Received: 29 July 2005 / Accepted: 18 October 2005 / Published online: 24 November 2005 | Roel Wieringa · Neil Maiden · Nancy Mead Colette Rolland
The paper "Requirements Engineering Paper Classification and Evaluation Criteria: A Proposal and a Discussion" by Roel Wieringa, Neil Maiden, Nancy Mead, and Colette Rolland addresses the need for a standardized classification and evaluation criteria for RE (Requirements Engineering) papers. The authors highlight the importance of consistent criteria to avoid misinterpretation and unfair treatment of submissions. They note that different types of papers, such as those describing new techniques, conceptual frameworks, or industrial experiences, should be evaluated using distinct criteria. The paper discusses the evolution of paper classification and evaluation schemes in RE conferences, emphasizing the need for a more comprehensive and consistent approach.
The authors propose a classification based on the engineering cycle, which includes activities such as problem investigation, solution design, solution validation, solution selection, solution implementation, and implementation evaluation. This cycle is not sequential but rather involves parallel and concurrent activities, reflecting the dynamic nature of RE research. The paper aims to provide a clear framework for authors and reviewers to ensure fair and effective evaluation of RE papers.The paper "Requirements Engineering Paper Classification and Evaluation Criteria: A Proposal and a Discussion" by Roel Wieringa, Neil Maiden, Nancy Mead, and Colette Rolland addresses the need for a standardized classification and evaluation criteria for RE (Requirements Engineering) papers. The authors highlight the importance of consistent criteria to avoid misinterpretation and unfair treatment of submissions. They note that different types of papers, such as those describing new techniques, conceptual frameworks, or industrial experiences, should be evaluated using distinct criteria. The paper discusses the evolution of paper classification and evaluation schemes in RE conferences, emphasizing the need for a more comprehensive and consistent approach.
The authors propose a classification based on the engineering cycle, which includes activities such as problem investigation, solution design, solution validation, solution selection, solution implementation, and implementation evaluation. This cycle is not sequential but rather involves parallel and concurrent activities, reflecting the dynamic nature of RE research. The paper aims to provide a clear framework for authors and reviewers to ensure fair and effective evaluation of RE papers.