| i* |
|
The framework is used in contexts in which there are multiple
parties
(or autonomous units) with strategic interests which may be reinforcing
or conflicting in relation to each other. Examples of such
contexts
include: business process redesign, business redesign, information
systems
requirements engineering, analyzing the social embedding of information
technology, and the design of agent-based software systems.
The name i* (pronounced eye-star) refers to the concept of distributed intentionality.
| Road map for readings on i*
: For a quick overview, you may start with RE97 which presents i* concepts in a Requirements Engineering context. A vision for strategic actors modelling in the context of Agent-Oriented Software Engineering is outlined in AOSE01. A similar overview for the Information Systems context is presented in WIj01. For a simple presentation of the framework in a Business Process Redesign context, you may start with either WITS94 or IEEE Expert 96. Both provide an overview of the framework, with the latter including an example of ConGolog process modelling. The COOCS93 paper focuses on the Strategic Dependency model (called the Actor Dependency model at the time). These papers should be enough to get you started in doing i* modelling. CACM99 provides an overview of goal-oriented analysis, which is an important part of i*. An earlier illustration of i* reasoning appeared in HICSS94 (This is now part of the Strategic Rationale model.) The ICSE94 paper is an application of the i* framework to Software Processes and Organizations. It has examples of the distinction among Agents, Roles, and Positions, and a discussion of enforcement, assurance, and insurance. These are further illustrated in ICEIMT97. IFAC99 offers examples of Business Modelling, with an example about IKEA. These are further illustrated in ER01. The latter also shows how i* modelling can be used to help reason about Patents in a strategic business context, with examples from e-commerce (online travel booking). The mechanisms for modelling patent protection is similar to those for modelling Trust and Security in Trust00. The WIj01 paper provides a more detailed explanation of the premises behind the i* ontology. The main arguments are summarized in the AOIS01 invited presentation. COOCS95
compares several different approaches
to modelling organizational work, including IBIS, KAOS, and
Action
Workflow (speech acts). The ER94
paper contains some partial schemas and
axioms for the models. More details are available in the PhD
thesis
[Yu95]. |
| A set of Powerpoint
slides assembles presentations
slides from various papers and talks into a tutorial format. |
Tropos at the University of Toronto, Canada
Tropos at the University of Trento, Italy
Tropos at the Technical University of Aachen (RWTH), Germany
Tropos at the Federal University of Pernambuco (UPFE), Brazil
Some applications, extensions, or adaptations of i* :
(See also E. Yu Publications)
in selected areas:
Roberto
Sebastiani, Paolo
Giorgini, John
Mylopoulos:
Simple
and Minimum-Cost Satisfiability for Goal Models. 16th
International Conference, CAiSE 2004, Riga, Latvia, June
7-11, 2004, Proceedings. LNCS
3084
(Springer) pp. 20-35.For discussions of goal-oriented requirements engineering, see
[Kavlaki02]
[Rolland03]
[vanLamsweerde00]
David
Bush, Anthony Finkelstein: Requirements
Stability Assessment Using Scenarios. in: IEEE
Joint International Conference on Requirements Engineering 2003,
California, USA. pp. 23-32.A number of Ph.D. dissertations have made use of i* modelling: