JP2018124620A - Specification creation support apparatus, specification creation support method and specification creation support program - Google Patents

Abstract

PROBLEM TO BE SOLVED: To aim to appropriately determine a test viewpoint lacking in an evaluation project.SOLUTION: A storage unit 110 stores a management table 111 for managing a test viewpoint 100 for a project. An acquisition unit 120 acquires the test viewpoint 100 for evaluation that is a test viewpoint of an evaluation target evaluation project. A difference analysis unit 130 analyses the test viewpoint managed by the test viewpoint 100 for evaluation and the management table 111, and select a project given the lacking test viewpoint to the evaluation project that is compared with the evaluation project as a superiority analysis result 321 from the management table 111. An adequacy analysis unit 140 determines whether the lacking test view point is appropriate as the evaluation project based on the superiority analysis result 321.SELECTED DRAWING: Figure 1

Description

  The present invention relates to a specification creation support apparatus, a specification creation support method, and a specification creation support program.

In software development, the scale of development is rapidly expanding, and rework due to an increase in test specifications or omission of tests and market defects are becoming problems.
With the introduction of efficient and effective test methods, it is necessary to select or reduce test specifications while guaranteeing quality.
In Patent Document 1, a diagram showing a relationship between a test object and a purpose, that is, an LTMap and a figure for discovering inconsistency or duplication between test objects, that is, a TRMap is used to determine the adequacy of a test specification, A technique for performing optimization is disclosed.

JP 20122266652 A

For the test viewpoints used to evaluate the effectiveness of the test specifications, the lack of test viewpoints or test specifications are detected and suggestions for improvement are presented. The test viewpoint used for evaluating the effectiveness of the test specification is called a test viewpoint document.
As an example of the test viewpoint, there is LTMap of Patent Document 1, and by using a diagram showing the relationship between the test object and the test purpose, it is possible to define an efficient test specification in accordance with the achievement goal of the project. However, there is a problem that omissions or variations occur due to differences in the experience values of the engineers to be created and the requirements of each project or customer.

  It is an object of the present invention to compare and evaluate a test viewpoint document or test specification with various data of other projects, detect an insufficient test viewpoint or test specification, and automatically present an improvement plan. And

The specification creation support apparatus according to the present invention is:
A storage unit for storing a management table for managing a test viewpoint document used for evaluating the effectiveness of a test specification of a program for each project;
An acquisition unit for acquiring a test viewpoint document for evaluation, which is a test viewpoint document of an evaluation project to be evaluated;
Analyzing the test viewpoint document for evaluation and the test viewpoint document managed in the management table, and comparing the evaluation project with the evaluation project, the evaluation project was given a missing test viewpoint document A difference analysis unit for selecting a project from the management table as a result of superiority analysis;
A validity analysis unit that determines whether the insufficient test viewpoint book is suitable for the evaluation project based on the superiority analysis result.

  In the specification creation support apparatus according to the present invention, the storage unit stores a management table for managing the test viewpoint document for each project. The acquisition unit acquires a test viewpoint book for evaluation, which is a test viewpoint book of the evaluation project to be evaluated. The difference analysis unit analyzes the test viewpoint document for evaluation and the test viewpoint document managed in the management table, and compares it with the evaluation project. Selected projects as superiority analysis results from the management table. The validity analysis unit determines whether the insufficient test viewpoint book is suitable for the evaluation project based on the result of superiority analysis. Therefore, according to the specification creation support apparatus according to the present invention, it is possible to appropriately determine the test viewpoint document that is lacking in the evaluation project.

1 is a configuration diagram of a specification creation support apparatus 10 according to Embodiment 1. FIG. FIG. 3 shows an example of a management table 111 according to the first embodiment. FIG. 5 shows an example of the result information 112 according to the first embodiment. The figure which showed an example of the experience value information 113 which concerns on Embodiment 1. FIG. The figure which showed an example of the risk information 114 which concerns on Embodiment 1. FIG. The figure which showed an example of the customer information 115 which concerns on Embodiment 1. FIG. FIG. 6 is a flowchart of a specification creation support method 512 of the specification creation support apparatus 10 according to the first embodiment and a specification creation support process S100 of the specification creation support program 511; FIG. 6 is a flowchart of acquisition processing S120 according to the first embodiment. FIG. 6 is a flowchart of similarity analysis processing S131 according to the first embodiment. The figure which showed the similarity analysis result 311 calculated by similarity analysis process S131 which concerns on embodiment. FIG. 6 is a flowchart of superiority analysis processing S132 according to the first embodiment. The figure which showed the superiority analysis result 321 calculated by the superiority analysis process S132 which concerns on Embodiment 1. FIG. FIG. 6 is a flowchart of a difference product evaluation process S141 according to the first embodiment. The flowchart of step S41 of the difference product evaluation process S141 which concerns on Embodiment 1. FIG. The flowchart of step S42 of the difference product evaluation process S141 which concerns on Embodiment 1. FIG. The flowchart of step S43 of the difference product evaluation process S141 which concerns on Embodiment 1. FIG. The figure which showed the 1st product evaluation result 411 calculated by difference product evaluation process S141 which concerns on Embodiment 1. FIG. FIG. 6 is a flowchart of an existing product evaluation process S142 according to the first embodiment. The flowchart of step S51 of the existing product evaluation process S142 which concerns on Embodiment 1. FIG. The flowchart of step S52 of the existing product evaluation process S142 which concerns on embodiment. The flowchart of step S53 of the existing product evaluation process S142 which concerns on Embodiment 1. FIG. The figure which showed the 2nd product evaluation result 421 calculated by the existing product evaluation process S142 which concerns on Embodiment 1. FIG. FIG. 6 is a flowchart of improvement proposal processing S150 based on a first product evaluation result 411 according to the first embodiment. The flowchart of the improvement proposal process S150 based on the 2nd product evaluation result 421 which concerns on Embodiment 1. FIG. The figure which showed the 1st correction item 501 selected by the improvement proposal process S150 which concerns on Embodiment 1. FIG. The figure which showed the 2nd correction item 502 selected by the improvement proposal process S150 which concerns on Embodiment 1. FIG. The block diagram of the specification preparation assistance apparatus 10 which concerns on the modification of Embodiment 1. FIG. FIG. 10 is a flowchart of similarity analysis processing S131b according to the second embodiment. The figure which showed the similarity analysis result 1312 calculated by similarity analysis process S131b which concerns on Embodiment 2. FIG. The figure which showed the superiority analysis result 1322 calculated by the superiority analysis process S132b which concerns on Embodiment 2. FIG. The figure which showed the 1st product evaluation result 1412 calculated by difference product evaluation process S141b which concerns on Embodiment 2. FIG. The figure which showed the 2nd product evaluation result 1422 calculated by the existing product evaluation process S142b which concerns on Embodiment 2. FIG. The figure which showed the 1st correction item 1503 selected by the improvement proposal process S150b which concerns on Embodiment 2. FIG. The figure which showed the 2nd correction item 1504 selected by the improvement proposal process S150b which concerns on Embodiment 2. FIG.

  Hereinafter, embodiments of the present invention will be described with reference to the drawings. In addition, the same code | symbol is attached | subjected to the part which is the same or it corresponds in each figure. In the description of the embodiments, the description of the same or corresponding parts will be omitted or simplified as appropriate.

Embodiment 1 FIG.
*** Explanation of configuration ***
The configuration of the specification creation support apparatus 10 according to the present embodiment will be described with reference to FIG.
As shown in FIG. 1, the specification creation support apparatus 10 is a computer. The specification creation support apparatus 10 includes hardware such as a processor 910, a storage device 920, an input interface 930, and an output interface 940. The storage device 920 includes a memory 921 and an auxiliary storage device 922. The processor 910 is connected to other hardware via a signal line, and controls these other hardware.

The specification creation support apparatus 10 includes an acquisition unit 120, a difference analysis unit 130, a validity analysis unit 140, an improvement proposal unit 150, and a storage unit 110 as components. The acquisition unit 120 and the difference analysis unit 130 include a similarity analysis unit 131 and a superiority analysis unit 132. The validity analysis unit 140 includes a difference product evaluation unit 141 and an existing product evaluation unit 142.
The functions of the acquisition unit 120, the similarity analysis unit 131, the superiority analysis unit 132, the difference product evaluation unit 141, the existing product evaluation unit 142, and the improvement proposal unit 150 are realized by software. The storage unit 110 is realized by the memory 921. Note that the storage unit 110 may be realized by the memory 921 and the auxiliary storage device 922. Alternatively, the storage unit 110 may be realized only by the auxiliary storage device 922.

  The auxiliary storage device 922 creates a specification that realizes the functions of the acquisition unit 120, the similarity analysis unit 131, the superiority analysis unit 132, the difference product evaluation unit 141, the existing product evaluation unit 142, and the improvement proposal unit 150. A support program 511 is stored. This program is read into the memory 921 by the processor 910 and executed by the processor 910. Thus, the functions of the acquisition unit 120, the similarity analysis unit 131, the superiority analysis unit 132, the difference product evaluation unit 141, the existing product evaluation unit 142, and the improvement proposal unit 150 are realized. The auxiliary storage device 922 also stores an OS (Operating System). At least a part of the OS is loaded into the memory 921, and the processor 910 executes the specification creation support program 511 while executing the OS.

  The processor 910 is an IC (Integrated Circuit) that performs arithmetic processing. The processor 910 is, as a specific example, a CPU (Central Processing Unit), a DSP (Digital Signal Processor), or a GPU (Graphics Processing Unit).

The memory 921 is a storage device that temporarily stores data. As a specific example, the memory 921 is an SRAM (Static Random Access Memory) or a DRAM (Dynamic Random Access Memory).
The auxiliary storage device 922 is a storage device that stores data. A specific example of the auxiliary storage device 922 is an HDD (Hard Disk Drive). The auxiliary storage device 922 includes an SD (registered trademark) (Secure Digital) memory card, a CF (CompactFlash), a NAND flash, a flexible disk, an optical disk, a compact disk, a Blu-ray (registered trademark) disk, a DVD (Digital Versatile Disk), and the like. It may be a portable storage medium.

  The input interface 930 is a port connected to an input device such as a mouse, a keyboard, and a touch panel. The input interface 930 is a USB (Universal Serial Bus) terminal as a specific example. The input interface 930 may be a port connected to a LAN (Local Area Network). The output interface 940 is a port to which a monitor 160 cable such as a display is connected. The output interface 940 is a USB terminal or an HDMI (registered trademark) terminal as a specific example. As a specific example, the display is an LCD (Liquid Crystal Display).

  The specification creation support apparatus 10 may include only one processor, or may include a plurality of processors. Programs for realizing the functions of the acquisition unit 120, the similarity analysis unit 131, the superiority analysis unit 132, the difference product evaluation unit 141, the existing product evaluation unit 142, and the improvement proposal unit 150 may be executed in cooperation. .

  Information, data, signal values, and information indicating results of processing by the acquisition unit 120, the similarity analysis unit 131, the superiority analysis unit 132, the difference product evaluation unit 141, the existing product evaluation unit 142, and the improvement proposal unit 150, The variable value is stored in the auxiliary storage device 922, the memory 921, or a register or cache memory in the processor 910.

  The specification creation support program product is a function described as the acquisition unit 120, the similarity analysis unit 131, the superiority analysis unit 132, the difference product evaluation unit 141, the existing product evaluation unit 142, and the improvement proposal unit 150. It is a storage medium or storage device in which a program to be realized is recorded. The specification creation support program product loads a computer-readable program regardless of the visual format.

*** Description of functions ***
The storage unit 110 stores a management table 111 for managing a test viewpoint document used for evaluating the effectiveness of a test specification of a program for each project. Further, evaluation information 11 used for evaluation of the test viewpoint document is stored. Specifically, the storage unit 110 stores test viewpoints and test specifications of each project, comparison data used for validity evaluation, and test viewpoint documents. The storage unit 110 stores a management table 111, result information 112, experience value information 113, risk information 114, and customer information 115. The result information 112, the experience value information 113, the risk information 114, and the customer information 115 are examples of the evaluation information 11 used for evaluating the test viewpoint document.

  The difference analysis unit 130 detects a difference in the test viewpoint document to be evaluated from data of another project. The difference analysis unit 130 analyzes the test viewpoint document 100 for evaluation and the test viewpoint document managed in the management table 111. The difference analysis unit 130 selects, from the management table 111, a superiority analysis result 321 as a superiority analysis result 321, which is a project to be compared with an evaluation project and to which a test viewpoint document that is insufficient for the evaluation project.

  The validity analysis unit 140 detects whether the analysis result by the difference analysis unit 130 is valid. As a specific example, the validity analysis unit 140 determines whether a test viewpoint document lacking in the evaluation project is suitable for the evaluation project based on the superiority analysis result 321. Specifically, the validity analysis unit 140 determines whether the missing test viewpoint document is suitable for the evaluation project, and determines the magnitude of the difference between the test viewpoint document 100 for evaluation and the insufficient test viewpoint document. The first product evaluation result 411 is output. In addition, the validity analysis unit 140 evaluates the test viewpoint book 100 for evaluation using the evaluation information 11 such as the result information 112, the experience value information 113, the risk information 114, and the customer information 115, and evaluates the second product evaluation. The result 421 is output.

  Based on the first product evaluation result 411, the improvement proposal unit 150 displays the insufficient test viewpoint book as the first correction item 501. Further, the improvement proposing unit 150 displays, as the second correction item 502, a test viewpoint document with a low evaluation among the test viewpoint documents 100 for evaluation based on the second product evaluation result 421. In this way, the improvement proposing unit 150 displays the test viewpoint document and the test specification considered to be insufficient together with the reference examples of other projects.

The configuration and processing of the specification creation support apparatus 10 will be further described.
The management table 111 stores project-specific information such as a test viewpoint for each project or product type.
In the result information 112, result information such as customer evaluation of each project stored in the management table 111 is stored. Details of each information will be described later.

  The acquisition unit 120 acquires a test viewpoint book 100 for evaluation, which is a test viewpoint book of an evaluation project to be evaluated. Specifically, the acquisition unit 120 acquires information such as the project or function type of the test viewpoint document 100 to be analyzed via the input interface 930 and inputs the information to the management table 111. The test viewpoint document 100 to be analyzed only needs to match the items in the management table 111, and test viewpoint documents other than the LTMap can be used. The input via the input interface 930 may be manual or automatic.

  The difference analysis unit 130 includes a similarity analysis unit 131 and a superiority analysis unit 132. The similarity analysis unit 131 evaluates which other project is similar to the input test viewpoint document to be analyzed. The superiority analysis unit 132 calculates which one of the projects similar to the analysis target project is superior, and determines the priority of the projects to be compared.

  The validity analysis unit 140 includes a difference product evaluation unit 141 and an existing product evaluation unit 142. The difference product evaluation unit 141 calculates whether the project selected by the difference analysis unit 130 is appropriate based on the experience value of the person in charge, product risk, and customer information, and selects a project to be referred to. To do. The existing product evaluation unit 142 calculates whether the content of the existing test viewpoint document is appropriate from the experience value of the person in charge, the risk of the product, and the customer information, and selects the one with a low evaluation.

  Based on the results of the difference product evaluation unit 141 and the existing product evaluation unit 142, the improvement proposal unit 150 outputs the insufficient test viewpoint document as a reference example from the test viewpoint document of a similar project. The improvement proposing unit 150 displays the reference case on the monitor 160 via the output interface 940.

FIG. 2 is a diagram showing an example of the management table 111 according to the present embodiment.
In the management table 111, test viewpoints described in the test viewpoint document and information accompanying the test viewpoints are defined. In the example of the management table 111 in FIG. 2, the project name, test viewpoint document ID, development period, development scale, customer, creator, test viewpoint, mass production shipment date, risk_high × test target granularity_class, and risk_high X Information such as test target granularity_module is defined.

  FIG. 3 is a diagram showing an example of the result information 112 according to the present embodiment. The result information 112 is defined for information such as project names described in the management table 111, their results, and required skills. In the example of the result information 112 in FIG. 3, information such as the number of market defects, front loading rate, customer evaluation, test process leader, experience product group, language use experience is defined.

  FIG. 4 is a diagram showing an example of the experience value information 113 according to the present embodiment. The experience value information 113 is defined for personal information of each person in charge who causes personality. In the example of the experience value information 113 in FIG. 4, information such as a person in charge, specialty, years of experience, experience in charge, and experience product group is defined.

  FIG. 5 is a diagram showing an example of the risk information 114 according to the present embodiment. The risk information 114 defines risk information related to a project or product type. In the example of the risk information 114 in FIG. 5, information such as human damage and defect recovery cost is defined.

  FIG. 6 is a diagram showing an example of customer information 115 according to the present embodiment. The customer information 115 defines information to be noted about each customer. In the example of the customer information 115 in FIG. 6, information such as a customer name, type, audit criteria, important items, and the number of past orders received is defined.

*** Explanation of operation ***
The specification creation support method 512 of the specification creation support apparatus 10 and the specification creation support process S100 of the specification creation support program 511 will be described with reference to FIG. The specification creation support process S100 includes an acquisition process S120, a difference analysis process S130, a validity analysis process S140, and an improvement proposal process S150. The difference analysis process S130 includes a similarity analysis process S131 and a superiority analysis process S132. The validity analysis process S140 includes a difference product evaluation process S141 and an existing product evaluation process S142.

<Acquisition process S120>
The acquisition process S120 according to the present embodiment will be described with reference to FIG.
In step S <b> 101, the acquisition unit 120 acquires the test viewpoint document 100 via the input interface 930. As described above, the input via the input interface 930 may be manual or automatic.
In step S <b> 102, the acquisition unit 120 inputs information related to the test viewpoint document 100 to the management table 111 according to the items of the management table 111. Note that the input method is not particularly limited when the acquisition unit 120 inputs the management table. As a specific example, information in the management table 111 can be described in advance in the test viewpoint document 100, and information described in the management table 111 can be automatically extracted.
The management table 111 in FIG. 2 is a diagram illustrating an example of the management table generated by the acquisition unit 120. Project X is registered as a project to be analyzed, and project A is registered as other project information. The data management method for the management table 111 is not particularly limited. Project X is an example of an evaluation project to be evaluated.

<Difference analysis process S130>
<Similarity analysis processing S131>
The similarity analysis process S131 according to the present embodiment will be described with reference to FIG.
In step S201a, the similarity analysis unit 131 searches the management table 111 for a project that matches the product type name in the test viewpoint document input by the acquisition unit. If there is a matched project, the similarity analysis unit 131 selects the project (step S202a). If there is no matching project, the similarity analysis unit 131 selects all projects (step S203a).
In step S204a, the similarity analysis unit 131 searches the management table 111 for a project that matches the customer name in the test viewpoint document input by the acquisition unit. If there is a matched project, the similarity analysis unit 131 selects the project (step S205a). If there is no matching project, the similarity analysis unit 131 selects all projects (step S206a).
In step S207a, the similarity analysis unit 131 searches the management table 111 for a project that is close to the development scale of the test viewpoint document input by the acquisition unit, and assigns a higher score in order from the closest development scale. The way of assigning the score at this time is not particularly limited.
In step S208a, the similarity analysis unit 131 searches the management table 111 for projects that are close to the mass production shipment date of the test viewpoint document input by the acquisition unit, and assigns a higher score in the order of the mass production shipment date. The way of assigning the score at this time is not particularly limited.
In step S209a, the similarity analysis unit 131 selects, as comparison target projects, the projects selected in steps S201a to S206a and the higher ranks of the total score added in steps 207a and 208a. The number of selections at this time can be arbitrarily determined. Further, although addition is used in the examples of step S207a and step S208a, the calculation method is not particularly limited.

  FIG. 10 is a diagram showing the similarity analysis result 311 calculated in the similarity analysis processing S131 according to the present embodiment. In the similarity analysis result 311, several projects with high similarity are registered by the similarity analysis processing S131.

<Superiority analysis process S132>
The superiority analysis process S132 according to the present embodiment will be described with reference to FIG.
In step S301, the superiority analysis unit 132 refers to the number of market defects from the result information 112 for the similar projects selected in the similarity analysis processing S131, and assigns a higher score to the projects with the lowest number of market defects.
In step S302, the superiority analysis unit 132 refers to the customer evaluation from the result information 112 for the similar project selected in the similarity analysis processing S, and assigns a higher score in the order of the project with the highest customer evaluation.
In step S303, the superiority analysis unit 132 refers to the front loading rate from the result information 112 for the similar projects selected by the similarity analysis unit 131, and assigns a higher score to the projects with the highest front loading rate.
In step S <b> 304, the superiority analysis unit 132 selects, as a comparison target project, a top number of total scores calculated in steps S <b> 301 to S <b> 303. Furthermore, the superiority analysis unit 132 compares the project to be analyzed with the top several projects, and registers the insufficient test viewpoint.

  FIG. 12 is a diagram showing the superiority analysis result 321 calculated in the superiority analysis processing S132 according to the present embodiment. In the superiority analysis result 321, a number of projects in which superiority is further added to the projects selected by the similarity analysis unit 131 are registered. A short test viewpoint document ID is set for each of several projects taking advantage of superiority.

<Validity analysis processing S140>
Next, the validity analysis process S140 according to the present embodiment will be described.
In the difference product evaluation process S <b> 141, the validity of the insufficient test viewpoint selected in the difference analysis process S <b> 130 is evaluated. In the existing product evaluation process S142, the validity of the entire test viewpoint document input by the acquisition unit 120 is evaluated.

<Difference product evaluation process S141>
The difference product evaluation process S141 according to the present embodiment will be described with reference to FIG.
In step S41, the difference product evaluation unit 141 calculates the validity of the test viewpoint document from the experience value information 113 of the person in charge.
In step S <b> 42, the difference product evaluation unit 141 calculates the validity of the test viewpoint document from the customer information 115.
In step S <b> 43, the difference product evaluation unit 141 calculates the validity of the test viewpoint document from the risk information 114.
In step S44, the difference product evaluation unit 141 performs comprehensive evaluation in consideration of the evaluation from step S41 to step S43. Details of each will be described.

Step S41 of the difference product evaluation process S141 according to the present embodiment will be described with reference to FIG. Step S41 includes Steps S411 to S416.
In step S411, the difference product evaluation unit 141 refers to the information on the person in charge who created the test viewpoints in the missing test viewpoints selected in the difference analysis process S130, from the experience value information 113, and the product Points are awarded if the experiences do not match.
In step S412, the difference product evaluation unit 141 refers to the information of the person in charge who created the test viewpoints in the missing test viewpoints selected in the difference analysis process S130, from the experience value information 113, and the language Points are given if the experience of use does not match.
In step S413, the difference product evaluation unit 141 refers to the information on the person in charge who created the test viewpoints in the missing test viewpoints selected in the difference analysis process S130, from the experience value information 113. If does not match, a score is given.
In step S414, the difference product evaluation unit 141 refers to the experience value information 113 for the information of the person in charge who created the test viewpoint document in the insufficient test viewpoint document selected in the difference analysis process S130. Points are assigned in descending order of years.
In step S415, the difference product evaluation unit 141 refers to the information on the person in charge who created the test viewpoints in the insufficient test viewpoints selected in the difference analysis process S130, from the experience value information 113. Points are deducted by the number of experiences.
In step S416, the difference product evaluation unit 141 refers to the information on the person in charge who created the test viewpoints in the missing test viewpoints selected in the difference analysis process S130, from the experience value information 113, Points are deducted in ascending order of cause.

With reference to FIG. 15, step S42 of the difference product evaluation process S141 according to the present embodiment will be described. Step S42 includes steps S421 to S423.
In step S <b> 421, the difference product evaluation unit 141 determines whether the customers of those projects match the customer information 115 in the insufficient test viewpoint document selected in the difference analysis process S <b> 130.
If the difference product evaluation unit 141 matches the customer information 115, in step S423, the difference product evaluation unit 141 gives a higher score as the auditing standard is stricter. Further, when the difference product evaluation unit 141 does not match the customer information 115, the customer information 115 having the same product type is applied, and the higher the auditing standard, the higher the score.

Step S43 of the difference product evaluation process S141 according to the present embodiment will be described with reference to FIG. Step S43 includes steps S431 to S432.
In step S431, the difference product evaluation unit 141 refers to those projects from the risk information 114 in the lacking test viewpoint document selected in the difference analysis process S130. Points are assigned in descending order.
In step S432, the difference product evaluation unit 141 refers to those projects from the risk information 114 in the missing test viewpoint document selected in the difference analysis process S130, and if the project or product type matches, the defect recovery is performed. Points are assigned in order of increasing cost.

  FIG. 17 is a diagram showing the first product evaluation result 411 calculated in the different product evaluation processing S141 according to the present embodiment. The first product evaluation result 411 is registered in consideration of the experience value information 113, the risk information 114, and the customer information 115 for the test viewpoint document selected in the difference analysis process S130. The first product evaluation result 411 indicates that the higher the overall score is, the more the test viewpoint should be added.

<Existing Product Evaluation Process S142>
The existing product evaluation process S142 according to the present embodiment will be described with reference to FIG.
Steps S51 to S54 of the existing product evaluation process S142 in FIG. 18 are basically the same as steps S41 to S44 in the difference product evaluation process S141 of FIG. The input information regarding step S41 to step S44 in FIG. 13 is the test viewpoint document calculated from the difference analysis process S130. However, in steps S51 to S54 in FIG. 18, the input is input in the acquisition process S120. It becomes a test viewpoint book.
FIG. 19 is a diagram showing step S51 of the existing product evaluation process S142 according to the present embodiment. FIG. 20 is a diagram showing step S52 of the existing product evaluation process S142 according to the present embodiment. FIG. 21 is a diagram showing step S53 of the existing product evaluation process S142 according to the present embodiment.
19 and FIG. 14, the flowchart of FIG. 20 and the flowchart of FIG. 15, the flowchart of FIG. 21, and the flowchart of FIG.

  FIG. 22 is a diagram showing the second product evaluation result 421 calculated in the existing product evaluation processing S142 according to the present embodiment. The second product evaluation result 421 is registered in consideration of the experience value information 113, the risk information 114, and the customer information 115 for the test viewpoint document selected in the difference analysis process S130. The second product evaluation result 421 indicates that the lower the total score is, the more the test viewpoint book should be corrected.

<Improvement proposal processing S150>
In the improvement proposal process S150, the improvement proposal part 150 presents the test items that are insufficient and the test items with low evaluation from the data obtained in the validity analysis process S140.
The improvement proposal process S150 based on the first product evaluation result 411 according to the present embodiment will be described with reference to FIG.
In step S <b> 601, the improvement proposing unit 150 selects a higher score than a certain threshold value from the first product evaluation result 411.
In step S <b> 602, the improvement proposing unit 150 selects a corresponding reference test viewpoint document from the test viewpoint document group 116.
In step S603, the improvement proposing unit 150 presents an analysis result and a reference test viewpoint document.

The improvement proposal process S150 based on the second product evaluation result 421 according to the present embodiment will be described with reference to FIG.
In step S <b> 701, the improvement proposing unit 150 selects a higher score than a certain threshold value than the second product evaluation result 421.
In step S <b> 702, the improvement proposal unit 150 selects a corresponding reference test viewpoint document from the test viewpoint document group 116.
In step S703, the improvement proposing unit 150 presents an analysis result and a reference test viewpoint document.

FIG. 25 is a diagram showing the first correction item 501 selected in the improvement proposing process S150 according to the present embodiment. In the first correction item 501, a list of test viewpoints to be added to the test viewpoint document to be analyzed is output and the corresponding test viewpoint document is output to the monitor 160.
FIG. 26 is a diagram showing the second correction item 502 selected in the improvement proposal processing S150 according to the present embodiment. In the second correction item 502, a list of test viewpoints to be confirmed in the test viewpoint document to be analyzed is output to the monitor 160, and the corresponding test viewpoint document is output.

*** Other configurations ***
In the present embodiment, the acquisition unit of the specification creation support apparatus 10 acquires via the input interface. However, the specification creation support apparatus 10 may include a communication device and may receive a test viewpoint document from another device via the communication device. At this time, the communication apparatus includes a receiver and a transmitter. Specifically, the communication device is a communication chip or a NIC (Network Interface Card). The communication device functions as a communication unit that communicates data. The receiver functions as a receiving unit that receives data, and the transmitter functions as a transmitting unit that transmits data.

In the present embodiment, the functions of the acquisition unit 120, the similarity analysis unit 131, the superiority analysis unit 132, the difference product evaluation unit 141, the existing product evaluation unit 142, and the improvement proposal unit 150 of the specification creation support apparatus 10 Is realized by software. However, as a modification, the functions of the acquisition unit 120, the similarity analysis unit 131, the superiority analysis unit 132, the difference product evaluation unit 141, the existing product evaluation unit 142, and the improvement proposal unit 150 of the specification creation support apparatus 10 May be implemented in hardware.
The configuration of the specification creation support apparatus 10 according to the modification of the present embodiment will be described using FIG.
As shown in FIG. 27, the specification creation support apparatus 10 includes hardware such as a processing circuit 909, an input interface 930, and an output interface 940.

  The processing circuit 909 implements the functions of the acquisition unit 120, the similarity analysis unit 131, the superiority analysis unit 132, the difference product evaluation unit 141, the existing product evaluation unit 142, and the improvement proposal unit 150 and the storage unit 110 described above. This is a dedicated electronic circuit. Specifically, the processing circuit 909 is a single circuit, a composite circuit, a programmed processor, a parallel programmed processor, a logic IC, a GA, an ASIC, or an FPGA. GA is an abbreviation for Gate Array. ASIC is an abbreviation for Application Specific Integrated Circuit. FPGA is an abbreviation for Field-Programmable Gate Array.

  The functions of the acquisition unit 120, the similarity analysis unit 131, the superiority analysis unit 132, the difference product evaluation unit 141, the existing product evaluation unit 142, and the improvement proposal unit 150 of the specification creation support apparatus 10 are one processing circuit. 909 may be realized, or may be realized by being distributed to a plurality of processing circuits 909.

  As another modification, the function of each device may be realized by a combination of software and hardware. That is, some functions of each device may be realized by dedicated hardware, and the remaining functions may be realized by software.

  The processor 910, the storage device 920, and the processing circuit 909 of the specification creation support apparatus 10 are collectively referred to as a “processing circuit”. That is, regardless of the configuration of the specification creation support apparatus 10 shown in FIGS. 1 and 27, the function of the specification creation support apparatus 10 is realized by the processing circuitry.

  “Part” may be read as “process” or “step” or “processing”. Further, the function of each device may be realized by firmware.

*** Explanation of effects of this embodiment ***
As described above, according to the specification creation support apparatus 10 according to the present embodiment, it is possible to eliminate personality in creating a test viewpoint document or test specification. In addition, according to the specification creation support apparatus 10 according to the present embodiment, it is possible to take into account differences in requirements that differ from project to project. By automating these, it is possible to efficiently improve omission or variation. it can.

Embodiment 2. FIG.
*** Explanation of configuration ***
In the present embodiment, differences from the first embodiment will be mainly described.
In this embodiment, the same components as those described in Embodiment 1 are denoted by the same reference numerals, and the description thereof may be omitted.

  In the first embodiment, the improvement proposal from the viewpoint of the test is performed. However, it is possible to propose the improvement for the shortage of the test specification described in the test viewpoint. The configuration diagram of the specification creation support apparatus 10 regarding the test specification shortage presentation is the same as the specification creation support apparatus 10 shown in FIG. However, some functions of the difference analysis unit 130, the validity analysis unit 140, and the improvement proposal unit 150 are different from those of the first embodiment. The different functions are described below.

*** Description of functions ***
The difference analysis unit 130 analyzes the test viewpoint document for evaluation and the test viewpoint document managed in the management table 111. The difference analysis unit 130 manages a test viewpoint document, which is a test viewpoint document to be compared with a test viewpoint document for evaluation, and to which a test specification lacking in the test viewpoint document for evaluation is given, as an advantage analysis result 1322. Select from table 111.
The validity analysis unit 140 determines, based on the superiority analysis result 1322, whether the test viewpoint document to which the insufficient test specification is assigned is suitable for the test viewpoint document for evaluation. The validity analysis unit 140 determines the magnitude of the difference between the test viewpoint combination of the test viewpoint document to which the insufficient test specification is assigned and the test viewpoint combination of the test viewpoint document for evaluation, and the first deliverable An evaluation result 1412 is output. In addition, the validity analysis unit 140 evaluates the test viewpoint combination of the evaluation test viewpoint document using the evaluation information 11, and outputs it as the second product evaluation result 1422.
Based on the first product evaluation result 1412, the improvement proposal unit 150 displays the test viewpoint combination of the test viewpoint document to which the insufficient test specification is assigned as the first correction item 1503. Further, based on the second product evaluation result 1422, the improvement proposing unit 150 displays a test viewpoint combination with a low evaluation among the test viewpoint combinations in the test viewpoint document for evaluation as the second correction item 1504.

*** Explanation of operation ***
FIG. 28 is a diagram showing a flowchart of similarity analysis processing S131b according to the present embodiment. In the first embodiment, the project unit and the test viewpoint are compared, but in this embodiment, the similarity analysis of the test viewpoint document is performed using the test viewpoint document and the test viewpoint combination as a key.
In step S <b> 210 b, the similarity analysis unit 131 searches the management table 111 for a test viewpoint document that matches the combination of test viewpoints of the test viewpoint document input by the acquisition unit 120. If there is a matching test viewpoint document, the similarity analysis unit 131 selects the test viewpoint document (step S211b). When there is no matching test viewpoint document, the similarity analysis unit 131 selects all test viewpoint documents (step S212b).
The steps from step S201b to step S209b in FIG. 28 are the same flow as steps S201a to S209a in FIG. In step S201b to step S209b in FIG. 28, not the project but the test viewpoint document is compared and selected.

  FIG. 29 is a diagram showing the similarity analysis result 1312 calculated in the similarity analysis processing S131b according to the present embodiment. In the similarity analysis result 1312, several test viewpoint documents with high similarity are registered by the similarity analysis processing S131b.

  The superiority analysis processing S132 according to the present embodiment has the same basic flow as in FIG. In the superiority analysis processing S132b according to the present embodiment, comparison and selection are performed in units of test viewpoints, not in units of projects.

  FIG. 30 is a diagram showing the superiority analysis result 1322 calculated in the superiority analysis processing S132b according to the present embodiment. In the superiority analysis result 1322, regarding the test viewpoint document selected in the similarity analysis processing S131b, a test viewpoint that further adds superiority, an insufficient test viewpoint, and the number of test specifications that are insufficient are registered. .

  The difference product evaluation process S141b according to the present embodiment has the same basic flow as that shown in FIGS. In the difference product evaluation process S141b according to the present embodiment, comparison and selection are not a test viewpoint but a combination of test viewpoints.

  FIG. 31 is a diagram showing the first product evaluation result 1412 calculated in the different product evaluation processing S141b according to the present embodiment. In the first product evaluation result 1412, the test viewpoint combination selected in the difference analysis process S <b> 130 b is registered in consideration of experience value information, risk information, and customer information. The higher the overall score, the more test specifications should be added.

  The existing product evaluation process S142b according to the present embodiment has the same basic flow as that shown in FIGS. In the existing product evaluation process S142b according to the present embodiment, comparison and selection are not a test viewpoint but a combination of test viewpoints.

  FIG. 32 is a diagram showing the second product evaluation result 1422 calculated in the existing product evaluation processing S142b according to the present embodiment. In the second product evaluation result 1422, the test viewpoint combination selected in the difference analysis process S <b> 130 b is registered in consideration of experience value information, risk information, and customer information. The lower the overall score, the higher the possibility that the test specification contains errors.

  In the improvement proposal processing S150b according to the present embodiment, the basic flow is the same as that shown in FIGS. In the improvement proposal process S150b according to the present embodiment, the selection is not a test viewpoint book but a combination of test viewpoints.

  FIG. 33 is a diagram showing the first correction item 1503 selected in the improvement proposal processing S150b according to the present embodiment. In the first correction item 1503, a list of test specifications that are insufficient with respect to the combination of test viewpoints to be analyzed is output to the monitor 160, and a test viewpoint document for reference is output.

  FIG. 34 is a diagram showing the second correction item 1504 selected in the improvement proposal processing S150b according to the present embodiment. In the second correction item 1504, a list of the number of test specifications having a high possibility of including errors in the combination of test viewpoints to be analyzed is output, and a test viewpoint document for reference is output to the monitor 160.

The configuration of the specification creation support apparatus according to the above-described embodiment will be summarized below.
The specification creation support apparatus according to the above-described embodiment includes a difference analysis unit that compares a test viewpoint document used for evaluating the effectiveness of a test item created in a project with a test viewpoint document created in another project. Have. In addition, the specification creation support apparatus 10 includes a validity analysis unit that evaluates whether the test viewpoint document is suitable for the project. In addition, the specification creation support apparatus 10 includes an improvement proposal unit that presents improvement items extracted by the difference analysis unit and the validity analysis unit and an improvement example.
The difference analysis unit extracts a difference when a test viewpoint document created in a project and a test viewpoint document created in another project are classified from the same viewpoint. In addition, the validity analysis unit judges whether the test viewpoint document is a content that takes into consideration the requirements for the project or the personality of the project. The improvement proposing unit has a function of selecting a test viewpoint document that is lacking from similar test viewpoint documents of other projects and presenting it as an improvement example. In particular, the difference analysis unit classifies test specifications created in one project and test specifications created in another project from the same test viewpoint, and extracts differences. In addition, the validity analysis unit determines whether the test specification is a content that takes into account the requirements for the project or the personality, and the validity. In addition, the improvement proposal unit selects a reference example from the test specifications similar to other projects for the missing test specification and presents it as an improvement example.

  In the embodiment described above, each of the acquisition unit 120, the similarity analysis unit 131, the superiority analysis unit 132, the difference product evaluation unit 141, the existing product evaluation unit 142, and the improvement proposal unit 150 is an independent function block. A specification creation support apparatus is configured. However, the configuration of the specification creation support apparatus may be arbitrary as long as the configuration is not the same as that of the above-described embodiment. The functional blocks of the specification creation support apparatus are arbitrary as long as the functions described in the above-described embodiments can be realized. The specification creation support apparatus may be configured by any other combination or arbitrary block configuration of these functional blocks.

Although Embodiments 1 and 2 have been described, a combination of a plurality of portions may be implemented among these embodiments. Alternatively, one part of these embodiments may be implemented. In addition, these embodiments may be implemented in any combination as a whole or in part.
The above-described embodiments are essentially preferable examples, and are not intended to limit the scope of the present invention, its application, and uses, and various modifications can be made as necessary. .

  DESCRIPTION OF SYMBOLS 10 Specification preparation support device, 11 Evaluation information, 100 Test viewpoint, 110 Storage part, 120 Acquisition part, 130 Difference analysis part, 131 Similarity analysis part, 132 Superiority analysis part, 140 Validity analysis part, 141 Difference Product Evaluation Unit, 142 Existing Product Evaluation Unit, 150 Improvement Proposal Unit, 160 Monitor, 111 Management Table, 112 Result Information, 113 Experience Value Information, 114 Risk Information, 115 Customer Information, 116 Test Perspective Document Group, 311, 1312 Similarity analysis result, 321, 1322 Superiority analysis result, 411, 1412 First product evaluation result, 421, 1422 Second product evaluation result, 501, 1503 First correction item, 502, 1504 Second correction item, 511 Specification creation support program, 512 Specification creation support method, S100 Specification creation support Management, S120 acquisition process, S130 differential analysis processing, S140 validity analysis, 909 processing circuits, 910 a processor, 920 a storage device, 921 a memory, 922 an auxiliary storage device, 930 an input interface, 940 an output interface.

Claims (12)

A storage unit for storing a management table for managing a test viewpoint document used for evaluating the effectiveness of a test specification of a program for each project;
An acquisition unit for acquiring a test viewpoint document for evaluation, which is a test viewpoint document of an evaluation project to be evaluated;
Analyzing the test viewpoint document for evaluation and the test viewpoint document managed in the management table, and comparing the evaluation project with the evaluation project, the evaluation project was given a missing test viewpoint document A difference analysis unit for selecting a project from the management table as a result of superiority analysis;
A specification creation support apparatus comprising: a validity analysis unit that determines whether the insufficient test viewpoint document is suitable for the evaluation project based on the superiority analysis result. The validity analysis unit
It is determined whether the insufficient test viewpoint document is suitable for the evaluation project by using the magnitude of the difference between the test viewpoint document for evaluation and the insufficient test viewpoint document, and the first product. The specification creation support apparatus according to claim 1, which is output as an evaluation result. The storage unit stores evaluation information used for evaluation of a test viewpoint document;
The validity analysis unit
The specification creation support apparatus according to claim 2, wherein the evaluation test viewpoint document is evaluated using the evaluation information and is output as a second product evaluation result. The specification creation support device includes:
The specification creation support apparatus according to claim 3, further comprising an improvement proposing unit that displays the insufficient test viewpoint document as a first correction item based on the first product evaluation result. The improvement proposal section
5. The specification creation support apparatus according to claim 4, wherein a test viewpoint document with a low evaluation among the test viewpoint documents for evaluation is displayed as a second correction item based on the second product evaluation result. A storage unit for storing a management table for managing a test viewpoint document used for evaluating the effectiveness of a test specification of a program for each project;
An acquisition unit for acquiring a test viewpoint document for evaluation, which is a test viewpoint document of an evaluation project to be evaluated;
Analyzing the test viewpoint book for evaluation and the test viewpoint book managed in the management table, and comparing the test viewpoint book with the test viewpoint book for evaluation, which is insufficient for the test viewpoint book for evaluation A difference analysis unit that selects from the management table a test viewpoint document to which a test specification is assigned as an advantage analysis result;
Creation of a specification including a validity analysis unit for determining whether the test viewpoint document to which the insufficient test specification is assigned is suitable for the test viewpoint document for evaluation based on the superiority analysis result Support device. The validity analysis unit
Determine the magnitude of the difference between the test viewpoint combination of the test viewpoint document to which the insufficient test specification is assigned and the test viewpoint combination of the test viewpoint document for evaluation, and output as a first product evaluation result The specification creation support apparatus according to claim 6. The storage unit stores evaluation information used for evaluation of a test viewpoint document;
The validity analysis unit
The specification creation support apparatus according to claim 7, wherein the evaluation information is used to evaluate a test viewpoint combination of the test viewpoint documents for evaluation and output the result as a second product evaluation result. The specification creation support device includes:
The specification according to claim 8, further comprising an improvement proposing unit that displays, as a first correction item, a test viewpoint combination of a test viewpoint document to which the insufficient test specification is assigned based on the first product evaluation result. Document creation support device. The improvement proposal section
10. The specification creation support apparatus according to claim 9, wherein a test viewpoint combination having a low evaluation among test viewpoint combinations of the test viewpoint documents for evaluation is displayed as a second correction item based on the second product evaluation result. In the specification creation support method of the specification creation support device having a management table for managing the test viewpoint document used for evaluating the effectiveness of the test specification of the program for each project,
The acquisition department acquires a test viewpoint document for evaluation, which is a test viewpoint document of the evaluation project to be evaluated,
The difference analysis unit analyzes the test viewpoint document for evaluation and the test viewpoint document managed in the management table and compares it with the evaluation project, and the test viewpoint that is insufficient for the evaluation project Select the project to which the certificate is given from the management table as the result of superiority analysis,
A specification creation support method in which a validity analysis unit determines whether the insufficient test viewpoint document is suitable for the evaluation project based on the superiority analysis result. In the specification creation support program of the specification creation support device with a management table that manages the test viewpoint document used for evaluating the effectiveness of the test specification of the program for each project,
An acquisition process for acquiring a test viewpoint book for evaluation, which is a test viewpoint book of the evaluation project to be evaluated,
Analyzing the test viewpoint document for evaluation and the test viewpoint document managed in the management table, and comparing the evaluation project with the evaluation project, the evaluation project was given a missing test viewpoint document A difference analysis process for selecting a project from the management table as an advantage analysis result;
A specification creation support program that causes a specification creation support apparatus, which is a computer, to execute a validity analysis process for determining whether the insufficient test viewpoint document is suitable for the evaluation project based on the superiority analysis result.

Images