Specifying features in terms of domain models: MuDForM method definition and case study

• Published in: Journal of software : evolution and process 2024-06, Vol.36 (6), p.n/a
• Main Authors: Deckers, Robert, Lago, Patricia
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Case studies; domain modeling; feature modeling; ISO26262; language engineering; Literature reviews; method engineering; model‐based engineering; process modeling; Software development; Specifications
• ISSN: 2047-7473; 2047-7481
• DOI: 10.1002/smr.2623

To enable the people involved in a software development process to communicate and reason close to their area of knowledge, we are investigating and engineering a method that formalizes and integrates knowledge of multiple domains into domain models and into specifications in terms of those domain models. We follow an action research approach, starting with a diagnosis phase, in which we have previously defined a set of method objectives, and performed a systematic literature review. During action planning, we defined how we are going to develop the method—called Multi‐Domain Formalization Method (MuDForM). This paper reports on the methodical support for using a domain model as the terminology for feature specifications. During action taking, we defined an initial version of the method and set up case studies. During the evaluation phase, we performed a case study to validate how well the method helps in the specification of processes and to realize the case‐specific objectives of the customer. The case study pertains to the formalization of the ISO26262 standard for functional safety in the automotive domain. The created models are explained to the involved experts to ensure their consistency with the original text. We found that MuDForM is suitable to systematically formalize processes described in natural language, such that the resulting process models are fully expressed in terms of domain concepts and concepts from outside the domains and processes of interest. Further, during the specifying learning phase, we have extended our method with concepts, steps, and guidelines for grammatical analysis, for formalization of constraints, and for the specification of processes. This paper presents methodical support for using domain models as a language to specify features, such that it is an intrinsic part of our domain‐oriented modeling method that also covers the creation of domain models. It also presents the validation of the method in an industrial case.