Video channel

The phrase “all models are wrong, but some are useful” is a truth that we all accept in the MBSE community. However, for a model to be useful, it must represent faithfully what needs and requirements represent, without flaws, and without gaps that might lead to misinterpretations.

RQA – QUALITY Studio has been dealing with the quality of requirements for over a decade, now it’s time to keep using RQA also to check the consistency and the correctness of models, as the best continuation possible after high-quality requirements.

This webinar will show how RQA – QUALITY Studio can now connect to the most common MBSE tools in the market, and analyze plenty of quality metrics to determine the correctness and consistency of SysML and Capella/Arcadia models.

The goal of this 10-minute express webinar is to show you how easy it is to put into practice the INCOSE Guide for Writing Requirements with our tools. Normally, it takes quite a lot of time and effort before the first real results of the quality evaluation are feasible. In only 10 minutes, you’ll learn how to conduct an objective quality analysis focused on the correctness of your requirements from scratch and how to issue a quality report, using RQA – QUALITY Studio.

This webinar is for beginners and will show you how to use our tools with the INCOSE guidelines from the very first step of downloading the INCOSE Library. After the presentation there will be 5 minutes for Q&A.

Consistency is one of the most undervalued yet extremely important issues whenever we refer to the requirements quality. As one of the CCC (Correctness, Consistency and Completeness) quality properties, Consistency is core to achieving any successful requirements management, and thus, neglecting it may lead to fatal errors in the project’s development.

More specifically, this factor preserves the coherence between requirements, particularly technical ones concerning any system, subsystem or component. For instance, tracking the presence of overlapping and duplicated data, confronting the excess or lack of tolerance, and checking the measurement units’ correspondence.

Thus, the goal of this webinar is to guide you through the basic notions of Consistency (briefly described in the INCOSE Standard and show you how to take them to the next level with) several practical examples, supported by The REUSE Company’s tools.

According to many different surveys and studies, requirements completeness is the factor that impacts the most when verifying requirements quality.

This webinar will show how lacking completeness can impact systems engineering projects and review some tips and tricks to reduce the gap between an actual specification and the ideal ‘complete’ specification. Asking the proper questions contributes to reducing this gap, so we’ll see some of those questions (you are welcome to prepare and share yours during the session).

To make it even a little bit more challenging, completeness has to be checked from two different perspectives. Aside from a global completeness check, individual requirements have to be written in a way that there are no missing blocks: conditions, performance information, tolerances…. This is also considered requirements completeness.

This webinar will provide more detail on this topic and show how the tool RQA – QUALITY Studio can contribute to complete specifications.

By using RQA – QUALITY Studio®, the quality management tool of the Systems Engineering Suite, you could benefit from a default set of rules (“Out-of-the-box”) featuring quality metrics mapping most of the rules established in the INCOSE Guide for Writing Requirements (Download the mapping table).

However, to adapt the thoroughness of the quality inspection or extend the scope of the INCOSE GfWR based on your own guidelines or practices, you sometimes might need to set up your own quality metrics. This webinar will introduce you the features of RQA – QUALITY Studio® that enable you creating and editing your own advanced correctness metrics, such as :

Pattern based correctness metrics
Correctness metrics based on term relationships
Pattern filters to skip metrics (exceptions)
Attribute filters to skip metrics
RQA – QUALITY Studio® can connect to several requirements management and MBSE tools.

A practical solution to an implementation towards quality assessment and requirements writing assistance.
Even though the INCOSE Guide for Writing Requirements (INCOSE GfWR – 3rd edition of June 2019) is a broadly used and recognized reference for requirement engineers all over the world, the implementation of the INCOSE Guide for Writing Requirements still poses many challenges. For example, the fact that requirements can be expressed at different levels of abstraction, the components addressed by those requirements not equal in criticality, a document might contain requirements of different types,…

The INCOSE GfWR thus requires tailoring so that its implementation could fit the project and organization needs and practices.

The proposed solution to tailor the INCOSE GfWR not only involves automated real-time quality assessment with customizable application of the rules, but also addresses the authoring phase of requirements. The aim is to reduce rework and enhance reusability while boosting the performance of requirements engineering teams.

RQA – Quality Studio® and RAT – Authoring Tools are tools of The REUSE Company’s Systems Engineering Suite aimed at requirements quality assessment and requirements writing assistance, respectively.

This webinar will feature a live demo of the tools using the INCOSE Requirements Guide Knowledge Library in which the rules of the INCOSE GfWR are implemented.

Have you ever dealt with the European Space Agency (ESA)? If so, you must now know how well-written their tender documents are, and how clear and unambiguous the ESA standards are.

In this webinar we’ll present the rules and recommendations described both in the ECSS Drafting rules (ECSS-D-00-01) and in the ECSS-E-ST-10-06C. Furthermore, we’ll also show how the RAT – Authoring Tool implements all these rules so that meeting all these recommendations can be done effortlessly.

Since 1995 to the 2016 last version, NASA publishes the “NASA Systems Engineering Handbook” (https://www.nasa.gov/connect/ebooks/nasa-systems-engineering-handbook) to bring the fundamental concepts and techniques of NASA Systems Engineering as a discipline at NASA body of knowledge. This handbook offers guidance for current best Agency practices and maintains the alignment of the Handbook with the Agency’s systems engineering policy. The handbook is considered as top-level guidance for good systems engineering practices in the space industry.

We have developed a knowledge library, to be used on our SE Suite, that takes the benefits of the NASA handbook body of knowledge to enhance the quality of requirements. This NASA domain knowledge library includes glossary, acronyms, abbreviations, as well as specific taxonomies, hierarchies, and terms relationships. It also brings guidance for well-formed requirements through rules and patterns. The library incorporates a set of metrics, based on NASA handbook guidance. These metrics implemented in our SE Suite help to ensure the quality of requirements and to optimize the requirements authoring process.

Discover in this webinar how our SE Suite, along with this NASA knowledge library we have developed, can improve the quality of your organization requirement as well as your requirement authoring and checking process. Thanks to this approach, your organization could discover requirements errors in an early stage of the process, to prevent adding potentially huge extra costs and time to market delays to your organization projects.

INCOSE, the International Council on Systems Engineering has done an excellent job in the dissemination of best practices and guides towards the Systems Engineering Community. A wonderful example of this kind of guide is the INCOSE Guide for Writing Requirements (GfWR) that is helping engineers meet the challenging quality standards that every requirement shall have, especially in the Safety Critical disciplines.

While other standards just define a number of nice-to-have, but yet very abstract set of quality characteristics, the INCOSE GfWR also includes a number of comprehensible, and SMART (specific, measurable and easy to automatize), set of quality rules for requirements and for requirements documents.

No matter what tool you use to manage your requirements, RQA - QUALITY Studio and RAT - Authoring Tools from The REUSE Company offer an easy-to-use library including the quality rules described in the GfWR; allowing both quality control of your existing documents, and real-time help during the authoring stage of the requirements. Writing high-quality requirements has never been so easy.

Low requirements quality is one of the main reasons that lead to unsuccessful projects in any engineering domain. Unclear and ambiguous statements, contradictory requirements or inconsistent measures are just a few examples of the dozens of errors that are very common to happen in requirements specifications. This webinar introduces the tools to early detect these sources of problems and provides with a set of basic techniques to overcome them, so an error-free requirements specification leads to achieving successful projects. All these basic aspects of requirements quality will be covered using a default installation of the tools RQA - Quality Analyzer and RAT - Authoring Tools.

In the world of systems engineering, the importance of having high quality requirements is well known and that is why there are standards and guidelines that establish the characteristics that the requirements must have for considering them of good quality.

To obtain quality measurements of the requirements it is common to use quantitative quality metrics based on established standards. However, the risk is to build assessment methods and tools that are both arbitrary and rigid in the parameterization and combination of metrics. This webinar is focused on the presentation of a flexible method to assess and improve the quality of requirements that can be easily adapted to different contexts, projects, organizations and quality standards, with a high degree of automation.

In the method proposed, the domain experts contribute with an initial set of requirements that they have classified according to their quality, and their quality metrics are extracted. Then machine learning techniques are used to emulate the implicit expert’s quality function. A procedure to suggest least-effort improvements in bad requirements is also provided.

The method is easily tailorable to different contexts, different styles to write requirements, and different demands in quality. The whole process of inferring and applying the quality rules adapted to each organization is highly automated.

In this tutorial you will learn how to analyze the quality of your requirements with RQA - Quality Analyzer (SQA). By connecting our tool to a requirements repository like IBM DOORS, PTC, Excel etc. you can analyze the requirements quality following the criteria for Correctness, Consistency and Completeness in an automatic way.

ECSS - European Cooperation for Space Standardization- represents a set of standards aiming to gain a common understanding across the space industry in Europe. ECSS released the ECSS-E-ST-10-06C (6 March 2009) to provide some guidelines for the development of technical requirements specifications.

The REUSE Company has developed a Knowledge Library coping with the ECSS standard (among others within the ECSS) to guide requirements writers writing high-quality requirements and provide help during the long-lasting requirements inspections, those making easier the compliance with the ECSS standards. This Knowledge Library is part of the SES Suite (Systems Engineering Suite), managed by our tool Knowledge Library (including glossaries, taxonomies of terms, taxonomies of types of requirements, requirements patterns and requirements quality rules).

Requirements are, with no doubts, the main source of re-work in both software and systems intensive projects. This webinar introduces these sources of problems and misunderstanding, and provides a set of basic tricks and techniques to overcome the problems and provide error-free requirements specifications to properly set the roots of successful projects. All these basic aspects of requirements quality will be covered using a default installation of the tools VERIFICATION Studio and the Rich Authoring Tool.

In the world of Model-Based Systems Engineering, we usually find a huge ecosystem full of tools. The community of practitioners will be using a wide variety of different tools for Requirements Management, Logical and Physical Modelling, Traceability, Simulation, Quality Management etc.

With regard to Quality Management, System Quality Analyzer (SQA) performs requirements quality assessment based on the Correctness, Completeness & Consistency (CCC) approach, that is, automatic verification of your requirements and support to requirements authoring. For this purpose, the SQA knowledge base (ontology) can be customized to automatically include -in real-time- the content of Rhapsody models or Simulink files or even external ontologies created with Protégé, among others, so that requirements quality can be assessed against all those models.

In addition to that, the knowledge about a project is a living entity, that means that it will evolve (hopefully) along the project lifecycle. An Ontology Configuration Management process will be presented to keep track of the changes performed on the ontology.

Nowadays, very few companies develop, distribute, and sell products end-to-end. On the contrary, it’s quite common to find the supply chain approach, where many suppliers might be involved in the whole product lifecycle. This may lead to specialization, cost reduction, and scalability.

This Webinar focuses on the close communication between the OEMs (Original Equipment Manufacturers) and the Suppliers to perform quality assessment and keep track of the evolution of the quality of the supplier assets.

In a nutshell, OEMs will define the quality metrics that must be fulfilled by the different Suppliers along the supply chain. Suppliers will develop their specifications, performing also quality assessment, and will send quality reports to the OEM. With this information, the OEM tracks the quality of the different subsystems.

Completeness is, by far, the most difficult quality characteristic to be checked in our requirements specifications. Completeness is a twofold issue. On the one hand, a requirement statement is complete when it includes and conveys all the information it has to include: who is the subject of the action, when is this action performed, under what conditions, what should be the performance…. In other words, and citing the INCOSE Guide for Writing Requirements, a requirement statement is complete when it “… describes the necessary capability, characteristic, constraint, or quality factor … without needing other information to understand the requirement”.

On the other hand, the entire specification should be analyzed in terms of completeness to answer questions such as:

Are we considering all different types of requirements (safety, security, regulation…)?
Are all the different types of actors mentioned in the high-level requirements?
Are we addressing the counterpart for some specific actions? That is, if a specific item can be created in a system, should it be also removed at any particular time? When a light can be switched on, shouldn’t we also expect a requirement to switch it off?
Are all the system elements described in a model well-covered in our specifications?
Are there interfaces between components where our requirements are not linking together these pair of components?
Are all the actions described at a specific level properly flowed down to the following levels?
Completeness also has to do with links and attributes. Missing links or empty attributes are also sources of incompleteness.
A tool like RQA will never replace the human labor to tackle this issue, but what technology can offer is a quick and exhaustive analysis of large requirements specifications; and, at the same time, having in mind that necessity and completeness are the two sides of the same coin.

Agenda:

Introduction
The completeness problem in systems engineering: how to know when the requirements are complete?
Completeness metrics in Requirements Quality Suite
Live demo:
Tailoring completeness metrics in RQA
Checking completeness for a DOORS specification with RQA
Q&A

Writing correct requirements is, sometimes, a challenging task. However, there are plenty of resources publicly available including tips on how to write correct requirements; we in The REUSE Company also provide our own guide (RQS tips summary), training and tools (RQA and RAT). Once the correctness topic is properly addressed, the real problem when analyzing the overall quality of a project (in terms of its requirements) comes with the consistency among the different requirements, that many times are written by different people, in different places… Not to mention the consistency between requirements and models in a MBSE environment.
This webinar focuses on the analysis of requirements consistency, and the metrics provided in Requirements Quality Suite to deal with this topic.

Learn how Requirements Quality Suite and Requirements Authoring Tool is used with PTC Integrity Lifecycle Manager to ensure high quality, reusable requirements. These requirements can then form a high quality foundation to drive successful UML / SysML activity. This allows multi-discipline teams to build complete reliable and agile traceability across your engineering assets.

Finding the proper set of quality rules to be checked in our requirements documents is key for the success of our projects. RQA (Requirements Quality Analyzer) allows you an easy translation between paper-based quality rules and checklists into an automatic tool to help quality teams and requirements authors.
RQA includes, out-of-the-box, a wide variety of requirements quality metrics. However, in some cases, the metrics to follow have to be tailored for particular cases and the out-of-the-box metrics could be not sufficient. This Webinar shows how a set of parameterized metrics can help to create custom metrics easily. All this custom metrics are automatically and seamlessly integrated together with the rest of out-of-the-box metrics and are accessible in both RQA and RAT (Requirements Authoring Tool)

In this webinar we will show how KM (Knowledge Manager) can be used to easily create and manage requirements patterns. RAT (Requirements Authoring Tool) will also be shown briefly to exemplify the writing of a new requirement based on one of the patterns created during the live demonstration, and how to apply requirements patterns for an automatic extraction of requirements from an unstructured source. Finally, we will also show how RQA (Requirements Quality Analyzer) can make use of those patterns to leverage the use of the quality metrics, and to extract content suitable for the knowledge base (domain concepts and relationships among concepts, properties…).
RQA, RAT and KM are the tools included in the Requirements Quality Suite (RQS).

Checking and enhancing the quality of requirement specifications is a vital task for ensuring a successful outcome of a project.
Out-of-the-Box the Requirements Quality Analyzer (RQA), and the Requirements Authoring Tool (RAT), help the user to avoid the most common and most annoying mistakes found in requirements. During this webinar we will explain and demonstrate the mechanisms offered by the RQS Tools to deal with the bulk discovery, capture and management of knowledge, and how sources of knowledge in current, or even previous projects can be used to ease this process.

Binding and synchronizing your Models & Requirements: RAT – AUTHORING Tool for Capella MBSE.

Binding and synchronizing your Models & Requirements: RAT – AUTHORING Tool for Capella MBSE.

Binding and synchronizing your Models & Requirements: RAT – AUTHORING Tool for Capella MBSE.

While Model Based Systems Engineering and Requirements Engineering can be seen as opposing means to support complex systems development, there is a fast-growing trend in considering the combination of both approaches.

Adopting a knowledge-centric approach, with artifacts originating from both models and textual requirements, helps better embracing the systems complexity.

Blending Models and Textual requirements is however challenging, as it requires to ensure consistency and completeness of the diverse knowledge sources.

This webinar will introduce the new version of the RAT – Authoring Tool add-on for Eclipse Capella, which goals are :

to ensure the correctness of the requirements created inside a Capella project,
to help requirement writers follow pre-defined patterns to standardize the formulation of well-structured requirements,
to ensure naming consistency between the model elements and the textual requirements,
to provide a complete round-trip between textual requirements in a Requirement Management Systems and models in Capella.
This new version is compatible with the latest Capella v5.0 and Team for Capella.

The webinar features a presentation of RAT – Authoring Tool for Capella as well as a demo showing functionalities such as :

Pattern-based writing assistance,
Real-time quality assessment,
Automatic requirements link generation between model elements,
Bi-directional synchronization of textual requirements with an external Requirements Management System (example with IBM Rational DOORS 9.6).

As requirements represent one of the major causes of failures in systems engineering projects, it is of the utmost importance to embrace tools & techniques that help identify defects introduced in the earliest stages of requirements engineering.

The RAT – Authoring Tool widget for IBM DOORS Next Generation offers a fully integrated interface enabling authors to write high-quality requirements based on tailored quality metrics and customized presets of requirement patterns.

The solution also features a connection to the quality management tool RQA – Quality Studio® in which the quality metrics can be edited and quality reports generated.

This webinar will present the main features of the RAT – Authoring Tool widget for IBM DOORS Next Generation and the connection to RQA – Quality Studio®.

Presented by

- José Fuentes, Chief Operating Officer at the REUSE Company.

***
Slides: https://fr.slideshare.net/Obeo_corp/capella-webinar-writing-perfect-textual-requirements

***
Learn how textual and model requirements are working together towards success!
While Eclipse Capella is a model-based systems engineering environment, it’s also clear that it enables the creation of model requirements that complement textual requirements.

When dealing with both, textual and model requirements, ensuring consistency and completeness are key to the final success of our systems.

This webinar introduces a new add-on for Capella, the so-called RAT for Capella (by The REUSE Company).

Its main goals are:
- to ensure the correctness of the requirements that are managed within Capella;
- to help authors follow a pattern to end up with a well-formed requirement;
- to ensure naming consistency between the model elements and the textual requirements,
- to provide a complete round-trip in Capella between other Requirements Management System and RAT.

This webinar describes the RAT for Capella add-on, and provides a live demo of the tool.

***
Follow us on our blog and different social networks to stay up to date on upcoming Capella events:

Blog : https://blog.obeosoft.com/
LinkedIn : https://www.linkedin.com/in/capella-mbse-tool
Twitter : https://twitter.com/capella_arcadia

***

Creative commons BY-ND Licence: Attribution + NoDerivatives

RAT - Authoring Tools providing real-time CCC assessment and consistency with the underlying model.
The seamless integration of textual Requirements within MBSE is a challenge in today’s Systems Engineering state of the art. Requirements are usually elaborated using natural language text and hence provide high expressivity and easiness of production and management. MBSE offers well-structured methodologies (like ARCADIA, OOSE, Systematica (S*), etc.) and a rigorous path for developing high-quality designs, but they demand steep learning curves.

This webinar presents an add-on to Capella that follows all the principles and features of the RAT - Authoring Tools on top of Requirements Modeling Tools (RMS), but now on top of a Modeling tool like Capella; thus enhancing a seamless consistency between textual requirements and models (model requirements).

The webinar will include a demo of this new add-on, showing the following features:

- Assisted authoring of requirements through pattern-based auto-completion
- Real-time quality assessment
- Maintenance of relations between textual and model-based requirements, and capitalization of links for change tracking
- Synchronization of textual requirements: a round-trip approach between Capella and other external Requirements Management Systems

The use of patterns to write structured requirements is strongly recommended in Requirements Engineering in order to avoid defects in engineering systems development that are mainly traced back to unprecise, unclear, or incomplete requirements.

Since the 1990s, the members of the SOPHIST GmbH (usually called “The Sophists”) have been in the forefront of consulting and training services in the area of requirements engineering. The Sophist patterns comprise both functional and non-functional requirement patterns, as well as patterns to express conditions and properties of systems.

The objective of this webinar is to introduce you to the newly integrated Sophist patterns into our RAT - Authoring Tools, with examples of real-time writing assistance enabled by the tool in order to check the compliance with the structure of the selected pattern.

Integration of our RAT - Authoring Tools with the 3DX Platform from Dassault Systèmes to calculate the quality of requirements in real time.

In this tutorial you will learn how to analyze the quality of your requirements with RQA - Quality Analyzer (SQA). By connecting our tool to a requirements repository like IBM DOORS, PTC, Excel etc. you can analyze the requirements quality following the criteria for Correctness, Consistency and Completeness in an automatic way.

Model-Based (MBSE) is the current trend in regard to Systems Engineering, leveraging testing and simulation activities. However, it’s also clear that textual requirements will remain in the scene since they are also key for testing, certification, and communication with other stakeholders.

This Webinar describes a real scenario where, while working in a model-based project using Rhapsody, there is the need of writing high quality requirements concerning the UML/SysML elements of the project.

In this scenario where UML/SysML models coexist with requirements, a crucial role is played by physical models simulations, indeed requirements feasibility is going to be tested against physical models simulation (FMUs files).

After learning how to manage your knowledge base in our previous webinar Knowledge Management Process: Organizing your ontology, it is time to go one step further and get the most out of the well-organized ontology. The next step is to create the commonly repeated semantic structures – patterns, that will replicate your requirements and help you scale up their writing and further analysis. During this short webinar, you will learn how to construct pattern structures with KM – KNOWLEDGE Manager, what customization techniques are available, and how to increase the complexity of your semantic structures on demand.

About KM KNOWLEDGE Manager
Since knowledge is a valuable asset in an organization, it is essential to reuse knowledge assets. These include engineers’ explicit and tacit knowledge and guidelines defining the organizational know-how. Gathering such knowledge can come from different sources, stored in secure repositories, and accessed by the assigned staff.

Managing knowledge from a systems engineering point of view is possible with our tool, KM – Knowledge Manager. As well as storing valuable information from requirements, models, system architectures, and other documents in a common System Knowledge Base!

The project’s ontology is a fuel that nurtures your requirements. Thus, it is essential to keep it neatly organized. In order to make the most efficient use out of your knowledge base, it should be structured clearly and intuitively. This short webinar aims to dive into the KM – KNOWLEDGE Manager ways of managing the knowledge of your project. You will be able to learn how to create a hierarchical structure, group the terms into semantic clusters, and lastly, establish the relationship within the ontology elements.

About KM KNOWLEDGE Manager
Admittedly, knowledge is one of the most valuable assets in your organization. Therefore, the key driver to success in any systems project is to reuse knowledge assets. These include engineers’ explicit and tacit knowledge and guidelines defining the organizational know-how.

Moreover, gathering knowledge comes from different sources, stored in secure repositories, and accessed by the appointed personnel.

KM – KNOWLEDGE Manager allows you to manage knowledge from the systems engineering point of view. Moreover, you can store valuable information from requirements, models, system architectures, and other documents in a common System Knowledge Base.

In this video you will learn how to import Knowledge Libreries using KM - Knowledge Manager capability to pack pieces of knowledge to be further tailored and reused in different kind of projects.

Checking and enhancing the quality of requirement specifications is a vital task for ensuring a successful outcome of a project.
Out-of-the-Box the Requirements Quality Analyzer (RQA), and the Requirements Authoring Tool (RAT), help the user to avoid the most common and most annoying mistakes found in requirements. During this webinar we will explain and demonstrate the mechanisms offered by the RQS Tools to deal with the bulk discovery, capture and management of knowledge, and how sources of knowledge in current, or even previous projects can be used to ease this process.

Traceability is a core activity within the Systems Development Lifecycle, and it’s a must when aiming to cope with ARP-4754, DO-254, DO-178, ISO 26262, and other guidelines and best practices in different industries (aerospace, defense, automotive, healthcare…). It’s a key practice, but also a tedious and time-consuming one, especially when the traces involve items coming from different disciplines and tools. Therefore, teams must be provided with tools that allow connection to heterogeneous environments, allowing easy access to the different configuration items, the definition of traces among them, generation of traceability matrices and impact analysis, and providing also semantic analysis features to suggest missing traces and smartly manage suspect links after changes.
When it comes to managing the changes in the traced items, in many cases, those changes are just meaningless changes (formatting, fixing a typo, replacing a word by a synonym word, changes in the grammar to express the same content, but in a more clear way…). All those changes should not trigger a suspicious link operation; this kind of actions shall only be restricted to meaningful changes, changes that really affect the semantics of the traced elements.
This video shows how the tool TRACEABILITY Studio manages changes in the elements that are traced. Based on a semantic tool, natural language and AI techniques can be used to restrict the number of suspicious links that are reported just to the meaningful ones.

Traceability is a core activity within the Systems Development Lifecycle, and it’s a must when aiming to cope with ARP-4754, DO-254, DO-178, ISO 26262, and other guidelines and best practices in different industries (aerospace, defense, automotive, healthcare…). It’s a key practice, but also a tedious and time-consuming one, especially when the traces involve items coming from different disciplines and tools. Therefore, teams must be provided with tools that allow connection to heterogeneous environments, allowing easy access to the different configuration items, the definition of traces among them, generation of traceability matrices and impact analysis, and providing also semantic analysis features to suggest missing traces and smartly manage suspect links after changes.
If we consider an average project, the number of traces to be created and maintained over the full lifecycle of the project might be huge. TRACEABILITY Studio is the best companion for this activity, since can suggest missing traces to the engineers, thus facilitating the level of completeness with regards to traces in our projects. This activity is based on a number of linguistic and AI algorithms that can suggest traces among items of different sorts (requirements, tests, model elements in MBSE environments…).

Traceability is a core activity within the Systems Development Lifecycle, and it’s a must when aiming to cope with ARP-4754, DO-254, DO-178, ISO 26262, and other guidelines and best practices in different industries (aerospace, defense, automotive, healthcare…). It’s a key practice, but also a tedious and time-consuming one, especially when the traces involve items coming from different disciplines and tools. Therefore, teams must be provided with tools that allow connection to heterogeneous environments, allowing easy access to the different configuration items, the definition of traces among them, generation of traceability matrices and impact analysis, and providing also semantic analysis features to suggest missing traces and smartly manage suspect links after changes.
This video shows a short walk through the tool TRACEABILITY Studio that, as part of the Systems Engineering Suite of The REUSE Company, allows for multiple SMART operations to help engineers accomplish this important task, meeting the standards, and reducing the amount of effort required.

ARP-4754, DO-254, DO-178, ISO 26262 and Traceability between heterogeneous environments.
Traceability is a core activity within the Systems Development Lifecycle, and it’s a must when aiming to cope with ARP-4754, DO-254, DO-178, ISO 26262, and other guidelines and best practices in different industries (aerospace, defense, automotive, healthcare…). It’s a key practice, but also a tedious and time-consuming one, especially when the traces involve items coming from different disciplines and tools. Therefore, teams must be provided with tools that allow connection to heterogeneous environments, allowing easy access to the different configuration items, the definition of traces among them, generation of traceability matrices and impact analysis, and providing also semantic analysis features to suggest missing traces and smartly manage suspect links after changes.

In this webinar, The REUSE Company will present a new version of the tool TRACEABILITY Studio. This tool, fully integrated with the Systems Engineering Suite, features connectors to some of the most widely-used tools in the systems engineering field; this includes requirements management tools, modelling tools, testing, simulation, and even connectors to MS Office. TRACEABILITY Studio provides an easy-to-use answer to all the challenges mentioned above, making this demanding activity easy and affordable for companies of all sizes.

Trouble managing Verification & Validation processes? V&V Studio is the right tool for you.

Trouble managing Verification & Validation processes? V&V Studio is the right tool for you.

Trouble managing Verification & Validation processes? V&V Studio is the right tool for you.

Display involving several general use cases of verification procedures, with a precise emphasis on the different functionalities and possibilities offered by the V&V Studio tool. Amongst many others, these include verification actions’ management (creation, tailoring, assignment, etc.), worksheets configuration, evaluation procedures, automatic suggestions, views at disposal, quality assessment (configuration and tailoring).

Complete walkthrough of the different functionalities offered by the ENGINEERING Studio tool, by means of the practical resolution of a requirements’ verification process. These include, verification action tailoring, project configuration, requirements’ evaluation, consequent corrections, as well as information extraction and display using the scoreboard functionalities.

Use case displaying the divergent scoreboard functionalities (current state diagrams, snapshots, dashboards and evolution scoreboard) with a requirements specification example, how to tailor and use them to obtain consistently important information to be tracked/recorded throughout the project’s development.

Showcase of a specific example involving the prior configuration and enabling process of the interoperability functionality offered by the Engineering Studio tool. This procedure includes the in-real-time connection with a model and consequent computation of the previously configured parameters, as well as how can it be tailored to adjust the input values under the expected thresholds.

Particular use case in which the obtained evidences to be provided for a requirement’s verification process are a media file, and the corresponding acceptance signature. Thus, showing how the Engineering Studio tool can detect those elements as arguments for the positive suggestion of the verifiable item.

Complete example of the verification process of a requirements specification involving its consequent quality assessment. This includes the corresponding verification action configuration, evaluation, issues identification, corrections required, and final re-evaluation.

Simplified example of the verification process of a CDR (Critical Design Review), involving a checklist method, and thus, explaining the procedure and steps involved (configuration, questions definition/import, verification action assignment, assessment, tailoring) in the completion of this task.

Engineering Studio tool walkthrough involving the verification action templates’ management, showing in depth, the different types of techniques and methods offered, as well as the divergent inputs at hand and sections involved to support the consequent verification procedure. Finally, the project configuration window is displayed, and the assignment of the previously shown verification actions is exemplified.

Complete verification process of a FMU (Functional Mock-up Unit) involving custom code methods, tailored evidence, verifiable/validatable items’ management, and quality assessment, among others.

Complete walkthrough involving several divergent verification scenarios supported by the V&V Studio tool. Amongst those, it is shown a particular SoW (Statement of Work) verification process applying the checklist method to ensure compliance with the considered documentation standard. Additionally, the offered custom code method is exemplified with a requirement verification scenario, also including the bi-directional connection establishment with an Excel file containing the results of the simulation procedure implied. Finally, this clip contains a last example involving the verification based upon quality assessment technique (correctness, in this case).

The ISO 15288 clearly defines what must be done when performing Verification and Validation processes. We must use and manage verification actions and collect evidences. But how should we do it? How to integrate them all in one environment? How to delegate V&V to specialized tools for specific work-products? How to deal with interoperability? This webinar intends to provide insight for these kind of questions.

Systems Engineering makes clear distinction between verification, validation and quality assurance processes. Verification is usually connected with the notion of “developing the system right” (setting the focus on performing SE properly). On the other hand, validation is described as “developing the right system,” making a SOI that meets the stakeholders needs. Both concepts are connected with the notion of quality assurance and management. Verification confirms that the quality is adequate, and Validation confirms that the system maps with correct functions and properties, as a kind of quality issue. Quality Assurance, when applied to product evaluations, helps to prevent incidents and problems.

As part of its knowledge reuse approach, The Reuse Company has created the V&V Studio as a software tool ready to provide support to the ISO15288 V&V processes by using (and reusing) information from RQA – QUALITY Studio and the Ontology. The V&V Studio merges the three concepts (Verification, Validation and Quality) and offers V&V by managing the corresponding verification and validation actions through quality and other measures. It uses the concept of metrics and quality functions to verify all kinds of work-products, as well as providing evidences management.

3 hours of training on how to write high-quality requirements.
Agenda:
The impact of poor quality requirements - Quality rules for requirements - Introduction to the SE Suite and the SKB - Walkthrough to the SE Suite (RQA - Quality Studio, RAT - Authoring Tools and KM - Knowledge Manager)

In this video you will learn how to import Knowledge Libreries using KM - Knowledge Manager capability to pack pieces of knowledge to be further tailored and reused in different kind of projects.

Tutorial on how to install the Systems Engineering (SE) Suite including RQA - QUALITY Studio, RAT - Authoring Tools and KM - Knowledge Manager.

This consistency metric checks if requirements from the same specification use different measurement units (i.e. ‘Kilograms’, ‘Pounds’, etc.) for a specific element’s property. Similar to the Measurement Units Consistency Metric, this one detects measurement units’ inconsistencies for a property of a element selected by the user. I.e.: Fuel tank – Capacity – Liters or Cubic Meters?, Aircraft – Weight – Kilograms or Pounds?, etc.

This consistency metric checks if the requirements from the same specification use different measurement systems (i.e. International system, British Imperial system, etc.). Therefore, it detects measurement systems’ incompatibilities for the magnitudes selected by the user. I.e.: Distance/Length – IS [Kilometers] or BIS [Yards]?, Weight – IS [Kilograms] or BIS [Pounds]?, etc.

This consistency metric compares several requirements from same or different specifications, representing the inconsistency ratio for requirements expressing the same need at the same level of abstraction

This completeness metric compares the values of properties from the parts of a breakdown structure with the value of the property from the composite. The selected breakdown is stored in the Conceptual Model layer (SCM) of the System Knowledge Base (SKB)

This consistency metric compares the values of properties extracted from the specification with the values assigned to the same property stored in the Conceptual Model layer (SCM) of the System Knowledge Base (SKB)

This completeness metric analyzes the not existence of links between requirements expressing the same need at the different level of abstraction in different modules/blocks of the same project.

This completeness metric compares the number of Requirements Patterns that are extracted from the requirements specification with the number of Requirements Patterns that are selected from the Patterns layer of the System Knowledge Base (SKB)

This completeness metric compares the number of different Properties that are found in the formalization from the requirements specification with a Properties set from the Conceptual Model layer of the System Knowledge Base (SKB)

This completeness metric compares the number of Relationships that are extracted from the requirements specification (through requirements patterns formalizations) with the Relationships that are extracted from a set of models stored in the Conceptual Model layer of the System Knowledge Base (SKB)

This completeness metric compares the number of different Relationship Types (NOT relationships instances) that are found in the relationships extracted from the requirements specification with a Relationship Type selection set from the Conceptual Model layer of the System Knowledge Base (SKB)

This completeness metric compares the number of relationships that are found in the requirements specification with a selection of relationships from the Breakdown structure of the System Conceptual Model (SCM) layer of the System Knowledge Base (SKB)

Los requisitos de baja calidad constituyen una de las principales causas de fracasos en proyectos de ingeniería, indiferentemente del sector de actividad. Las formulaciones ambiguas y a las que les falta claridad, los requisitos contradictorios o la incoherencia de unidades de medida son algunos ejemplos de los numerosos errores que puedan ocurrir durante la documentación de requisitos.

Este webinar introduce al uso de herramientas y técnicas que permiten detectar desde las primeras fases de proyectos las fuentes de errores, con el fin de eliminar esos errores en los requisitos y aumentar así la probabilidad de éxito de estos mismos. Todos esos aspectos fundamentales de la calidad de requisitos están cubiertos por una instalación por defecto de las herramientas RQA – Quality Studio y RAT – Authoring Tools.

Anforderungen von niedrigerer Qualität stellen eine der wichtigsten Ursachen dar, warum technische Projekte scheitern, egal welche Branche man betrachtet. Mehrdeutige und an Klarheit mangelnde Formulierungen, widersprüchliche Anforderungen und Inkohärenz in den verwendeten Messeinheiten sind einige Beispiele von den zahlreichen Fehlern, die in der Ausfertigung von Anforderungen eintreten können.

Dieses Webinar leitet die Benutzung von Anwendungen und Praktiken ein, die das Feststellen von Fehlerquellen zu Beginn des Projekts erlauben, um die daraus resultierende Fehler in den Anforderungen zu beseitigen und damit die Erfolgswahrscheinlichkeit Ihres Projekts deutlich zu erhöhen. Alle diese grundlegende Aspekte der Qualität von Anforderungen werden von der Standardkonfiguration unserer Werkzeuge RQA – Quality Studio und RAT – Authoring Tools abgedeckt.

Krav med låg kvalitet är en av de främsta orsakerna som leder till misslyckade projekt och studier visar på att så mycket som 15% av ett projekts totala kostnad kan härledas till undermålig eller konstant föränderlig kravbild. Oklara och tvetydiga krav, motstridiga krav eller inkonsekventa kravspecifikationer är bara några exempel på de dussintals fel som är mycket vanliga i alla projekt.

Detta webinar introducerar verktyg för att tidigt upptäcka dessa problemkällor och visar på en uppsättning grundläggande tekniker för att övervinna dem och enkelt skriva krav med hög kvalitet. Alla dessa grundläggande aspekter av kravkvalitet täcks med en standardinstallation av verktygen RQA – Quality Studio och RAT – Authoring Tools. Du kan gå från en kravbild med en massa felaktigheter till en komplett kravbild med få överlapp, motstridigheter eller rena felaktigheter på mycket kort tid och med minimal arbetsinsats. Det bästa av allt är kanske ändå att du sedan kan återbruka din kunskap och slipper därmed göra om dina misstag i efterföljande projekt.

Les exigences de mauvaise qualité constituent l’une des principales raisons d’échec des projets d’ingénierie, quel que soit le secteur d’activité. Les formulations ambiguës et manquant de clarté, les exigences contradictoires ou l’incohérence dans les unités de mesures sont quelques exemples parmi les nombreuses erreurs qui peuvent se produire lors de la documentation d’exigences.

Ce webinaire introduit à l’utilisation des outils ainsi qu’aux techniques permettant de détecter dès les premières phases de projets les sources d’erreurs, dans le but d’éliminer ces erreurs dans les exigences et d’augmenter ainsi la probabilité de succès des projets. Tous ces aspects fondamentaux de la qualité des exigences sont couverts par le biais d’une installation par défaut des outils RQA – Quality Studio et RAT – Authoring Tools.

Démo des produits RQA et RAT pour la vérification de la qualité des exigences ainsi que l’aide à la rédaction d’exigences en incluant l’analyse de la qualité des exigences en temps réel, la rédaction basée sur des patrons sémantiques y la connexion à bases de connaissances.