INCOSE RWG
INCOSE RWG
  • 77
  • 23 396
Welcome to the INCOSE Requirement Working Group (RWG)
Introduction presentation by the RWG Chair, Lou Wheatcraft, welcoming viewers to this change and introducing them to the RWG and benefits of joining INCOSE and the RWG.
Переглядів: 92

Відео

NRM Sec 14 Needs, Requirements, Verification, & Validation Management
Переглядів 2374 місяці тому
This presentation "NRM Sec 14 Needs, Requirements, Verification, & Validation Management" was given on April 29, 2024 to the INCOSE Canadian Chapter. Needs, Requirements, Verification, and Validation Management (NRVVM) separates the “management” of NRVV processes and data from the “execution” of NRVV activities. NRVVM is a cross-cutting series of activities that spans all lifecycle process acti...
Guide to Model based Needs and Requirements Introduction
Переглядів 3114 місяці тому
This is a presentation given at the RWG monthly meeting on May 30, 2024 by Dr. Jeff Williams concerning the development of a new Guide to Model-based Needs and Requirements. This presentation provides an overview of the Guide to Model Based Needs & Requirements. The presentation begins with an introduction of the members of the team working on the development of the model for the Guide to Model...
Ultimate Requirements Assessment Tutorial Part 3
Переглядів 227Рік тому
This is the third of three presentations concerning assessing the quality of poorly formed requirements based on the characteristics and rules defined in the INCOSE RWG Guide to Writing Requirements (GtWR). The three presentations are divided into shorter presentations suitable for viewing during a lunch and learn session or a training session offered by an organization. The three presentations...
Ultimate Requirements Assessment Tutorial Part 2
Переглядів 178Рік тому
This is the second of three presentations concerning assessing the quality of poorly formed requirements based on the characteristics and rules defined in the INCOSE RWG Guide to Writing Requirements (GtWR). The three presentations are divided into shorter presentations suitable for viewing during a lunch and learn session or a training session offered by an organization. The three presentation...
Ultimate Requirements Assessment Tutorial Part 1
Переглядів 524Рік тому
This is the first of three presentations concerning assessing the quality of poorly formed requirements based on the characteristics and rules defined in the INCOSE RWG Guide to Writing Requirements (GtWR). The three presentations are divided into shorter presentations suitable for viewing during a lunch and learn session or a training session offered by an organization. The three presentations...
Implementing the latest concepts of the new GtWR v4.0
Переглядів 238Рік тому
This presentation, "Implementing the latest concepts of the latest version 4.0 of the INCOSE Guide to Writing Requirements (GtWR) v4.0" was presented at the INCOSE Requirements Working Group (RWG) September 2023 meeting/webinar by Ilyes Yousfi, from the ReUse Company. The focus of this presentation was to shed light on some of the major improvements to the GtWR, which has been the gold standard...
Applying AI to MBSE
Переглядів 1,7 тис.Рік тому
This presentation "Applying AI to MBSE" was given at the RWG August monthly meeting on 083123 by Rosemary Kioko and SSA Inc Team. The purpose of this presentation is for the SSA Inc team to share their current study and solicit feedback from the RWG. The goal of the study is to create tools using AI to assist engineers in creating and managing requirements. This presentation provides insights o...
Guide to Writing Requirements (GtWR) v4 Overview
Переглядів 837Рік тому
This is a presentation Lou Wheatcraft gave to the INCOSE Texas Gulf Coast Chapter (TGCC) providing an overview of the newly released version 4 of the INCOSE Guide to Writing Requirements. More in-depth presentations are included in the GtWR playlist. The first 35 min is to core presentation, followed by 12 min of Q&A.
Sustainability Needs and Requirements
Переглядів 150Рік тому
This is a presentation given by Lou Wheatcraft to the ChicagoLand INCOSE Chapter on July 20, 2023. It is based on a workshop that Tami Katz and Lou were asked to give during the EMEA Conference in April 2023. During the presentation, attendees were engaged in discussions concerning issues and challenges of implementing sustainability goals, needs, and requirements within organizations. These di...
SE Quality Management WG and Requirements WG Interactions
Переглядів 200Рік тому
The June RWG monthly Exchange Cafe was a joint meeting between the INCOSE Systems Engineering Quality Management Working Group (SEQM WG) and the Requirements WG leads and working group members. The focus was exploring common ideas and concepts concerning quality management from the perspectives of requirements as well as a discussion on future interactions and collaboration between WGs. The ses...
INCOSE RWG GtWR Rules for Writing Well-formed Needs and Requirements.
Переглядів 1,5 тис.Рік тому
This is a presentation that Lou Wheatcraft, co-chair of the INCOSE RWG, gave on May 6, 2023 during a seminar on writing requirements sponsored by the INCOSE ChicagoLand Chapter. The focus of this presentation is on Section 4 of the INCOSE RWG Guide to Writing Requirements (GtWR); "Rules for Writing Well-Formed Need and Requirement Statements and Sets of Needs and Requirements." The material in ...
Applying AI for Requirements Development
Переглядів 687Рік тому
This is a presentation given to the INCOSE RWG at our May 18, 2023 monthly meeting by Dr. Steven H. Dam, PH.D., ESEP, on an interesting topic concerning Applying AI for Requirements Development. Dr. Dam is the President and Founder of the Systems and Proposal Engineering Company (dba SPEC Innovations), based in Manassas, VA. He has been involved with structured analysis, software development, a...
NRM Section 6 & 7 Design Input Requirements Definition
Переглядів 436Рік тому
This presentation was given to the ChicagoLand INCOSE Chapter on April 20, 2023 by Lou Wheatcraft, cochair of the INCOSE RWG. The presentation provides an overview of the INCOSE RWG Needs and Requirements Manual (NRM) Section 6, “Design Input Requirements Definition.” Activities discussed include transforming needs into design input requirements, establishing traceability across the lifecycle, ...
Techniques to Keep Requirement Sets Comprehensible
Переглядів 448Рік тому
This presentation was given to the INCOSE RWG during our monthly meeting on April 19, 2023 by Henrik Mattfolk. Abstract: Requirement sets often end up containing a high number of requirements which can have a negative impact on the comprehensibility of the set. A requirements set that is difficult to comprehend loses some of its value. Are there trade offs to be done between characteristics of ...
RWG Exchange Cafe Model-Based Structured Requirements in SysML
Переглядів 324Рік тому
RWG Exchange Cafe Model-Based Structured Requirements in SysML
RWG Exchange Cafe 022323
Переглядів 90Рік тому
RWG Exchange Cafe 022323
GtWR Section 3 Characteristics of Sets of Needs and Sets of Requirements
Переглядів 147Рік тому
GtWR Section 3 Characteristics of Sets of Needs and Sets of Requirements
GtWR Section 2 Characteristics of Individual Need and Requirement Statements
Переглядів 235Рік тому
GtWR Section 2 Characteristics of Individual Need and Requirement Statements
GtWR Introduction and Key Underlying Concepts
Переглядів 519Рік тому
GtWR Introduction and Key Underlying Concepts
Standards and Regulations Compliance
Переглядів 465Рік тому
Standards and Regulations Compliance
RWG PreIW2023 Day 1 Open Discussion
Переглядів 40Рік тому
RWG PreIW2023 Day 1 Open Discussion
Quantitative Aspects of Requirements
Переглядів 85Рік тому
Quantitative Aspects of Requirements
Capabilities for Libraries of Requirements, Standards and Regulations
Переглядів 122Рік тому
Capabilities for Libraries of Requirements, Standards and Regulations
INCOSE Requirements Working Group plans for 2023
Переглядів 82Рік тому
INCOSE Requirements Working Group plans for 2023
Project Data Dictionaries for Needs and Requirements
Переглядів 78Рік тому
Project Data Dictionaries for Needs and Requirements
Configuration Management of Variants Across the Digital Thread
Переглядів 238Рік тому
Configuration Management of Variants Across the Digital Thread
Collaboration in Needs and Requirements Development
Переглядів 219Рік тому
Collaboration in Needs and Requirements Development
INCOSE Requirements Working Group Progress
Переглядів 139Рік тому
INCOSE Requirements Working Group Progress
Guide to Systems Security Engineering Needs and Requirements
Переглядів 156Рік тому
Guide to Systems Security Engineering Needs and Requirements

КОМЕНТАРІ

  • @RB-hw7yg
    @RB-hw7yg 3 місяці тому

    Many thanks for sharing. Are any of the resources and models freely available for the community for example the metamodel example model? Is there a timeline of events for the next steps and release dates for us to look out for?

    • @incoserwg891
      @incoserwg891 Місяць тому

      We will be adding update videos as soon as we can. Also, if you are a member of INCOSE, you can visit the RWG iNet site for current information and status.

  • @dadsh85
    @dadsh85 4 місяці тому

    The 5 sources of requirements slide, can you point me to the research behind this? I would like to know more about this. Is there a reference?

  • @RobinHelsing-es9it
    @RobinHelsing-es9it 5 місяців тому

    When stating quantities, is it common to use (T) - threshold and (O) - objective? Reason I'm asking is that I watched another course, which stated that it should be used. Like: The LIR shall Report LIR_Health_and_Status data every (T) 1 minute +/- 0.1 minute (O) 0.5 minute +/- 0.1 minute to the FCR C&M software as defined in FCR ICD xyz.

  • @niranjanasenthilnathan8208
    @niranjanasenthilnathan8208 7 місяців тому

    Wow. Very good thought process :) Would like to learn the advancements .

  • @mathieuhoude3990
    @mathieuhoude3990 10 місяців тому

    I like the idea. The testing approach should always be considered when eliciting requirements. I think that thinking about the tests helps to define whether it may be relevant to divide the attributes into several requirements or not. One possibility for improvement here would be to use an alphanumeric list and not just bullet points for each attribute. Thus, it is possible to refer to a specific attribute of a requirement (e.g. REQ123a, REQ123b ) in a test procedure, reports and be more specific about what actually fails for instance.

  • @dr.strangelove8846
    @dr.strangelove8846 11 місяців тому

    Nice presentation Dr. Carson.. Thank you

  • @stuartrojas9582
    @stuartrojas9582 Рік тому

    "Promosm" 💞

  • @JeffreyWallk
    @JeffreyWallk Рік тому

    Reverse engineering requirements is a useful capability. There are some limited capabilities to conduct quality assessments and refine requirements. There is still a need to generate requirements and specifications, which is within our reach. This is where we can introduce domain knowledge and mapping between component models for Persona, Profile, Preferences, Jobs, Outcomes, Processes, and Measures that are contextualized around scenarios. This is a very different approach than conventional document-centric business analysis and requirements capture. Then we can build forward and reverse engineering of requirements and systems engineering. As we shift towards synthetic systems and services to support dynamic adaptation of systems in the digital ecosystem, these capabilities will likely become mainstream in order to keep pace with change and ensure relevancy in the digital market of interoperable services and products.

  • @raymondbwolfgang
    @raymondbwolfgang Рік тому

    Great topic - and thanks for posting the video. There's a lot more to explore here, especially as we move to graphical requirements - not just a bunch of shall statements.

  • @siliakas
    @siliakas Рік тому

    Dr. Carson went direct to the point: The great added value from AI would be to automatically extract the requirements from the architecture you are modelling. 🎯

    • @niranjanasenthilnathan8208
      @niranjanasenthilnathan8208 7 місяців тому

      Wont it be solution oriented approach if we extract requirements from Architecture ? ( Interesting Perspective )

    • @scottveach175
      @scottveach175 4 місяці тому

      I see it as an iterative process.

  • @lts4627
    @lts4627 Рік тому

    how one could accuratelly represent nonfunctional requirements using sysml?

  • @SpencerSkelly
    @SpencerSkelly Рік тому

    Well done. The goal of creating valuable requirements, and not just more requirements, is so important when working with multiple teams and suppliers. Thanks for this.

  • @raymondbwolfgang
    @raymondbwolfgang Рік тому

    Thank you for posting this replay on UA-cam!

    • @incoserwg891
      @incoserwg891 Рік тому

      Glad you found it useful. Having the ability to post these presentation is a great addition to the services the RWG provides to the SE community.

  • @makzmakz
    @makzmakz 2 роки тому

    Thanks for a great talk! Would a good functional/performance requirement like this be something that would be added to the set of design input requirements for the Payload?: FR1: The Payload shall send send the meassured temperature of the Payload according to signal tmpMsrmnt1 defined in Spacecraft ICD 1234, Table 5.4 row 2 within 2 ms and with accuracy of +/- 0.1 degC and with precision +/- 0.05 degC when requested by the Spacecraft by the recieved signal tmpMsmrntReq1 defined in Spacecraft ICD 1234, Table 5.4 row 10, while in operational mode as defined in States And Modes Definition Document figure 1.

    • @incoserwg891
      @incoserwg891 2 роки тому

      makzmakz Glad you enjoyed the presentation. You have the main idea in that 1) Interface requirements are functional/performance requirements and 2) the performance is the defined and agreed to definition of an interaction often contained in an ICD type of document. In this example the characteristics of the measurement parameter and the command. For data, command, and messages some organizations will have a separate data dictionary that defines the characteristics of each, others will include this information in an ICD. One thing about your example is that I don't think the accuracy and precision are part of the exchange of the measurement parameter, rather they are part of the act of obtaining the measurement in the first place. Something like: "The Payload shall measure tmpMsrmnt1 with an accuracy of of +/- 0.1 degC" and "The Payload shall measure tmpMsrmnt1 with a precision of +/- 0.05 degC." There would be other requirements concerning the sample rate and storage. From a single thought perspective and thinking ahead to system verification, I broke this into separate requirements. Another thing is the wordiness of the requirement - the less words the better while still being clear as too the intent while keeping the requirement a single thought as discussed above. As discussed in the INCOSE Guide to Writing Requirements (GtWR), including qualifying clauses is allowed and encouraged when appropriate to the level the requirement is being stated. These clauses also are an aid in planning ahead for how the system will be verified to meet the requirement as well as an aid when developing models of the system. In this case the command from the spacecraft is a trigger for the Payload to send the temperature measurement to the spacecraft. From a states and modes perspective, some organizations will include the state or mode as an attribute rather than as part of the requirement wording. This is helpful when wanting to list all the requirements that apply to a specific state or mode. This is discussed in the INCOSE RWG Needs and Requirements Manual (NRM) chapter on attributes. With these things in mind along with the assumption the state/mode is included as an attribute of the requirements rather than as part of the requirement statement text the following interface requirement could be stated. "The Payload shall send payload temperature measurement TmpMsrmnt1 defined in Spacecraft ICD 1234, Table 5.4 row 2 to the Spacecraft within 2 ms upon receipt of the spacecraft payload temperature request TmpMsmrntReq1 defined in Spacecraft ICD 1234, Table 5.4 row 10." Because the measurement and command are proper nouns I capitalized them.

  • @JayLikesLasers
    @JayLikesLasers 2 роки тому

    This seems to suggest that the ICD is fully written and published, before the interface requirement can be written. This seems completely backwards to me. In other words I never expected the requirement to include "as defined in Spacecraft ICD 1234, Table 5.4." If you have already defined the interface in a published ICD, why then are you spending the time to retrospectively write requirements? It's like planning for something you've already done. I thought that for a new system, requirements come first before the solution is developed, then followed by an ICD which evolves as part of the development.

    • @incoserwg891
      @incoserwg891 2 роки тому

      Jay, For existing systems, you are correct - an ICD should have been developed and baselined. This ICD then contains the information needed by new systems to be developed in the future to be able to interact with the existing system. As such, the existing system is a constraint on any new system being developed in the future that will interact in some way with the existing system. In the example you refer to there is an existing spacecraft that a new payload or instrument is being integrated into. Thus this new system is constrained by the existing spacecraft buss. Therefore the new system must have interface requirements concerning each interaction and these must include a pointer to the existing systems ICD. If both the spacecraft and payload are being developed concurrently, then what you say is also correct. Each will have interface requirements as design inputs that address each identified interaction from the perspective of what the interaction involves and characteristics of the things involved in the interactions. This information is included in a preliminary ICD and is referred to within the interface requirements. As design inputs, these requirements provide the design team the knowledge they need to come up with a design the enables the interaction to take place. Because the design has not been completed and agreed to, other interface requirements that depend on the design include a TBD until the design is complete. Once complete, the design information is added to the ICD and the TBDs in the interface requirements are replaced with pointers to the ICD. These requirements must be stated to not only drive design, but also because the build systems must be verified to meet all the interface requirements. If you go back and listen to the presentation and subsequent discussion, you will see that what I just said was discussed. If you have more questions, I suggest you read the sections in the INCOSE RWG Needs and Requirements Manual in section 4, 6, and 14 that discuss interfaces and interface requirements.

  • @JayLikesLasers
    @JayLikesLasers 2 роки тому

    Max resolution is 480p

    • @incoserwg891
      @incoserwg891 2 роки тому

      The presentation file can be found at our website: www.incose.org/incose-member-resources/working-groups/process/requirements

    • @JayLikesLasers
      @JayLikesLasers 2 роки тому

      @@incoserwg891 Thank you kindly. I love the resources and videos. If you're able to pass on feedback, could you have a systems engineer look at the whole website design? It's exceptionally difficult to find things, exceptionally difficult to buy things, even when you specifically know what you want to buy in advance. No obvious structure on where to click to buy a document. The user experience is unfamiliar even to an avid online shopper. I sometimes unexpectedly get redirected e.g. to a login page or a home page. There are documents which even when knowing the title, don't even seem show up on Google search. Plus the site feels 20 years out of date. The site seems to be a great anti-thesis to systems engineering practices. Also my company's purchasing department struggled to find a way to purchase something from the INCOSE website.

  • @ryanalexander153
    @ryanalexander153 2 роки тому

    For the verification, where do we find the "Electronic Task Production Sheet" or "Task Performance Sheet" within SharePoint? Is this a native SharePoint functionality or a link to a separate component?

  • @jppdx
    @jppdx 2 роки тому

    Great Introduction to EARS

  • @rene_lca
    @rene_lca 2 роки тому

    Well done Henrik!

  • @guarita
    @guarita 2 роки тому

    Hi, when will the Needs, Requiremnts, Verification, Validation Lifecycle Manual be available at the INCOSE store?