A framework for multi-valued reasoning over inconsistent viewpoints

Abstract

In requirements elicitation, different stakeholders often hold different views of how a proposed system should behave, resulting in inconsistencies between their descriptions. Consensus may not be needed for every detail, but it can be hard to determine whether a particular disagreement affects the critical properties of the system. In this paper, we describe the Xbel framework for merging and reasoning about multiple, inconsistent state machine models. Xbel permits the analyst to choose how to combine information from the multiple viewpoints, where each viewpoint is described using an underlying multi-valued logic. The different values of our logics typically represent different levels of agreement. Our multi-valued model checker, Xchek, allows us to check the merged model against properties expressed in a temporal logic. The resulting framework can be used as an exploration tool to support requirements negotiation, by determining what properties are preserved for various combinations of inconsistent viewpoints.