Supporting the resolution of inconsistencies in specifications based on mathematical argumentation theory (Model theoretic aspects of the notion of independence and dimension)

Abstract

In this paper, we propose a method to support for resolving “inconsistencies” in a requirement specification document which is written in a natural language. We also develop a tool based on the method. We use mathematical argumentation theory and natural language processing to realize the method. Based on mathematical argumentation theory, we can formulate various “inconsistencies” including logical contradiction as an attack relation R in an argumentation framework (A, R). Then an extension S in (A, R) represents a set of acceptable descriptions of a requirement specification document. Moreover, an extension S suggests an engineer the set of descriptions which should be corrected to resolve “inconsistencies” by referring R. Our method consists of the following methods. First, we adopt the method in [1], which is based on natural language processing, to generate an argumentation framework (A, R) from a requirement specification document. Second, we use the method in [2] to define an extension S of (A, R) in an extension of first-order logic, and then we use the method in [3] to enumerate extensions from (A, R) by solving a Partial Maximal Satisfiable Subsets Enumeration problem that is an extension of a Maximal Satisfiable Subsets Enumeration problem. Finally we visualize the (A, R) and S's to support for resolving “inconsistencies” in a requirement specification document.