Special track at SEFM 2010
to honour Geoff Dromey's memory
  • Peter A. Lindsay Behavior Trees: from Systems Engineering to Software Engineering
    AbstractClick to Show/Hide Abstract

    Geoff Dromey's Behavior Engineering method provides a vital link between systems engineering processes and software engineering processes.

    It has proven particularly effective in industry when applied to large complex systems, to help understand the problem space and clarify system and software requirements.

    In this paper we examine what it is about Behavior Trees that makes them succeed as a system design notation and method. We compare the method with some of the most widely used system design methods, including State Transition Diagrams, Algorithmic State Machines, Object Oriented Design in some of its various manifestations, IDEF0, UML and SysML.
    The comparison draws on the Design-Methods Comparison Project undertaken by Bahill et al in 1998, and uses their Traffic Lights case study to illustrate the similarities with, and differences from, the Behavior Engineering method.

  • Kirsten Winter, Ian J. Hayes, Robert Colvin Integrating Requirements: The Behavior Tree Approach
    AbstractClick to Show/Hide Abstract

    Behavior Trees were invented by Geoff Dromey as a graphical modelling notation.

    Their design was driven by the wish to ease the task of capturing functional system requirements and to bridge the gap between informal language description and the formal model. Vital to Dromey's intention is the idea of incrementally creating the model out of its building blocks, the functional requirements.
    This is done by graphically representing each requirement as a mini 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 framework of rules and provides us with a semantic underpinning of requirements integration. We then use Behavior Trees as an example how this framework can be put into practise.

  • Daniel Powell Behavior Engineering - A Scalable Modeling and Analysis Method
    AbstractClick to Show/Hide Abstract

    The impact of failing to develop a shared understanding of the requirements describing and constraining large, complex projects and programs with many, possibly distributed, stakeholders and suppliers is enormous.

    Traditional engineering methods provide little in the way of taming complexity when synthesising, analysing and communicating the requirements of such projects.

    The Behavior Engineering method, developed at Griffith University, and employed on a number of large, complex and nationally critical defence, aerospace, transport and government projects and programs addresses the problems of scale and complexity head on.

    The Behavior Engineering method is presented in this paper as an efficient and effective method for modeling, analysing, evaluating and communicating large requirements specifications comprising thousands of requirements as well as a method that facilitates the synthesis of quality requirements from architectural models and scenarios.

    It is demonstrated through analysis of industry data, that Behavior Engineering facilitates the development and communication of a deep, accurate and holistic understanding of the system needs, significantly reducing the risk of failure to capture and preserve intent in the development of large and complex systems.

   

 
www.sefm2010.isti.cnr.it SEFM 2010 School
Home    |    News   |   Downloads   |   Sitemap   |     |   rss feed   |   css 2.1   |   last updated: 08 Jul, 2010 - 17:41