LOGIN TO YOUR ACCOUNT

Username
Password
Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Or use your Academic/Social account:

Congratulations!

You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.

Important!

Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Name:
Username:
Password:
Verify Password:
E-mail:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Pavlidis, Michail (2014)
Languages: English
Types: Doctoral thesis
Subjects:
Trustworthy information systems are information systems that fulfill all the functional\ud and non-functional requirements. To this end, all the components of an information\ud system, either human or technical, need to collaborate in order to meet its\ud requirements and achieve its goals. This entails that system components will show\ud the desired or expected behaviour once the system is put in operation. However,\ud modern information systems include a great number of components that can behave\ud in a very unpredictable way. This unpredictability of the behaviour of the system\ud components is a major challenge to the development of trustworthy information systems\ud and more particularly during the modelling stage. When a system component\ud is modelled as part of a requirements engineering model it creates an uncertainty\ud about its future behaviour, thus undermining the accuracy of the system model and\ud eventually the system trustworthiness. Therefore, the addition of system components\ud inevitably is based on assumptions of their future behaviour. Such assumptions are\ud underlying the development of a system and usually are assumptions of trust by the\ud system developer about her trust relationships with the system components, which\ud are instantly formed when a component is inserted into a requirements engineering\ud model of a system. However, despite the importance of such issues, a requirements\ud engineering methodology that explicitly captures such trust relationships along with\ud the entailing trust assumptions and trustworthiness requirements is still missing.\ud For tackling the preceding problems, the thesis proposes a requirements engineering\ud methodology, namely JTrust (Justifying Trust) for developing trustworthy information\ud systems. The methodology is founded upon the notions of trust and control\ud as the means of confidence achievement. In order to develop an information system\ud the developer needs to consider her trust relationships with the system components\ud that are formed with their addition in a system model, reason about them, and proceed\ud to a justified decision about the design of the system. If the system component\ud cannot be trusted to behave in a desired or expected way then the question of what\ud are the alternatives in order to build confidence in the future behaviour of the system\ud component raises. To answer this question we define a new class of requirements,\ud namely trustworthiness requirements. Trustworthiness requirements prescribe the\ud functionality of the software included in the information system that compels the\ud rest of the information system components to behave in a desired or expected way.\ud The proposed methodology consists of: (i) a modelling language which contains trust\ud i\ud and control abstractions; (ii) and a methodological process for capturing and reasoning\ud about trust relationships, modelling and analysing trustworthiness requirements,\ud and assessing the system trustworthiness at a requirements stage. The methodology\ud is accompanied by a CASE tool to support it.\ud To evaluate our proposal, we have applied our methodology to a case study, and\ud we carried out a survey to get feedback from experts. The topic of the case study was\ud the e-health care system of the National Health Service in England, which was used to\ud reason about trust relationships with system components and identify trustworthiness\ud requirements. Researchers from three academic institutions across Europe and from\ud one industrial company, British Telecom, have participated in the survey in order to\ud provide valuable feedback about the effectiveness and efficiency of the methodology.\ud The results conclude that JTrust is useful and easy to use in modelling and reasoning\ud about trust relationships, modelling and analysing trustworthiness requirements and\ud assessing the system trustworthiness at a requirements level.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • Avizienis, A., J.-C. Laprie, and B. Randell (2004). \Dependability and Its Threats: A Taxonomy". In: Building the Information Society. Ed. by R. Jacquart. Vol. 156. IFIP International Federation for Information Processing. Springer US, pp. 91{120.
    • Axelrod, R. (1984). The evolution of Cooperation. New York, NY, USA: Basic Books Inc.
    • Bangemann, M. et al. (1994). \Recommendations to the European Council: Europe and the global information society". In: Brussels: European Commission.
    • Barber, B. (1983). The logic and Limits of Trust. Rutgers University Press.
    • Berard, E. V. (1995). What is a methodology. White Paper. The Object Agency.
    • Berzins, V. (2004). \Trustworthiness as risk abatement". In: Center for National Software Studies Workshop on Trustworthy Software. Citeseer, p. 9.
    • Bigley, G. A. and J. L. Pearce (1998). \Straining for Shared Meaning in Organization Science: Problems of Trust and Distrust". In: The Academy of Management Review 23.3, pp. 405{421.
    • Bimrah, K. K. (2009). \A Framework for Modelling Trust During Information Systems Development." PhD thesis. University of East London.
    • Blaze, M., J. Feigenbaum, and J. Lacy (1996). \Decentralized trust management". In: Security and Privacy, 1996. Proceedings., 1996 IEEE Symposium on, pp. 164{173.
    • Blaze, M., J. Feigenbaum, and A. D. Keromytis (1999). \KeyNote: Trust Management for Public-Key Infrastructures (Position Paper)". In: Proceedings of the 6th International Workshop on Security Protocols. London, UK, UK: Springer-Verlag, pp. 59{63.
    • Bostrom, R. P. and J. S. Heinen (1977). \MIS Problems and failures: a sociotechnical perspective part I: the cause". In: MIS Q. 1.3, pp. 17{32.
    • Braynov, S. (2002). \Contracting with uncertain level of trust". In: Computational Intelligence 18, pp. 501{514.
    • Bresciani, P. et al. (2004). \Tropos: An Agent-Oriented Software Development Methodology". English. In: Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems 8.3, pp. 203{236.
    • Brooks, A. and L. Scott (2001). \Constraints in CASE tools: results from curiosity driven research". In: Software Engineering Conference, 2001. Proceedings. 2001 Australian. IEEE, pp. 285{293.
    • Castelfranchi, C. and R. Falcone (1998). \Principles of trust for MAS: Cognitive anatomy, social importance, and quanti cation". In: Multi Agent Systems, 1998. Proceedings. International Conference on. IEEE, pp. 72{79.
    • | (2000). \Trust Is Much More than Subjective Probability: Mental Components and Sources of Trust". In: Proceedings of the 33rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences-Volume 6 - Volume 6. HICSS '00. Washington, DC, USA: IEEE Computer Society.
    • Charney, S. (2012). \Trustworthy Computing Next". In: Microsoft, white paper.
    • Chu, Y. H. et al. (June 1997). \Referee: Trust Management for Web Applications". In: World Wide Web J. 2.3, pp. 127{139.
    • Chung, L. and J. C. S. do Prado Leite (2009). \On non-functional requirements in software engineering". In: Conceptual modeling: Foundations and applications. Springer, pp. 363{379.
    • Chung, L. et al. (2000). Non-functional requirements in Software Engineering. Kluwer Academic Publishers.
    • Cofta, P. (2007). Trust, complexity and control: con dence in a convergent world. John Wiley.
    • Cofta, P. (2008). \Towards a better citizen identi cation system". English. In: Identity in the Information Society 1.1, pp. 39{53.
    • Cofta, P., H. Lacohee, and P. Hodgson (2010). \Incorporating Social Trust into Design Practices for Secure Systems". In: IJDTIS 1.4, pp. 1{24.
    • Dardenne, A., A. van Lamsweerde, and S. Fickas (Apr. 1993). \Goal-directed requirements acquisition". In: Science of Computer Programming 20.1-2, pp. 3{50.
    • Das, T. K. and B.-S. Teng (1998). \Between trust and control: developing con dence in partner cooperation in alliances". In: Academy of management review 23.3, pp. 491{ 512.
    • Dasgupta, P. (2000). \Trust as a commodity". In: Trust: Making and breaking cooperative relations 4, pp. 49{72.
    • Deutsch, M. (1962). \Cooperation and trust: Some theoretical notes". In: Nebraska Symposium on Motivation.
    • Doherty, N. and M. King (1998). \The importance of organisational issues in systems development". In: Information Technology & people 11.2, pp. 104{123.
    • Drenth, P. J. (2012). A European code of conduct for research integrity.
    • Easterbrook, S. et al. (2008). \Selecting Empirical Methods for Software Engineering Research". In: Guide to Advanced Empirical Software Engineering. Ed. by F. Shull, J. Singer, and D. Sj berg. Springer London, pp. 285{311.
    • Egger, F. N. (2003). \From interactions to transactions: designing the trust experience for business-to-consumer electronic commerce". PhD thesis.
    • Elahi, G. and E. Yu (2009). \Trust trade-o analysis for security requirements engineering". In: Requirements Engineering Conference, 2009. RE'09. 17th IEEE International. IEEE, pp. 243{248.
    • Finnigan, D., R. Kemp, and D. Mehandjiska (2000). \Towards an ideal CASE tool". In: Software Methods and Tools, 2000. SMT 2000. Proceedings. International Conference on. IEEE, pp. 189{197.
    • Flyvbjerg, B. (2006). \Five Misunderstandings About Case-Study Research". In: Qualitative Inquiry 12.2, pp. 219{245.
    • Fortune, J. and G. Peters (2005). Information Systems: Achieving Success by Avoiding Failure. John Wiley & Sons.
    • Friedman, B., P. H. Khan Jr, and D. C. Howe (2000). \Trust online". In: Communications of the ACM 43.12, pp. 34{40.
    • Gambetta, D. (1988). Trust: Making and Breaking Cooperative Relations. Blackwell.
    • Garc a-Magarin~o, I. and J. J. Gomez-Sanz (2008). \Framework for de ning model language metamodels for CASE tools". In: Model-based Methodologies for Pervasive and Embedded Software, 2008. MOMPES 2008. 5th International Workshop on. IEEE, pp. 14{23.
    • Giorgini, P. et al. (2005). \Modeling security requirements through ownership, permission and delegation". In: Requirements Engineering, 2005. Proceedings. 13th IEEE International Conference on, pp. 167{176.
    • Giorgini, P. et al. (2003). \Reasoning with goal models". In: Conceptual Modeling|ER 2002. Springer, pp. 167{181.
    • Giorgini, P. et al. (2004). \Requirements Engineering Meets Trust Management". In: Trust Management. Ed. by C. Jensen, S. Poslad, and T. Dimitrakos. Vol. 2995. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, pp. 176{190.
    • Gorski, J. et al. (2005). \Trust case: Justifying trust in an IT solution". In: Reliability Engineering & System Safety 89.1, pp. 33{47.
    • Grandison, T. (2003). \Trust Management for Internet Applications". PhD thesis. Imperial College London.
    • Haley, B. et al. (Feb. 2006). \Using Trust Assumptions with Security Requirements". In: Requir. Eng. 11.2, pp. 138{151.
    • Haley, C. et al. (2008). \Security Requirements Engineering: A Framework for Representation and Analysis". In: Software Engineering, IEEE Transactions on 34.1, pp. 133 {153.
    • Hasselbring, W. and R. Reussner (2006). \Toward trustworthy software systems". In: Computer 39.4, pp. 91{92.
    • Hatebur, D., M. Heisel, and H. Schmidt (2007). \A Pattern System for Security Requirements Engineering". In: Availability, Reliability and Security, 2007. ARES 2007. The Second International Conference on. IEEE, pp. 356{365.
    • Herzberg, A. et al. (2000). \Access control meets public key infrastructure, or: assigning roles to strangers". In: Security and Privacy, 2000. S P 2000. Proceedings. 2000 IEEE Symposium on, pp. 2{14.
    • Ho man, L. J., K. Lawson-Jenkins, and J. Blum (July 2006). \Trust Beyond Security: An Expanded Trust Model". In: Commun. ACM 49.7, pp. 94{101.
    • IEEE (1990). \IEEE Standard Glossary of Software Engineering Terminology". In: IEEE Std 610.12, pp. 1{84.
    • Iivari, J. and R. Hirschheim (1996). \Analyzing information systems development: A comparison and analysis of eight is development approaches". In: Information Systems 21.7, pp. 551 {575.
    • Islam, S., H. Mouratidis, and S. Wagner (2010). \Towards a framework to elicit and manage security and privacy requirements from laws and regulations". In: Requirements Engineering: Foundation for Software Quality. Springer, pp. 255{261.
    • Jackson, M. (1997). \The meaning of requirements". English. In: Annals of Software Engineering 3.1, pp. 5{21.
    • | (2001). Problem frames: analysing and structuring software development problems. Addison-Wesley.
    • Jayaswal, B. K. and P. C. Patton (2006). Design for Trustworthy Software: Tools, Techniques, and Methodology of Developing Robust Software. Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA: Prentice Hall PTR.
    • J sang, A., R. Ismail, and C. Boyd (2007). \A survey of trust and reputation systems for online service provision". In: Decision support systems 43.2, pp. 618{644.
    • J sang, A., C. Keser, and T. Dimitrakos (2005). \Can We Manage Trust?" In: Trust Management. Ed. by P. Herrmann, V. Issarny, and S. Shiu. Vol. 3477. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, pp. 93{107.
    • Jurjens, J. (2005). Secure systems development with UML. Vol. 1. Springer.
    • Kalloniatis, C., E. Kavakli, and S. Gritzalis (2008). \Addressing privacy requirements in system design: the PriS method". In: Requirements Engineering 13.3, pp. 241{255.
    • Karagiannis, D. and H. Kuhn (2002). \Metamodelling platforms". In: EC-Web, p. 182.
    • Kini, A. and J. Choobineh (1998). \Trust in electronic commerce: de nition and theoretical considerations". In: System Sciences, 1998., Proceedings of the Thirty-First Hawaii International Conference on. Vol. 4, 51{61 vol.4.
    • Kitchenham, B. (1996). DESMET: A method for evaluating Software Engineering methods and tools. Tech. rep. Department of Computer Science Department of Computer Science, University of Keele.
    • Kitchenham, B., S. Linkman, and D. Law (1997). \DESMET: a methodology for evaluating software engineering methods and tools". In: Computing Control Engineering Journal 8.3, pp. 120{126.
    • Kitchenham, B. et al. (2002). \Preliminary guidelines for empirical research in software engineering". In: Software Engineering, IEEE Transactions on 28.8, pp. 721{734.
    • Klopper, R., S. Gruner, and D. G. Kourie (2007). \Assessment of a framework to compare software development methodologies". In: Proceedings of the 2007 annual research conference of the South African institute of computer scientists and information technologists on IT research in developing countries. ACM, pp. 56{65.
    • Lamsweerde, A. van (2001). \Goal-oriented requirements engineering: a guided tour". In: Requirements Engineering, 2001. Proceedings. Fifth IEEE International Symposium on, pp. 249{262.
    • Lamsweerde, A. and E. Letier (2004). \From Object Orientation to Goal Orientation: A Paradigm Shift for Requirements Engineering". In: Radical Innovations of Software and Systems Engineering in the Future. Ed. by M. Wirsing, A. Knapp, and S. Balsamo. Vol. 2941. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, pp. 325{ 340.
    • Lapouchnian, A. (2005). \Goal-Oriented Requirements Engineering - An Overview of the Current Research". MA thesis. University of Toronto.
    • Letier, E. and A. van Lamsweerde (2002). \Agent-based Tactics for Goal-oriented Requirements Elaboration". In: Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Software Engineering. ICSE '02. Orlando, Florida: ACM, pp. 83{93.
    • | (2004). \Reasoning about partial goal satisfaction for requirements and design engineering". In: Proceedings of the 12th ACM SIGSOFT twelfth international symposium on Foundations of software engineering. SIGSOFT '04/FSE-12. Newport Beach, CA, USA: ACM, pp. 53{62.
    • Lewicki, R. J. and B. B. Bunker (1996). \Developing and maintaining trust in work relationships". In: Trust in organizations Frontiers of theory and research. Ed. by R. M. Kramer and T. R. Tyler. Vol. 1. Sage, pp. 114{139.
    • Lewis, J. D. and A. Weigert (1985). \Trust as a social reality". In: Social forces 63.4, pp. 967{985.
    • Lipner, S. (2004). \The trustworthy computing security development lifecycle". In: Computer Security Applications Conference, 2004. 20th Annual. IEEE, pp. 2{13.
    • Luhmann, N. (1979). Trust and Power. Wiley.
    • | (1988). \Familiarity, Con dence, Trust: Problems and Alternatives". In: D. Gambetta, editor, Trust: Making and Breaking of Cooperative Relations, Basil Blackwell, Oxford, 1988.
    • Luna-Reyes, L. et al. (2005). \Information systems development as emergent socio-technical change: a practice approach". In: European Journal of Information Systems 14.1, pp. 93{105.
    • Lund, M. S., B. Solhaug, and K. St len (2010). Model-driven risk analysis: the CORAS approach. Springer.
    • Lyytinen, K. and M. Newman (2008). \Explaining Information Systems Change: A Punctuated Socio-technical Change Model". In: European Journal of Information Systems 17.6, pp. 589{613.
    • Marcos, E. (2005). \Software engineering research versus software development". In: ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes 30.4, pp. 1{7.
    • Marsh, S. and P. Briggs (2009). \Examining Trust, Forgiveness and Regret as Computational Concepts". In: Computing with social trust. Springer, pp. 9{43.
    • Marsh, S. P. (1994). \Formalising trust as a computational concept". PhD thesis.
    • Mastho , J. (2007). \Computationally modelling trust: an exploration". In: Proceedings of the SociUM workshop associated with the User Modeling conference.
    • Mayer, R. C., J. H. Davis, and F. D. Schoorman (1995). \An integrative model of organizational trust". In: Academy of management review 20.3, pp. 709{734.
    • McAllister, D. J. (1995). \A ect and Cognition Based Trust as Foundations for Interpersonal Cooperation in Organisations". In: Academy of Management Journal 38.1, pp. 24 {59.
    • McGraw, D. et al. (2009). \Privacy as an enabler, not an impediment: building trust into health information exchange". In: Health A airs 28.2, pp. 416{427.
    • McKnight, D. H. and N. L. Chervany (1996). The Meanings of Trust. Tech. rep. University of Minnesota.
    • McKnight, D. H. and N. L. Chervany (2000). \What is trust? A conceptual analysis and an interdisciplinary model". In: AMCIS.
    • McKnight, D. H., L. L. Cummings, and N. L. Chervany (1998). \Initial trust formation in new organizational relationships". In: Academy of management review 23.3, pp. 473{ 490.
    • McKnight, D. and L. Chervany (2006). \Handbook of Trust Research". In: ed. by R. Bachmann and A. Zaheer. Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd. Chap. Re ections on an Initial Trust-Buiding Model, pp. 29{51.
    • Michie, D. (1982). \The state of the art in machine learning". In: Introductory readings in expert systems, pp. 208{229.
    • Miller, K. and J. Voas (2009). \The Metaphysics of Software Trust". In: IT Professional 11.2, pp. 52{55.
    • Mollering, G. (2005). \The Trust/Control Duality An Integrative Perspective on Positive Expectations of Others". In: International sociology 20.3, pp. 283{305.
    • Moody, D. et al. (2003). \Evaluating the quality of information models: empirical testing of a conceptual model quality framework". In: Software Engineering, 2003. Proceedings. 25th International Conference on, pp. 295 {305.
    • Mouratidis, H. and P. Cofta (Dec. 2010). \Practitioner's challenges in designing trust into online systems". In: J. Theor. Appl. Electron. Commer. Res. 5.3, pp. 65{77.
    • Mouratidis, H. and P. Giorgini (2007). \Secure Tropos: A Security-Oriented Extension of the Tropos Methodology". In: International Journal of Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering 17.02, pp. 285{309.
    • Mylopoulos, J., L. Chung, and E. Yu (Jan. 1999). \From Object-Oriented to Goal-Oriented Requirements Analysis". In: Communications of ACM 42.1, pp. 31{37.
    • | (2011a). Summary Care Record Scope. Tech. rep.
    • | (2011b). The Care Record Guarantee. Tech. rep.
    • | (2012a). Introduction to the Summary Care Record. Tech. rep.
    • | (2012b). NHS Summary Care Record - Guide for GP Practice Sta .pdf. Tech. rep.
    • | (2013a). aaaaaHealth and social care information centre. url: http://www.hscic. gov.uk/home.
    • | (2013b). The Handbook to the NHS Constitution. Tech. rep.
    • Nielsen, J. (1994). Usability engineering. Elsevier.
    • O ce, N. A. (2011). The National Programme for IT in the NHS - an update on the delivery of detailed care records systems. Tech. rep. Department of Health, UK.
    • (OMG), O. M. G. SPEM 2.0.
    • Parnas, D. L. and J. Madey (1995). \Functional documents for computer systems". In: Science of Computer Programming 25.1, pp. 41 {61.
    • Partridge, D. (1997). \The case for inductive programming". In: Computer 30.1, pp. 36{ 41.
    • Pavlidis, M. et al. (2012). \Dealing with trust and control: A meta-model for trustworthy information systems development". In: Research Challenges in Information Science (RCIS), 2012 Sixth International Conference on, pp. 1{9.
    • Pavlidis, M., H. Mouratidis, and S. Islam (2012). \Modelling security using trust based concepts". In: International Journal of Secure Software Engineering (IJSSE) 3.2, pp. 36{ 53.
    • Pavlidis, M. et al. (2014). \Modeling Trust Relationships for Developing Trustworthy Information Systems". In: International Journal of Information System Modeling and Design (IJISMD) 5.1, pp. 25{48.
    • Pearson, S. and B. Balache (2003). Trusted computing platforms: TCPA technology in context. Prentice Hall Professional.
    • Phillips, C. et al. (1998). \The usability component of a framework for the evaluation of OO CASE tools". In: Software Engineering: Education & Practice, 1998. Proceedings. 1998 International Conference. IEEE, pp. 134{141.
    • Pourshahid, A. and T. Tran (2007). \Modeling trust in e-commerce: an approach based on user requirements". In: Proceedings of the ninth international conference on Electronic commerce. ACM, pp. 413{422.
    • Presti, S. L. et al. (2006). \Holistic Trust Design of E-Services". In: Trust in E-Services: Technologies, Practices and Challenges, pp. 113{139.
    • Public Accounts, C. of (2013). The dismantled National Programme for IT in the NHS. Tech. rep. House of Commons.
    • Rasmusson, L. and S. Jansson (1996). \Simulated social control for secure Internet commerce". In: Proceedings of the 1996 workshop on New security paradigms. ACM, pp. 18{ 25.
    • Ray, I. and S. Chakraborty (2004). \A Vector Model of Trust for Developing Trustworthy Systems". In: Computer Security { ESORICS 2004. Ed. by P. Samarati et al. Vol. 3193. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, pp. 260{275.
    • Rempel, J. K., J. G. Holmes, and M. P. Zanna (1985). \Trust in close relationships". In: Journal of personality and social psychology 49.1, p. 95.
    • Riegelsberger, J., M. A. Sasse, and J. D. McCarthy (2005). \The mechanics of trust: A framework for research and design". In: International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 62.3, pp. 381{422.
    • Rohm, A. J. and G. R. Milne (2004). \Just what the doctor ordered: the role of information sensitivity and trust in reducing medical information privacy concern". In: Journal of Business Research 57.9, pp. 1000{1011.
    • Ross, D. and J. Schoman K.E. (1977). \Structured Analysis for Requirements De nition". In: Software Engineering, IEEE Transactions on SE-3.1, pp. 6{15.
    • Rousseau, D. M. et al. (1998). \Not so di erent after all: A cross-discipline view of trust". In: Academy of management review 23.3, pp. 393{404.
    • Roy, M. C., O. Dewit, and B. A. Aubert (2001). \The impact of interface usability on trust in web retailers". In: Internet research 11.5, pp. 388{398.
    • Runeson, P. and M. Host (2009). \Guidelines for conducting and reporting case study research in software engineering". English. In: Empirical Software Engineering 14.2, pp. 131{164.
    • Sabater, J. and C. Sierra (2005). \Review on computational trust and reputation models". In: Arti cial Intelligence Review 24.1, pp. 33{60.
    • Sasse, M. A. (2005). \Usability and trust in information systems". In: Trust and Crime in Information Societies.
    • Schillo, M., P. Funk, and M. Rovatsos (2000). \Using trust for detecting deceitful agents in arti cial societies". In: Applied Arti cial Intelligence 14.8, pp. 825{848.
    • Van Lamsweerde, A. and L. Willemet (1998). \Inferring declarative requirements speci - cations from operational scenarios". In: IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 24.12, pp. 1089{1114.
    • Van Lamsweerde, A. and E. Letier (2000). \Handling Obstacles in Goal-Oriented Requirements Engineering". In: Software Engineering, IEEE Transactions on 26.10, pp. 978{ 1005.
    • Van Lamsweerde, A. et al. (2007). \Engineering requirements for system reliability and security". In: NATO Security through Science Series D - Information and Communication Security 9, p. 196.
    • Verner, J. et al. (2009). \Guidelines for industrially-based multiple case studies in software engineering". In: Research Challenges in Information Science, 2009. RCIS 2009. Third International Conference on, pp. 313 {324.
    • Viega, J., T. Kohno, and B. Potter (Feb. 2001). \Trust (and Mistrust) in Secure Applications". In: Commun. ACM 44.2, pp. 31{36.
    • Wieringa, R. and J. Heerkens (2006). \The methodological soundness of requirements engineering papers: a conceptual framework and two case studies". In: Requirements Engineering 11.4, pp. 295{307.
    • Wieringa, R. and A. Morali (2012). \Technical Action Research as a Validation Method in Information Systems Design Science". In: Design Science Research in Information Systems. Advances in Theory and Practice. Ed. by K. Pe ers, M. Rothenberger, and B. Kuechler. Vol. 7286. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, pp. 220{238.
    • Wilson, M. et al. (2007). \The TrustCoM approach to enforcing agreements between interoperating enterprises". In: Enterprise Interoperability. Springer, pp. 365{375.
    • Wohlin, C. et al. (2012). Experimentation in software engineering. Springer ( rst edition by Kluwer in 2000).
    • Yan, Z. and P. Cofta (2003). \Methodology to Bridge Di erent Domains of Trust in Mobile Communications". English. In: Trust Management. Ed. by P. Nixon and S. Terzis. Vol. 2692. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, pp. 211{224.
    • Yu, E. (1993). \Modeling organizations for information systems requirements engineering". In: Proceedings of IEEE International Symposium on Requirements Engineering, pp. 34{41. doi: 10.1109/ISRE.1993.324839.
    • Yu, E. (1995). \Modelling Strategic Relationships for Process Reengineering". PhD thesis. University of Toronto.
    • Yu, E. and L. Liu (2001). \Modelling Trust for System Design Using the i * Strategic Actors Framework". English. In: Trust in Cyber-societies. Ed. by R. Falcone, M. Singh, and Y.-H. Tan. Vol. 2246. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, pp. 175{194.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article