ArticleEntropy (Basel, Switzerland)2020
Software Requirements Classification Using Machine Learning Algorithms.
Article in Entropy (Basel, Switzerland), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Symmetric bug prediction in software requirement by machine learning algorithms.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Association between pollinosis and obstructive sleep apnea hypopnea syndrome in the US population: evidence from the NHANES database 2005-2018.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2025Article
- Using machine learning methods to investigate the role of volatile organic compounds in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease.Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 2025Article
- Detecting refactoring type of software commit messages based on ensemble machine learning algorithms.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- MLR-predictor: a versatile and efficient computational framework for multi-label requirements classification.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2024Article
- Classifying software security requirements into confidentiality, integrity, and availability using machine learning approaches.PeerJ. Computer science · 2024Article
- Identifying Potential Lyme Disease Cases Using Self-Reported Worldwide Tweets: Deep Learning Modeling Approach Enhanced With Sentimental Words Through Emojis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Article
- Research on Product Core Component Acquisition Based on Patent Semantic Network.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Recognition of Continuous Music Segments Based on the Phase Space Reconstruction Method.Computational intelligence and neuroscience · 2022Article
- Classification of Non-Functional Requirements From IoT Oriented Healthcare Requirement Document.Frontiers in public health · 2022Article
- One- and Two-Phase Software Requirement Classification Using Ensemble Deep Learning.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- An Improvised Machine Learning Model Based on Mutual Information Feature Selection Approach for Microbes Classification.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Traffic Crash Severity Prediction-A Synergy by Hybrid Principal Component Analysis and Machine Learning Models.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The correct classification of requirements has become an essential task within software engineering. This study shows a comparison among the text feature extraction techniques, and machine learning algorithms to the problem of requirements engineer classification to answer the two major questions "Which works best (Bag of Words (BoW) vs. Term Frequency-Inverse Document Frequency (TF-IDF) vs. Chi Squared (CHI2)) for classifying Software Requirements into Functional Requirements (FR) and Non-Functional Requirements (NF), and the sub-classes of Non-Functional Requirements?" and "Which Machine Learning Algorithm provides the best performance for the requirements classification task?". The data used to perform the research was the PROMISE_exp, a recently made dataset that expands the already known PROMISE repository, a repository that contains labeled software requirements. All the documents from the database were cleaned with a set of normalization steps and the two feature extractions, and feature selection techniques used were BoW, TF-IDF and CHI2 respectively. The algorithms used for classification were Logist Regression (LR), Support Vector Machine (SVM), Multinomial Naive Bayes (MNB) and k-Nearest Neighbors (kNN). The novelty of our work is the data used to perform the experiment, the details of the steps used to reproduce the classification, and the comparison between BoW, TF-IDF and CHI2 for this repository not having been covered by other studies. This work will serve as a reference for the software engineering community and will help other researchers to understand the requirement classification process. We noticed that the use of TF-IDF followed by the use of LR had a better classification result to differentiate requirements, with an F-measure of 0.91 in binary classification (tying with SVM in that case), 0.74 in NF classification and 0.78 in general classification. As future work we intend to compare more algorithms and new forms to improve the precision of our models.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.