In this position paper I argue that RE practice is the problem analysis part of a design problem, and that this problem analysis part is a knowledge problem in which the requirements engineer tries to build a theory of a problem domain. RE research is a knowledge problem too, in which the researcher tries to build partial theories of a class of domains. In both cases, models can help to find theories, because models are entities that are more accessible, or more understandable, than their subjects and therefore help to find a theory of their subject. I compare a number of concepts closely related to that of a model, including that of paradigm, benchmark and exemplar. Finally, I argue that the evaluation of RE theories, at whatever level, is not different from the evaluation of any other theory: They should be repeatably and intersubjectively true.
|Publication status||Published - 8 Sep 2003|
|Event||First International Workshop on Comparative Evaluation in Requirements Engineering, CERE 2003 - Monterey Bay, United States|
Duration: 8 Sep 2003 → 8 Sep 2003
Conference number: 1
|Workshop||First International Workshop on Comparative Evaluation in Requirements Engineering, CERE 2003|
|Period||8/09/03 → 8/09/03|
- IS-Design science methodology
Gervasi, V. (Ed.), Wieringa, R. J., Zowghi, D. (Ed.), Easterbrook, S. (Ed.), & Sim, S. E. (Ed.) (2003). Methodologies of requirements engineering research and practice: position statement. Paper presented at First International Workshop on Comparative Evaluation in Requirements Engineering, CERE 2003, Monterey Bay, United States.