Recovering and using use-case-diagram-to-source-code traceability links

ABSTRACT

Use case diagrams (UCDs) are widely used to describe requirements and desired functionality of software products. However, UCDs are loosely linked to source code, and maintaining traces between the source code and elements of UCDs is a manual, tedious, and laborious process. These traces help programmers to understand code that they maintain and evolve.

Our contribution is twofold. First, we offer a novel approach for automating part of the process of recovering traceability links (TLs) between types and variables in Java programs and elements of UCDs. We evaluate our prototype implementation on open-source and commercial software, and the results suggest that our approach can recover many TLs with a high degree of automation and precision.

Second, we developed an Eclipse plugin that enables programmers to trace program types and variables to elements of UCDs and vice versa using recovered TLs. We conducted a case study that shows that programmers could maintain and evolve software more efficiently with our plugin. These results demonstrate that modest programmer effort to create TLs together with automated program mining and analysis is a promising approach than can increase program understanding while reducing programmer burden.

REFERENCES

• 1: Private conversations with IBM Rational, ETrade, GE, Bank of New York, and Bank of America employees.
• 2: Bente Anda , Kai Hansen , Ingolf Gullesen , Hanne Kristin Thorsen, Experiences from introducing UML-based development in a large safety-critical project, Empirical Software Engineering, v.11 n.4, p.555-581, December 2006 [doi>10.1007/s10664-006-9020-6]
• 3: Nicolas Anquetil , Timothy Lethbridge, Assessing the relevance of identifier names in a legacy software system, Proceedings of the 1998 conference of the Centre for Advanced Studies on Collaborative research, p.4, November 30-December 03, 1998, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
• 4: Giuliano Antoniol , Gerardo Canfora , Gerardo Casazza , Andrea De Lucia , Ettore Merlo, Recovering Traceability Links between Code and Documentation, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, v.28 n.10, p.970-983, October 2002 [doi>10.1109/TSE.2002.1041053]
• 5: Ted J. Biggerstaff , Bharat G. Mitbander , Dallas Webster, The concept assignment problem in program understanding, Proceedings of the 15th international conference on Software Engineering, p.482-498, May 17-21, 1993, Baltimore, Maryland, United States
• 6: Kunrong Chen , Václav Rajlich, Case Study of Feature Location Using Dependence Graph, Proceedings of the 8th International Workshop on Program Comprehension, p.241, June 10-11, 2000
• 7: Jane Cleland-Huang , Raffaella Settimi , Oussama BenKhadra , Eugenia Berezhanskaya , Selvia Christina, Goal-centric traceability for managing non-functional requirements, Proceedings of the 27th international conference on Software engineering, May 15-21, 2005, St. Louis, MO, USA [doi>10.1145/1062455.1062525]
• 8: W. W. Cohen and H. Hirsh. Joins that generalize: Text classification using WHIRL. In KDD, pages 169--173, 1998.
• 9: Merlin Dorfman , Richard F. Flynn, ART-an automated requirements traceability system, Journal of Systems and Software, v.4 n.1, p.63-74, April 1984 [doi>10.1016/0164-1212(84)90022-0]
• 10: Alexander Egyed, A scenario-driven approach to traceability, Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Software Engineering, p.123-132, May 12-19, 2001, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
• 11: Alexander Egyed , Paul Grünbacher, Automating Requirements Traceability: Beyond the Record & Replay Paradigm, Proceedings of the 17th IEEE international conference on Automated software engineering, p.163, September 23-27, 2002
• 12: Ivar Jacobson, Object-oriented development in an industrial environment, Conference proceedings on Object-oriented programming systems, languages and applications, p.183-191, October 04-08, 1987, Orlando, Florida, United States
• 13: Andrian Marcus , Jonathan I. Maletic, Recovering documentation-to-source-code traceability links using latent semantic indexing, Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Software Engineering, May 03-10, 2003, Portland, Oregon
• 14: R. Michalski and G. Tecuci. Machine Learning: A Multistrategy Approach. Morgan Kaufmann, February 1994.
• 15: Gail C. Murphy , David Notkin , Kevin Sullivan, Software reflexion models: bridging the gap between source and high-level models, Proceedings of the 3rd ACM SIGSOFT symposium on Foundations of software engineering, p.18-28, October 12-15, 1995, Washington, D.C., United States
• 16: Francisco A. C. Pinheiro , Joseph A. Goguen, An Object-Oriented Tool for Tracing Requirements, IEEE Software, v.13 n.2, p.52-64, March 1996 [doi>10.1109/52.506462]
• 17: Denys Poshyvanyk , Andrian Marcus , Vaclav Rajlich , Yann-Gael Gueheneuc , Giuliano Antoniol, Combining Probabilistic Ranking and Latent Semantic Indexing for Feature Identification, Proceedings of the 14th IEEE International Conference on Program Comprehension, p.137-148, June 14-16, 2006 [doi>10.1109/ICPC.2006.17]
• 18: Jonathan Sillito , Gail C. Murphy , Kris De Volder, Questions programmers ask during software evolution tasks, Proceedings of the 14th ACM SIGSOFT international symposium on Foundations of software engineering, November 05-11, 2006, Portland, Oregon, USA [doi>10.1145/1181775.1181779]
• 19: George Spanoudakis, Plausible and adaptive requirement traceability structures, Proceedings of the 14th international conference on Software engineering and knowledge engineering, July 15-19, 2002, Ischia, Italy [doi>10.1145/568760.568786]
• 20: Lin Tan , Ding Yuan , Yuanyuan Zhou, Hotcomments: how to make program comments more useful?, Proceedings of the 11th USENIX workshop on Hot topics in operating systems, p.1-6, May 07-09, 2007, San Diego, CA
• 21: Ian H. Witten , Eibe Frank, Data Mining: Practical Machine Learning Tools and Techniques, Second Edition (Morgan Kaufmann Series in Data Management Systems), Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., San Francisco, CA, 2005

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  D. Software
  D.2 SOFTWARE ENGINEERING
      D.2.1 Requirements/Specifications
          Subjects: Methodologies (e.g., object-oriented, structured)

Additional Classification:
  D. Software
  D.2 SOFTWARE ENGINEERING
      D.2.1 Requirements/Specifications
          Subjects: Tools
      D.2.9 Management
          Subjects: Productivity

General Terms:
Algorithms, Documentation, Experimentation

Keywords:
LeanArt, machine learning, program analysis, traceability links, use case diagram