered by IGA as compared to AHP is extremely interesting  With an elicitation effort reduced to 10% of the one required by AHP, IGA produces an apprx. ordering which has a quite low disagreement from the requirement positions in the GS.  User Errors tolerance offered by IGA as compared to AHP is highly reasonable  With an elicitation of very significant amount of less pairs than AHP (i.e. pairwise comparisons), it is reasonable even if IGA accepts up to 20% user error, while using AHP even 10% user error can result a total bad ordering. Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions
  • 35.
    Conclusions & FutureWorks Using Interactive Genetic Algorithm for Requirements Prioritization 35  We proposed an Interactive Genetic Algorithm to collect pairwise information useful to prioritize the requirements for a software system.  We also verified the robustness of the algorithm with respect to increasing user feedback errors.  We evaluated the approach in a real project (ACube).  In summary, we contributed A NOVEL APPROACH to prioritize requirements & tested its effectiveness empirically. What’s Next? Algorithm: - refining the algorithm - improving GA operators Experiment - off-line: comparisons with other approaches - on-line: controlled experiments with real object (i.e. human) Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions
  • 36.
    Paper Publication Using Interactive Genetic Algorithm for Requirements Prioritization 36 Apaper was published from this work and was presented at SSBSE 2010: Paolo Tonella1, Angelo Susi1, and Francis Palma2, "Using Interactive GA for Requirements Prioritization" in 2nd International Symposium on Search Based Software Engineering 2010. 1Fondazione Bruno Kessler, Software Engineering Research Unit; 2Department of Inf. Eng. and Computer Science, University of Trento. Outline Problem Related Works Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions
  • 37.
    Using Interactive Genetic Algorithm for Requirements Prioritization 37 Thank You! Outline Problem RelatedWorks Genetic Algo Our Approach Case Study Results Discussions Conclusions