JP6247976B2 - Rule management support device and rule management support method - Google Patents

Description

  The present invention relates to a rule management support device and a rule management support method.

  The specifications of software are determined and designed in accordance with legal regulations regarding business such as products and services to be processed, and various business rules and standards. Software specifications may be organized in IF-THEN format. The specifications of the IF-THEN format have various names depending on the phases to be used such as business rules, system rules, check rules, etc. (hereinafter, these are all referred to as “rules” in the present application). A rule is expressed in various forms such as “natural if” and “rule” is described in a natural sentence, or is described in a decision table in which a correspondence relation between a condition and a result is defined in a table format. For example, Patent Document 1 discloses a method for defining a rule by linking a propositional format description and a decision table. Patent Document 1 discloses a method for outputting a propositional rule from a decision table.

JP 2012-190203 A

  In software development, many maintenance developments occur due to revisions to laws and regulations to be observed and business changes. In maintenance and development, it is necessary to specify where existing software should be corrected in accordance with legal revisions and business changes, and then design how to correct and then modify the software based on that. In order to improve the efficiency of such maintenance and development, it is very important to ensure traceability of laws, business specifications, and system specifications. For example, software that is developed based on laws and regulations can easily identify where software should be corrected when legal revision occurs by ensuring traceability between laws and software specifications. In addition, software specifications are not based on laws and regulations, but various requirements are added. It is useful in ensuring maintainability to clearly distinguish between the requirements from the law and other requirements.

  In order to ensure maintainability, it is also useful to minimize the number of rules by integrating and abolishing rules. By reducing the number of rules, it is possible to reduce the scale of software and minimize the scope of influence when changing specifications. In this regard, the rule output in the proposition format from the decision table of Patent Document 1 is considered to have a certain effect with respect to the traceability to the applicable laws and the like, and the reduction in the number of rules, but with the software specification change, I can't say that I have enough treatment about how to modify the rules.

  In view of the above and other problems, in the present invention, a rule management support device that makes it possible to easily execute correction accompanying a specification change while ensuring traceability with rationale information and minimizing the number of rules, and An object is to provide a rule management support method.

  In order to solve the above-mentioned and other problems, an embodiment of the present invention is an apparatus for supporting rule management in software specification development, and stores a condition for satisfying the rule And an input rule receiving unit for receiving one or more input rules including a result unit for storing a result when the condition is satisfied, and a rule for receiving a rule output condition which is a condition for establishing the output rule An output condition receiving unit; and a rule output unit for outputting a rule based on the input rule and the rule output condition, wherein the rule output condition receiving unit is configured to input the input for each or all of the input rules. A non-modifiable option for instructing to output the rule as it is, a modifiable option for instructing to permit modification of the input rule And an option designating unit for designating the option to be applied to one or more of the unused options that do not consider the format of the input rule, and the rule output unit refers to the option designating unit. If it is determined that the uncorrectable option is specified, the input rule is output as it is, and if it is determined that one of the correctable options is specified, the input in which the correctable option is specified The result of combining a rule and a rule that is equivalent to a part or all of the input rule for which the unutilized option is specified is a judgment condition for whether or not the input rule for which the correctable option is specified can be corrected. When it is determined based on a certain similarity determination condition, and it is determined that the similarity is within an allowable range and can be corrected. When a rule with a modification to the input rule is output and it is determined that the unused option is specified, a rule that is equivalent to a part or all of the input rule for which the unused option is specified It is characterized by outputting.

  According to the embodiment of the present invention, a rule management support device and a rule management support method that can easily perform correction accompanying a specification change while ensuring traceability with ground information and minimizing the number of rules Can be provided.

FIG. 1 is an example of a configuration diagram of a rule management support apparatus 100 according to the first embodiment of the present invention. FIG. 2 is an example of a rule output condition setting screen in the rule output condition specifying unit 105. FIG. 3 is an example of condition items, result items, condition element values, result element values, and user-defined rules. FIG. 4 is a display example of the determination table 400. FIG. 5 is an example of a modifiable option setting screen. FIG. 6 is an example of a user-defined rule individual option setting screen. FIG. 7 shows an example of the data structure of the user-defined rule holding unit 153. FIG. 8 is an example of the data structure of the rule output condition holding unit 154. FIG. 9 is an example of the data structure of the decision table holding unit 152. FIG. 10 shows an example of the data structure of the decision table correction rule holding unit 151. FIG. 11 shows an example of the data structure of the output rule holding unit 155. FIG. 12 is an example of a flowchart showing the processing of the rule output unit 106. FIG. 13 is an example of a flowchart illustrating a rule generation process for each result item in the rule output unit 106. FIG. 14 is an example of a flowchart showing a rule generation unit rule generation process of the rule output unit 106. FIG. 15 is an example of a flowchart illustrating a process for generating a rule with a change in the output rule holding unit 155. FIG. 16 is an example of an output rule display screen in the output rule display unit 107. FIG. 17 is a diagram illustrating an example of information serving as an input for explaining a processing example of the rule output unit 106. FIG. 18 is an example of a configuration diagram of the rule management support apparatus 100 according to the second embodiment of the present invention.

  Hereinafter, the present invention will be described with reference to the drawings in accordance with the embodiment. The embodiments described below do not limit the invention according to the claims, and all the elements and combinations described in the embodiments are essential for the solution of the invention. Is not limited.

First Embodiment In this embodiment, an example of an apparatus that supports management of a rule defined by a user and a decision table generated based on the rule will be described.

  FIG. 1 is an example of a configuration diagram of a rule management support apparatus 100 according to the present embodiment. In the present embodiment, a configuration for managing one or more rules that realize rule function logic such as one check logic and inference logic will be described. In terms of system function, a rule function logic is executed for a certain input, and a certain result is returned. At this time, the rules are condition judgments and restrictions on input and output. In the following description, one rule function logic managed by the rule management support apparatus 100 is assumed. However, a plurality of rule function logics may be managed.

  The rule management support apparatus 100 includes at least a processor 160 such as a CPU (Central Processing Unit), a memory 170 such as a RAM (Random Access Memory) and a ROM (Read Only Memory), and an input / output device 180 such as a keyboard and a display monitor. Computer. The rule management support apparatus 100 includes a user-defined rule input unit 101 (input rule reception unit), a determination table conversion unit 102, a determination table display unit 103, a determination table editing unit 104, a rule output condition specification unit 105 (rule output condition reception unit) ), Functional logic such as a rule output unit 106, an output rule display unit 107, and an output rule reflection unit 108. These functional logics are realized as computer programs, and are executed by the processor 160 on the memory 170. The rule management support apparatus 100 also illustrates data such as the decision table correction rule holding unit 151, the decision table holding unit 152, the user-defined rule holding unit 153, the rule output condition holding unit 154, and the output rule holding unit 155. It is stored in an auxiliary storage device such as a hard disk drive that is omitted. These data are read from the auxiliary storage device and used when the processor 160 executes the functional logic.

  The user-defined rule input unit 101 refers to element values for condition items, result items, conditions, and result items (hereinafter, element values for condition items are referred to as “condition element values”, and element values for result items are referred to as “result element values”. ) And a rule (hereinafter referred to as a “user-defined rule”), and registers them in the user-defined rule holding unit 153. The condition item is an input item of the rule function logic in which the user-defined rule is incorporated, and the result item is an output item of the rule function logic. The user-defined rule is composed of a combination of a condition item, a result item, a condition element value, a result element value, and a logical operator. With reference to FIG. 2, examples of condition items, result items, condition element values, result element values, and user-defined rules will be described.

  FIG. 2 is an example of condition items, result items, condition element values, result element values, and user-defined rules. In the example of FIG. 2, the condition item data 210 includes “age”, “license color”, and “purpose of use” as the condition items, and can take values indicated by the condition element values. For example, the condition item “age” has two condition element values of “under 35 years old” and “over 35 years old”. Next, the result item data 220 includes “other driving special contract” and “discount rate” as result items, and can take values indicated in the result element values. For example, the result item “other person driving special contract” has two result element values of “specifiable” and “not specifiable”. Next, the user-defined rule data 230 includes a condition part 231 and a result part 232. For example, the user-defined rule 233 represents the meaning that “if the license color is blue and the purpose of use is commuting, the special driving policy for others cannot be specified and the discount rate is 5%”. .

  Next, returning to FIG. 1, the decision table conversion unit 102 acquires the user definition rules from the user definition rule holding unit 153, converts them into decision tables, and registers the converted decision table information in the decision table holding unit 152. To do.

  Next, the decision table display unit 103 acquires information on the decision table from the decision table holding unit 152 and the decision table correction rule holding unit 151 and displays the decision table on the display screen of the input / output device 180. FIG. 3 shows a display example of the determination table. The decision table 300 includes a condition part display area 301 and a result part display area 302. The condition part display area 301 is an area for displaying a combination of condition element values of each condition item. The result part display area 302 is an area for displaying the result element value of each result item for the combination of the condition element values of each condition item. The white circle “◯” in the result portion display area 302 is the content displayed based on the information in the decision table holding unit 152, and the black circle “●” in the result portion display area 302 is based on the information in the decision table correction rule holding unit 151. It is the displayed content. As a result, whether the result element value of each result item for the combination of the condition element values of each condition item is based on the user-defined rule (○ mark) or modified by the user on the decision table (● mark) Can be distinguished by the user.

  Next, the decision table editing unit 104 receives the correction content of the result part display area 302 of the decision table 300 and converts the correction content into a rule format (hereinafter, the converted rule is referred to as “decision table correction rule”). Then, the determination table correction rule is registered in the determination table correction rule holding unit 151. Thus, the user can directly correct the decision table when there is an error while checking the displayed decision table 300.

  Next, the rule output condition designating unit 105 outputs a rule from the user definition rule registered in the user definition rule holding unit 153 and the decision table correction rule registered in the decision table correction rule holding unit 151. A condition (hereinafter referred to as “rule output condition”) is received, and the rule output condition is registered in the rule output condition holding unit. Thereby, the user can control the format of the rule output by the rule output unit 106 according to the use of the rule output.

  Next, the rule output unit 106 registers the user definition rule registered in the user definition rule holding unit 153, the decision table correction rule registered in the decision table correction rule holding unit 151, and the rule output condition holding unit 154. The rule output condition is acquired, and the rule is output based on the rule output condition from the user-defined rule and the decision table correction rule (hereinafter, the output rule is referred to as “output rule”). The rule output unit 106 registers the output rule in the output rule holding unit 155.

  Next, the output rule display unit 107 displays the output rule registered in the output rule holding unit 155 on a screen such as a display monitor of the input / output device 180. Thereby, the user can confirm how to modify the user-defined rule, whether the user-defined rule is defined as intended, or the like.

  Next, the output rule reflection unit 108 adds the output rule registered in the output rule holding unit 155 to the user-defined rule holding unit 153, or changes or deletes the existing user-defined rule. Thereby, the user can reflect an output rule in a user definition rule efficiently.

  Next, a rule output condition setting screen in the rule output condition specifying unit 105 will be described with reference to FIG.

  FIG. 4 is an example of a rule output condition setting screen in the rule output condition specifying unit 105 of the rule management support apparatus 100 according to the present embodiment. The rule output condition setting screen 400 includes areas such as an output range designation area 410, a user-defined rule utilization mode designation area 420, an output unit designation area 430, and an output rule constraint designation area 440.

  The output range designation area 410 is an area for designating the range of the rule to be output. All ranges 411, all result defined ranges 412, user selection range 413, result undefined range 414, condition range designation 415, and result It has a selector such as a range specification 416. The user selection range 413 includes a range selection button 417. By pressing the range selection button 417, an output range can be specified by a user-defined rule, a range of a decision table, or a combination thereof. The condition range specification 415 includes a text box 418 for receiving a range of condition items. In the text box 418, a range of condition items can be specified by combining condition items, condition value candidates, logical operators, and the like. The result range designation 416 has a text box 419 that accepts a range of result items. In the text box 419, a range of condition items can be specified by combining result items, result value candidates, logical operators, and the like.

  Next, the behavior of the rule output unit 106 when each selector in the output range designation area 410 is selected will be described. When all the ranges 411 are selected, the rule output unit 106 sets a combination of all condition parts of the output rule (hereinafter referred to as “output rule condition set”) as a combination set of all condition items. Output rules that match By selecting all the ranges 411, for example, the user can eliminate the redundancy for the entire rule, grasp the range where the results are defined, and the undefined range. The result of eliminating redundancy for the entire rule is useful, for example, when writing a program.

  When all the result defined ranges 412 are selected, the rule output unit 106 outputs a rule in which the output rule condition set matches the condition set in which the result is defined. By selecting all the result defined ranges 412, for example, the user can optimize a rule focusing on the result defined ranges.

  When the user selection range 413 is selected, the rule output unit 106 determines that the output rule condition set matches the user-defined rule specified by the user by pressing the range selection button 417 and the set of condition parts in the range of the decision table. Is output. By selecting the user selection range 413, for example, the user can optimize only the user-defined rule for which redundancy is to be excluded.

  When the result undefined range 414 is selected, the rule output unit 106 outputs a rule whose output rule condition set matches a set of conditions whose result is undefined. By selecting the result undefined range 414, the user can grasp the range of examination failure of the combination of the condition element values of each condition item. By selecting the result undefined range 414 and confirming that the rule is not output, it can be confirmed that there is no examination omission.

  When the condition range specification 415 is selected, the rule output unit 106 outputs a rule whose output rule condition set matches the condition set specified in the text box 418. By selecting the condition range specification 415, the user can grasp the result element values of possible result items in the specified condition range and test whether the result element values are as intended. Available.

  When the result range specification 416 is selected, the rule output unit 106 outputs a rule whose output rule condition set matches the condition set that is the result specified in the text box 419. By selecting the result range specification 416, it is possible to grasp the condition that results in a specific result, check whether the condition matches the condition intended by the user, or confirm the condition that caused the failure, focusing on the result of the failure. Available to:

  Next, the user-defined rule utilization mode designation area 420 is an area for designating the utilization mode of the user-defined rule, and there are selectors such as a non-modifiable 421, a modifiable 422, an unutilized 423, and an individual setting 424. If the uncorrectable 421 is selected, the contents of the decision table 300 cannot be corrected. The modifiable 422 has a setting button 425, and by pressing the setting button 425, the selection method of the user-defined rule to be modified can be designated. The individual setting 424 includes a setting button 426. By pressing the setting button 426, the user-defined rule utilization mode can be designated for each user-defined rule.

  FIG. 5 is an example of a modifiable option setting screen displayed when the setting button 425 is pressed. The modifiable option setting screen 500 includes a similarity evaluation method designation area 510 and the like. The similarity evaluation method designation area 510 is an area for designating an index of similarity between the user-defined rule after correction and the user-defined rule before correction created internally by the rule output unit 106, and includes an effective flag 511 and an evaluation index 512. , Priority 513, sort 514, lower limit 515, and upper limit 516. The evaluation index 512 is the name of the evaluation index included in the rule management support apparatus 100, and the user designates the validity flag 511, the priority 513, the sort 514, the lower limit 515, and the upper limit 516 for each evaluation index 512. The valid flag 511 is a flag indicating whether or not to use the evaluation index, and when checked, the rule output unit 106 uses the evaluation index for similarity determination. The priority 513 is a priority order when the rule output unit 106 determines the similarity, and gives priority to an evaluation index having a small number. The sort 514 designates whether the degree of similarity is considered high when the value calculated by the evaluation index is large or small. When the sort 514 is in ascending order, the smaller value is regarded as the higher degree of similarity, and in the descending order, the larger value is regarded as the higher degree of similarity. The lower limit 515 and the upper limit 516 represent the lower limit and the upper limit of the value calculated by the evaluation index 512. When the lower limit 515 and the upper limit 516 are not included in the range, the rule output unit 106 displays the user-defined rule before correction and the user-defined rule after correction. Are determined not to be similar. When the lower limit 515 and the upper limit 516 are “-(hyphen)”, the rule output unit 106 considers that there is no lower limit and no upper limit.

  In the example of FIG. 5, the evaluation index 512 includes four elements: the number of added elements, the number of deleted elements, the number of matching elements, and the total number of elements. The number of elements is the number of condition elements such as “A = a1” included in the condition part of the rule. For example, in the case of the user-defined rule 233 in FIG. 2, the number of elements is three: “age = less than 35 years”, “license color = gold”, and “use purpose = leisure”.

  FIG. 6 is an example of a user-defined rule individual option setting screen displayed when the setting button 426 is pressed. The user-defined rule individual option setting screen 600 includes a user-defined rule individual option setting area 610, an evaluation index setting button 620, and the like. The user-defined rule individual option setting area 610 is an area for designating a user-defined rule utilization mode for each user-defined rule, such as an ID 611 that is an identification code of each user-defined rule, a rule name 612, and a user-defined rule utilization mode 613. There are items. The user-defined rule utilization mode 613 further includes selectors that cannot be modified 614, modification 615, and unused 616. The evaluation index setting button 620 is used when designating a method for selecting a user-defined rule to be modified. By pressing the evaluation index setting button 620, the evaluation index setting button 620 is similar to pressing the setting button 425 on the rule output condition setting screen 400. A correctable option setting screen 500 shown in FIG. 5 is displayed.

  In the example of FIG. 6, for example, for a user-defined rule whose ID 611 is “1”, the rule name is “Rule 1” and the user-defined rule utilization mode 613 is “uncorrectable”.

  Note that a user-defined rule utilization mode may be set for the decision table correction rule. In this case, for example, the decision table correction rule may be displayed on the same screen as the user-defined rule individual option setting screen 600.

  Next, the behavior of the rule output unit 106 when each selector in the user-defined rule utilization mode designation area 420 is selected will be described.

  When the uncorrectable 421 is selected, the rule output unit 106 outputs the rules in the same format without destroying the logical structure of the user-defined rules. This allows, for example, user-defined rules written so that the equivalence with laws and business manuals can be easily determined, and only other rules (decision table modification rules) to be output as rules. Ease of checking the equivalence with the manual can be maintained.

  When the modifiable 422 is selected, the rule output unit 106 outputs a user-defined rule obtained by modifying the condition part of the user-defined rule based on the condition specified on the modifiable option setting screen 500. Thereby, for example, it can be specified which existing user-defined rule should be changed in accordance with the change of the specification.

  When the unused 423 is selected, the rule output unit 106 outputs a rule equivalent to the user-defined rule and the decision table correction rule. At this time, there is no guarantee that the output rule maintains the logical structure of the user-defined rule. Thereby, for example, redundancy of the entire rule can be eliminated.

  When the individual setting 424 is selected, the rule output unit 106 selects a rule according to the use mode of the user-defined rule that cannot be modified, can be modified, and is not utilized for each user-defined rule set by pressing the setting button 426. Output. As a result, for example, the redundancy of only the specified user-defined rule can be eliminated, or the rule that maintains the traceability with the law can be output by making only the user-defined rule based on the law non-modifiable 422. it can.

  Returning to the rule output condition setting screen 400 of FIG. 4, the output unit designation area 430 is an area for designating a method for dividing the output rule, and includes selectors such as a result item unit 431 and a result item combination unit 432.

  The behavior of the rule output unit 106 when each selector in the output unit designation area 430 is selected will be described.

  When the result item unit 431 is selected, the rule output unit 106 outputs a rule in which the result part of the rule includes only one of the result items. Thereby, the user can confirm the condition when a certain result item becomes a specific result element value.

  When the result item combination unit 432 is selected, the rule output unit 106 outputs a rule in which the result part of the rule includes all result items. Thereby, the user can confirm conditions for every combination of the result element value of each result item. However, for a user-defined rule whose user-defined rule utilization mode is uncorrectable or amendable, the result part of the original user-defined rule does not change regardless of the selector.

  In addition, as a selector of the output unit designation area 430, there may be the number of combinations of result items. In this case, for example, when there are three result items and the number of combination of result items is 2, two result items are extracted from the three result items, and the same behavior as the result item combination unit 432 is obtained for the combination. Execute. This process is executed for all combinations of result items.

  Next, the output rule constraint designation area 440 is an area for designating output rule restrictions, and includes items such as 441 for permitting negation of condition values and 442 for permitting duplication between rules.

  The behavior of the rule output unit 106 when each item in the output rule constraint specifying area 440 is selected will be described.

  When 441 that permits denial of the condition value is selected, the rule output unit 106 may output a rule including negation such as “A! = A1”. On the other hand, if 441 that permits denial of the condition value is not selected, the rule output unit 106 does not output a rule that includes negation. For example, consider a case where the condition item A has three condition element values a1, a2, and a3, and the condition part is “A = a2 or A = a3”. At this time, when 441 that permits denial of the condition value is selected, the rule output unit 106 converts “A = a2 or A = a3” into “A! = A1” and outputs the result. If 441 that denies the condition value is not selected, “A = a2 or A = a3” is output as it is. By permitting denial, the description of the condition value may be simplified as described above.

  If 442 that permits duplication between rules is selected, the rule output unit 106 outputs the output as it is even if there is duplication in the condition part between the output rules. On the other hand, when 442 that permits duplication between rules is not selected, the rule output unit 106 outputs the rules so that there is no duplication of the condition parts between the output rules and the rules are exclusive. Thereby, for example, the output rule may be simplified by selecting 442 that permits duplication between rules. Also, by not selecting 442 that permits duplication between rules, the rules are exclusive, and the equivalence class in the test can be specified.

  Note that the rule output condition designating unit 105 may include an area for designating other options that affect the structure of the output rule. For example, “IF-THEN format” and “IF-THEN IF-THEN format” can be selected as the structure pattern of the output rule. The former outputs a rule composed of a normal condition part and a result part, while the latter outputs a rule of a nested structure of an IF statement.

  Next, an example of the data structure of the user-defined rule holding unit 153 according to the present embodiment will be described with reference to FIG. As illustrated in FIG. 7, the user-defined rule holding unit 153 includes entities such as a user-defined rule 701, a condition item 702, a result item 703, and an element value 704. Each entity in FIG. 7 is composed of two rectangles. The name shown in the upper rectangle represents the entity name, and the name shown in the lower rectangle represents the attribute name of the entity. The relationship between entities is expressed by connecting a diamond and a solid line, and the entity on the diamond side and the entity on the solid line side are in a one-to-many relationship. The other data structure diagrams are also described below.

  In FIG. 7, a user-defined rule 701 is an entity having attributes such as rule ID, rule name, condition part logical expression, and result part logical expression as information regarding individual user-defined rules. The rule ID is a unique identifier in the user-defined rule holding unit 153. The rule name is the name of the user-defined rule. The condition part logical expression is data related to the condition part of the user-defined rule, and the element value ID, rule ID, logical operator (logical product, logical sum, logical value) corresponding to the condition item 702 or the result item 703 (only one of them). Negation) and parentheses are used in combination. The result part logical expression is data related to the result part of the user-defined rule and has the same format as the condition part logical expression. However, when the condition part logical expression is defined from the condition item 702 and the result part logical expression is defined from the result item 703, the result part logical expression may be defined only by the logical product with the result item 703. desirable. In such a case, when the result part logical expression includes a logical sum or negation, the result is non-deterministic. Further, the user-defined rule data 702 can further include user-defined rule data 702 as a child element. With such a structure, the user-defined rule holding unit 153 can hold various rules such as a nested structure of IF statements. In addition, by leaving the result part logical expression blank and describing the condition part logical expression, it is possible to handle a condition part common to a plurality of user-defined rules as a component. When a condition part that is a common part is used, a rule ID may be included in the condition part logical expression. Further, in addition to the attributes shown in the user-defined rule 701, an attribute describing a rule type such as laws and business rules, rule rationale information, and a lower design document ID may be included. For example, the existence of a rule type can be used as a material for determining whether a change is possible. Further, the ground information can be used to ensure traceability between the rule and the ground information. Similarly, by including the lower design document ID, it is possible to ensure traceability with the lower design document.

  Next, the condition item 702 is an entity having attributes such as a condition item ID and a condition item name as condition items in the decision table 300. The condition item ID is a unique identifier in the user definition rule holding unit 153 including the result item ID. The condition item name is the name of the condition item.

  Next, the result item 703 is an entity having attributes such as a result item ID and a result item name as a result item in the determination table 300. The result item ID is a unique identifier in the user-defined rule holding unit 153 including the condition item ID. The result item name is the name of the result item.

  Next, the element value 704 is a condition element value or a result element value in the decision table 300, and is an entity having attributes such as a condition / result item ID, an element value ID, and an element value name. The condition / result item ID is the condition item ID or result item ID of the condition item 702 or result item 703 having the element value. The element value ID is a unique identifier in the user-defined rule holding unit 153. The element value name is a name of the element value, and is a unique name in the condition item 702 or the result item 703.

  In addition, although the condition item 702 and the result item 703 are distinguished as entities, it is only necessary to distinguish the input item and the output item in the rule function logic related to the user-defined rule.

  Next, an example of the data structure of the rule output condition holding unit 154 according to the present embodiment will be described with reference to FIG. As illustrated in FIG. 8, the rule output condition holding unit 154 includes entities such as a rule output condition 801, a user selection rule 802, a modifiable option 803, an individual setting option 804, and an output rule constraint 805.

  In FIG. 8, a rule output condition 801 is information set by the user on the rule output condition setting screen 400, and includes attributes such as an output range option, a condition / result range, a user-defined rule utilization mode, an output unit, and an output rule constraint. It is an entity that has. The output range option is information selected by the user in the output range designation area 410 of the rule output condition setting screen 400. In this embodiment, all the ranges 411, all the result defined ranges 412, the user selected range 413, the result This is information for identifying the undefined range 414, the condition range designation 415, or the result range designation 416. The condition / result range is information specified only when the output range option is the condition range specification 415 or the result range specification 416, and is a value of either the text box 418 or the text box 419. The user-defined rule utilization mode is information selected by the user in the user-defined rule utilization mode designation area 420 of the rule output condition setting screen 400. In this embodiment, the user-defined rule utilization mode 421, the modification 422, the unutilized 423, or , Information for identifying the individual setting 424. The output unit is information selected by the user in the output unit designation area 430 of the rule output condition setting screen 400. In this embodiment, the output unit is information for identifying the result item unit 431 or the result item combination unit 432.

  Next, the user selection rule 802 is information on a user-defined rule selected by the user on the screen displayed by pressing the range selection button 417 on the rule output condition setting screen 400, and is an entity having an attribute such as a rule ID. The rule ID is information for identifying a user-defined rule specified by the user, and matches one of the rule IDs of the user-defined rule 701 stored in the user-defined rule holding unit 153.

  Next, the modifiable option 803 is information set by the user on the modifiable option setting screen 500 and is an entity having attributes such as a valid flag, an evaluation index name, an evaluation module name, a priority, a sort, a lower limit, and an upper limit. is there. The valid flag is information indicating whether or not the user has selected. The evaluation index name is information displayed in the column of the evaluation index 512 on the user-modifiable option setting screen 500. The evaluation module name is the name of the module that executes the evaluation process based on the evaluation index 512. This makes it easy to introduce a new evaluation index 512. The priority is information specified by the user in the priority 513 field of the modifiable option setting screen 500. Sort is information specified by the user in the column of sort 514 of the modifiable option setting screen 500, and is information for identifying ascending order or descending order. The lower limit is information specified by the user in the lower limit 515 field of the modifiable option setting screen 500. The upper limit is information specified by the user in the upper limit 516 field of the modifiable option setting screen 500.

  Next, the individual setting option 804 is information set on the user-defined rule individual option designation screen 600, and is an entity having attributes such as rule ID and mode. The rule ID is information displayed in the ID 611 of the user-defined rule individual option designation screen 600 and matches one of the rule IDs of the user-defined rule data 702 stored in the user-defined rule holding unit 153. The mode is information selected by the user in the user-defined rule utilization mode 613 on the user-defined rule individual option designation screen 600. In this embodiment, the mode is information for identifying the uncorrectable 614, the correctable 615, or the unutilized 616. .

  Next, the output rule constraint 805 is information set by the user in the output rule constraint designation area 440 of the rule output condition setting screen 400, and is an entity having attributes such as a valid flag, an option name, and a constraint module name. The valid flag is information indicating whether or not the user has already selected the output rule constraint in the output rule constraint designation area 440. The option name is a character string displayed in the output rule constraint designation area 440. In this embodiment, the option name is 441 that permits denial of the condition value or 442 that permits duplication between rules. The constraint module name is the name of the module that executes the output rule constraint. In this way, new output rule constraints can be easily introduced.

  Next, an example of the data structure of the decision table holding unit 152 according to this embodiment will be described with reference to FIG. As illustrated in FIG. 9, the determination table holding unit 152 includes entities such as a column rule 901, a condition item setting value 902, a result item setting value 903, and a related rule 904.

  In FIG. 9, a column rule 901 is information about one column on the decision table 300, and is an entity having attributes such as a column rule ID and a constraint flag. The column rule ID is information for uniquely identifying a column in the decision table 300 and is unique in the decision table holding unit 152. The constraint flag is a flag indicating whether or not the column rule cannot be combined as a user-defined rule. By describing both the condition part and the result part using condition items as user-defined rules, possible combinations and impossible combinations can be expressed.

  Next, the condition item setting value 902 is information on a condition part of one column on the determination table 300, and is an entity having attributes such as a column rule ID and an element value ID. The column rule ID is the column rule ID of the column rule 901 having the condition item setting value 902. The element value ID is one of element value IDs that are attributes of the element value 704 related to the condition item 702 of the user definition rule holding unit 153. The number of entities of the condition item setting value 902 is equal to the number of condition items 702 of the user definition rule holding unit 153 for one column rule 901. The element value ID of the condition item setting value 902 included in one column rule 901 includes any one element value ID corresponding to each condition item 702 for all the condition items 702 in the user-defined rule holding unit 153. including.

  Next, the result item setting value 903 is information of a result part of one column on the determination table 300, and is an entity having attributes such as a column rule ID and an element value ID. The column rule ID is the column rule ID of the column rule 901 having the result item setting value 903. The element value ID is any one of the element value IDs that are attributes of the element value 704 related to the result item 703 of the user definition rule holding unit 153. The number of entities of the result item setting value 903 is equal to the number of result items 703 of the user definition rule holding unit 153 for one column rule 901. The element value ID of the result item setting value 903 included in one column rule 901 includes any one element value ID corresponding to each result item 703 for all the result items 703 in the user-defined rule holding unit 153. including.

  Next, the association rule 904 is information related to the column rule 901 and is an entity having attributes such as a column rule ID and a rule ID. The column rule ID is the column rule ID of the column rule 901 having the related rule 905. The rule ID is the rule ID of the user-defined rule 701 related to the determination of the element value ID of the result item setting value 903 of the column rule 901 specified by the column rule ID.

  Next, an example of the data structure of the decision table correction rule holding unit 151 according to this embodiment will be described with reference to FIG. As illustrated in FIG. 10, the determination table correction rule holding unit 151 includes entities such as a determination table correction rule 1001 and a condition item setting value 1002.

  In FIG. 10, the decision table correction rule 1001 is information relating to the contents corrected by the user on the decision table 300 and is an entity having attributes such as a column rule ID, a result item ID, and an element value ID. The column rule ID is information for identifying a column modified by the user on the decision table 300 and is one of the column rule IDs of the column rule 901 in the decision table holding unit 152. The result item ID is information for identifying a result item that has been corrected on the determination table 300 by the user. The element value ID is information for identifying the element value after correction for the result item that the user has corrected on the determination table 300. The decision table correction rule 1001 is provided for each result item in one column of the decision table 300. For example, even in the same column, there are two result items, and when the user corrects each element value, the decision table correction rule holding unit 151 holds two decision table correction rules.

  Next, the condition item setting value 1002 is information on the condition part of one column modified by the user on the decision table 300, and is an entity having attributes such as a column rule ID and an element value ID. The column rule ID is the column rule ID of the decision table correction rule 1001 having the condition item setting value 1002. The element value ID is one of element value IDs that are attributes of the element value 704 related to the condition item 702 of the user definition rule holding unit 153. The number of entities of the condition item setting value 1002 is equal to the number of condition items 702 of the user definition rule holding unit 153 for one column rule 901. The element value ID of the condition item setting value 1002 included in one decision table correction rule 1001 includes any one element corresponding to each condition item 702 for all the condition items 702 in the user-defined rule holding unit 153. Contains the value ID.

  Next, an example of the data structure of the output rule holding unit 155 according to the present embodiment will be described with reference to FIG. As illustrated in FIG. 11, the output rule holding unit 155 includes entities such as a no-change rule 1101, a rule with change 1102, and an additional rule 1103.

  In FIG. 11, a no-change rule 1101 is information on the user-defined rule 701 that the rule output unit 106 has not changed or deleted, and is an entity having an attribute such as a rule ID. The rule ID is the rule ID of the user-defined rule 701 that the rule output unit 106 has not changed or deleted.

  Next, the changed rule 1102 is information regarding the user-defined rule 701 to which the rule output unit 106 has changed, and is an entity having attributes such as a rule ID, a conditional part logical expression, and a result part logical expression. The rule ID is the rule ID of the user-defined rule 701 that has been changed by the rule output unit 106. The conditional part logical expression and the result part logical expression are the conditional part logical expression and the result part logical expression of the user-defined rule 701 after being changed by the rule output unit 106.

  Next, the additional rule 1103 is information regarding a rule newly created by the rule output unit 106, and is an entity having attributes such as an additional rule ID, a conditional part logical expression, and a result part logical expression. The additional rule ID is information for identifying the additional rule, and is unique in the output rule holding unit 155. The condition part logical expression and the result part logical expression are logical expressions of the condition part and result part of the rule created by the rule output unit 106.

  Subsequently, processing of the rule output unit 106 according to the embodiment of the present invention will be described with reference to FIG. FIG. 12 is a flowchart illustrating a processing example of the rule output unit 106 according to the present embodiment. In addition, the code | symbol S in a figure represents a step (same below in this specification).

  First, the rule output unit 106 starts execution of a process by a user operation of the input / output device 180, batch processing, or the like (S1200). The rule output unit 106 reads all the user-defined rules 701 stored in the user-defined rule holding unit 153 (S1201). The rule output unit 106 includes, in the read user-defined rule 701, the conditional part logical expression is composed of element values corresponding to the condition item 702 (not including the element value corresponding to the result item 703), and the result part logic An original rule is a user-defined rule 701 (hereinafter referred to as “condition-result AND rule”) composed of an AND and an element value corresponding to the result item 703 (not including an element value corresponding to the condition item 703). Remember as a set. Further, the rule output unit 106 includes a condition part logical expression composed of element values corresponding to the result item 703 (not including an element value corresponding to the condition item 702), and a result part logical expression corresponding to the result item 703. For a user-defined rule (hereinafter, referred to as “result-result AND rule”) composed of element values and logical products (not including an element value corresponding to the condition item 703), the condition part logical expression of the user-defined rule And a rule having a result part logical expression in the original rule set that can be satisfied, and a rule composed of the conditional part logical expression of each rule and the result part logical expression of the result-result AND rule for all applicable rules. Is stored as a correction rule set. Also, the rule output unit 106 includes, in the read user-defined rule 701, both the condition part logical expression and the result part logical expression are composed of element values corresponding to the condition item 702 (element values corresponding to the result item 703 are changed). User-defined rules 701 (not included) (hereinafter referred to as “condition-condition rules”) are stored as a constraint rule set. After reading the user-defined rule, the process proceeds to S1202.

  Next, the rule output unit 106 checks the consistency between the read user-defined rules 701 (S1202). A method for confirming consistency between user-defined rules 701 is disclosed in Patent Document 1, for example. When it is determined that there is a mismatch between the user-defined rules 701, the rule output unit 106 interrupts the process. If it is determined that there is no inconsistency, the process proceeds to S1203.

  Next, the rule output unit 106 reads all the decision table correction rules 1001 stored in the decision table correction rule holding unit 151 (S1203). The rule output unit 106 adds the read decision table correction rule 1001 to the correction rule set. After reading the decision table correction rule 1001, the process proceeds to S1204.

  Next, the rule output unit 106 confirms the consistency between the user-defined rule 701 and the decision table correction rule 1001 (S1204). The method for confirming the consistency between the user-defined rule 701 and the decision table correction rule 1001 is, for example, that the user-defined rule corresponding to the column rule ID of the decision table correction rule 1001 is the rule ID of the related rule 904 in the decision table holding unit 152 If it is determined whether it exists, and it is determined that it exists, the consistency is confirmed by comparing the decision table correction rule 1001 with the user-defined rule 701. Similar to the confirmation of the consistency between user-defined rules in S1202, the consistency can also be confirmed by the method disclosed in Patent Document 1. When it is determined that the user-defined rule 701 and the decision table correction rule 1001 are inconsistent, a confirmation message as to which of the user-defined rule 701 and the decision table correction rule 1001 has priority is displayed. When giving priority to the user-defined rule 701, the decision table correction rule 1001 having an inconsistent relationship with the user-defined rule 701 is deleted from the correction rule set. When the decision table correction rule 1001 is prioritized, the condition part logical expression of the user-defined rule 701 inconsistent with the decision table correction rule 1001 is replaced with the condition part logical expression of the user-defined rule 701 and the decision table correction rule. Replace with the negative logical product of the condition part logical expression of 1001 (condition part logical expression of the user-defined rule 701 after replacement = (condition part logical expression of the user-defined rule 701 before replacement) ∧¬ (correction of the decision table) Rule condition formula))). After the consistency between the user-defined rule 701 and the decision table correction rule 1001 is confirmed, the process proceeds to S1205.

  Next, the rule output unit 106 reads the rule output condition 801 stored in the rule output condition holding unit 154 (S1205). Further, the rule output unit 106 reads all user selection rules 802, modifiable options 803, individual setting options 804, and output rule constraints 805 related to the rule output condition 801.

  Next, the rule output unit 106 generates a rule set that satisfies the conditions of the output range of the rule output condition 801 (S1206). The output range conditions are the output range option and condition / result range of the rule output condition 801, and the user selection rule 802. Processing differs depending on which output range option is selected. The processing contents of the rule output unit 106 for each output range option will be described below.

  When the output range option is all ranges 411, the rule output unit 106 generates a rule with an undefined result and adds it to the correction rule set. The method for generating a rule with an undefined result is, for example, a condition for a rule in which the condition part logical expression does not include the element value of the result item, and the result part logical expression includes only the element value of the result item and the logical product operator. A partial logical expression is extracted from the original rule set and the modified rule set, and a logical expression obtained by ANDing the negation of the conditional part logical expression of the extracted rule can be expressed as a rule having no result logical expression as a conditional logical expression. . In addition, a column rule in which the result item setting value of the determination table holding unit 152 is not set can be extracted as a rule whose result is undefined.

  When the output range option is all the result-defined ranges 412, the rule output unit 106 does not perform additional processing.

  When the output range option is the user selection range 413, the rule output unit 106 leaves only the user-defined rule selected by the user and the rules in the range of the decision table 300, and deletes the others from the original rule set and the modified rule set. Some of the rules of the original rule set are included in the range of the decision table 300 selected by the user (the column rule set represented by the condition part logical expression of the rule and the column rule set representing the range of the decision table 300 are partially If they match, the rule output unit 106 deletes the rule from the original rule set, generates a condition part logical expression from the column rule representing the range of the decision table 300, and sets the condition part logical expression of the rule as the condition A rule in which a partial logical expression is negated and a conditional logical expression obtained by combining the conditional logical expression of the rule with a logical product is added to the correction rule set.

  When the output range option is the result undefined range 414, the rule output unit 106 generates a rule for the result undefined range by the above-described rule generation method for an undefined result, and adds the rule to the correction rule set. Further, the rule output unit 106 deletes all rules except for all rules included in the original rule set and rules added as a result undefined range rule included in the correction rule set.

  When the output range option is the condition range specification 415, the rule output unit 106 leaves only the rules of the original rule set and the correction rule set included in the condition range specified by the condition range specification 415, and deletes the others. When a part of the rules of the original rule set is included in the condition range (the column rule set represented by the condition part logical expression of the rule and the column rule set representing the condition range partially match), the rule output unit 106 , Delete the rule from the original rule set, generate a conditional part formula from the condition range, AND the conditional part logical expression of the rule with the negative of the conditional part logical expression and the conditional part logical expression of the rule The rule replaced with the combined conditional part logical expression is added to the correction rule set.

  When the output range option is the result range specification 416, the rule output unit 106 leaves only the rules of the original rule set and the correction rule set included in the result range specified by the result range specification 416, and deletes the others.

  Next, the rule output unit 106 sorts the rules based on the user-defined rule utilization mode of the rule output condition 801 (S1207). When the user-defined rule utilization mode is not modifiable 421, the rule output unit 106 deletes the rule of the original rule set modified in S1204 from the original rule set and adds it to the modified rule set. Further, the rule output unit 106 deletes all the rules remaining in the original rule set and registers them in the no-change rule 1101 of the output rule holding unit 155. When the user-defined rule utilization mode is modifiable 422, the rule output unit 106 deletes all the rules of the original rule set and adds them to the modifiable rule set that is a set that stores rules that are permitted to be modified. When the user-defined rule utilization mode is not utilized 423, the rule output unit 106 adds all the rules included in the original rule set to the correction rule set. When the user-defined rule utilization mode is the individual setting 424, the rule output unit 106 confirms the information of the individual setting corresponding to each rule of the original rule set, and among the rules whose user-defined rule utilization mode is not 614, S1204 The rule that has been modified in is deleted from the original rule set and added to the modifiable rule set. Also, a rule whose user-defined rule utilization mode is modifiable 615 is deleted from the original rule set and added to the modifiable rule set. A rule whose user-defined rule utilization mode is not utilized 616 is deleted from the original rule set and added to the correction rule set. After sorting the rules in this way, the rule output unit 106 proceeds to S1208.

  Next, the rule output unit 106 reads the output unit of the rule output condition 801. If the result item unit 431, the process proceeds to S1209. If the result item combination unit 432, the process proceeds to S1210 (S1208).

  In S1209, the rule output unit 106 generates a rule for each result item (S1209). With reference to FIG. 13, the rule generation processing of the result item unit of the rule output unit 106 will be described.

  FIG. 13 is a flowchart showing a rule generation unit rule generation (S1209) process by the rule output unit 106.

  After starting the processing, the rule output unit 106 selects an unprocessed element value r_ij for the result item (S1300, S1301). Here, r_ij represents the j-th element value of the result item Ri. After selecting an unprocessed element value r_ij, the process proceeds to S1302.

  Next, the rule output unit 106 combines a logical expression (hereinafter referred to as a “conditional part logical sum combination expression”) obtained by combining the condition part logical expressions of the rule including r_ij from the modified rule set with the logical sum. Generate (S1302). The conditional part OR combination expression represents a condition that results in r_ij. After generating the conditional part OR combination expression, the process proceeds to S1303.

  Next, the rule output unit 106 generates a logical expression (hereinafter, referred to as “conditional part DNF expression”) obtained by converting the conditional part OR combination expression into a standard form called DNF (Disjunctive Normal Form) (S1303). The condition part DNF expression is an expression in which components (hereinafter referred to as “condition part DNF clauses”) composed of element values of condition items and logical products are combined by a logical sum. The conversion from the conditional part OR combination expression to the conditional part DNF expression can be executed by applying, for example, De Morgan's law and distribution rule in propositional logic. Also, the rule output unit 106 performs conversion so that the length of the condition unit DNF expression is minimized. This can be realized by utilizing a multi-stage logic minimization algorithm used in the field of circuit design. After generating the condition part DNF expression, the process proceeds to S1304.

  Next, the rule output unit 106 generates a rule having each condition part DNF clause as a condition part logical expression and r_ij as a result part logical expression, and registers the rule in the additional rule 1103 of the output rule holding part 155 (S1304). After registration, the process proceeds to S1305.

  Next, the rule output unit 106 checks whether or not there is an unprocessed element value of the result item Ri (S1305). If there is an unprocessed element value (S1305, Yes), the process proceeds to S1301, and if there is no unprocessed element value (S1305, No), the rule generation process for each result item ends (S1306).

  In S1210 of FIG. 12, the rule output unit 106 generates a rule for the result item combination unit (S1210). With reference to FIG. 14, the rule generation processing of the result item combination unit of the rule output unit 106 will be described.

  FIG. 14 is a flowchart showing the rule generation unit rule generation processing of the rule output unit 106.

  After starting the processing, the rule output unit 106 selects an unprocessed element value r_ij related to the result item (S1400, S1401). After selection, the process proceeds to S1402.

  Next, the rule output unit 106 generates, from the correction rule set, a logical expression (conditional logical OR combination expression) obtained by combining the conditional part logical expressions including the rule r_ij in the result part logical expression with a logical sum (S1402). After the conditional part OR combination expression is generated, the process proceeds to S1403.

  Next, the rule output unit 106 checks whether there is an unprocessed element value related to the result item (S1403). When there is an unprocessed element value (S1403, Yes), the process proceeds to step S1401, and when there is no unprocessed element value (S1403, No), the process proceeds to S1404.

  Next, the rule output unit 106 selects an unprocessed combination (∧r_ix) of the element values of the result items (S1404). ∧r_ix represents a logical expression in which element values of each result item are combined by logical product. This combination includes a result item whose element value is undefined. For example, when there are result items R1 and R2 and {r11, r12} {r21, r22} can be taken as element values, the combination of element values of result items is conceptually an element value “undefined”. Since there are three element values, there are 3 × 3 = 9 combinations. After selecting an unprocessed combination of element values of the result item, the process proceeds to S1405.

  Next, the rule output unit 106 generates a logical expression (hereinafter, referred to as “combination condition part logical expression”) obtained by combining the conditional part logical combination expression corresponding to each element value of the combination by logical product (hereinafter, referred to as “combination condition part logical expression”) (S1405). ). After the combination condition part logical expression is generated, the process proceeds to S1406.

  Next, the rule output unit 106 determines whether the combination condition part logical expression is satisfiable (S1406). If it is determined that it can be satisfied (S1406, Yes), the process proceeds to S1407, and if it is determined that it cannot be satisfied (S1406, No), the process proceeds to S1404.

  Next, the rule output unit 106 generates a logical expression (conditional part DNF expression) obtained by converting the combination condition part logical expression into DNF (S1407). The method for generating the condition part DNF expression is the same as S1303 in FIG. After the generation of the condition part DNF expression, the process proceeds to S1408.

  Next, the rule output unit 106 generates a rule having each condition part DNF clause as a condition part logical expression and ∧r_ix as a result part logical expression, and registers the rule as an additional rule in the output rule holding part 155 (S1408). After registration, the process proceeds to S1409.

  Next, the rule output unit 106 checks whether or not there is an unprocessed combination of element values of result items (S1409). When it is determined that there is an unprocessed combination (S1409, Yes), the process proceeds to S1404, and when it is determined that there is no unprocessed combination (S1409, No), the rule generating process for the result item combination unit ends (S1410). .

  Subsequently, returning to the processing flow of FIG. 12, the rule output unit 106 generates a rule 1102 with a change in the output rule holding unit 155 (S1211). With reference to FIG. 15, the generation process of the changed rule 1102 will be described.

  FIG. 15 is a flowchart showing a process for generating the modified rule 1102 in the output rule holding unit 155 in the embodiment of the present invention.

  The rule output unit 106 is an unprocessed rule that has been corrected from the correctable rule set after the start of processing (hereinafter, a rule that has been corrected in the correctable rule set is referred to as a “corrected rule”). .) Is selected (S1500, S1501). After selecting the corrected rule, the process proceeds to S1502. The corrected rule is “can be corrected if there is a mismatch between the user-defined rule and the decision table correction rule in S1204 of FIG. 12 and the user has selected to give priority to the decision table correction rule. Is defined as a modified user-defined rule.

  Next, the rule output unit 106 develops the logical expression of the condition part logical expression of the corrected rule (S1502). After the logical expression expansion, the process proceeds to S1503.

  Next, the rule output unit 106 determines whether or not the condition of the modifiable option 803 is satisfied. If the rule output unit 106 determines that the condition of the modifiable option 803 is satisfied, the rule output unit 106 deletes the modified rule from the modifiable rule set, and converts the conditional part logical expression of the modified rule into a logical expression after logical expression expansion. The rule replaced with is registered in the changed rule 1102 of the output rule holding unit 155 (S1503). If the rule output unit 106 determines that the condition of the modifiable option 803 is not satisfied, the rule output unit 106 deletes the modified rule from the modifiable rule set, and replaces the condition part logical expression of the modified rule with the logical expression after logical expression expansion. The rule replaced with the expression is registered in the additional rule 1103 of the output rule holding unit 155. After the corrected rule is registered in the changed rule 1102 or the added rule 1103, the process proceeds to S1504.

  Next, the rule output unit 106 checks whether there is an unprocessed modified rule (S1504). When it is determined that there is an unprocessed modified rule (S1504, Yes), the rule output unit 106 proceeds to S1501, and when it is determined that there is no unprocessed modified rule (S1504, No), the process proceeds to S1505. In the processing relating to the modified rule in S1501 to S1504, if the modified rule is logically expanded and evaluated based on the evaluation index of FIG. 5, it is determined that the degree of correction is within the allowable range of the evaluation index. The rule is registered in the output rule holding unit 155. If there is an inconsistency between the user-defined rule and the decision table correction rule, it is not possible to register with the correction possible rule as it is. However, there are cases where the collection result rule can be finely corrected and left by appropriately eliminating the inconsistency between the two. Whether or not such a fine correction is sufficient is determined in light of the evaluation index of FIG.

  Next, the rule output unit 106 selects an unprocessed additional rule 1103 from the output rule holding unit 155 (S1505), and proceeds to S1506.

  Next, for each rule of the modifiable rule set whose result part logical expression matches the additional rule 1103, the rule output unit 106 applies the condition part logical expression of the additional rule 1103 and the condition of the rule of the modifiable rule set. The logical sum of the partial logical expressions is calculated (the logical expression of the calculation result is referred to as “corrected logical expression”) (S1506). For each rule in the correctable rule set in which the added rule 1103 matches the result part logical expression, a corrected logical expression is generated, and the process advances to step S1507.

  Next, when there is a corrected logical expression that satisfies the condition of the correctable option 803, the rule output unit 106 deletes the additional rule 1103, and corrects the corrected logical expression from the corrected logical expression that satisfies the condition of the correctable option 803. In accordance with the priority of the permitted option 803, a rule with the corrected logical expression having the highest priority as the conditional part logical expression is added to the changed rule 1102 in the output rule holding unit 15 (S1507). In addition, the rule output unit 106 deletes the rule of the correctable rule set corresponding to the added rule from the correctable rule set. After adding to the changed rule 1102, the process proceeds to S 1508. If there is no corrected logical expression that satisfies the condition of the correctable option 803, the process advances to step S1508.

  Next, the rule output unit 106 checks whether there is an unprocessed additional rule 1103 (S1508). If it is determined that there is an unprocessed additional rule 1103 (S1508, Yes), the process proceeds to S1505. If it is determined that there is no unprocessed additional rule 1103 (S1508, No), the process proceeds to S1509.

  Next, the rule output unit 106 registers the rule remaining in the modifiable rule set in the no-change rule 1102 of the output rule holding unit 155 (S1508), and ends the rule generation process with change (S1509).

  Thereafter, in FIG. 12, the rule output unit 106 updates the additional rule 1103 of the output rule holding unit 155 based on the output rule constraint 805 of the rule output condition (S1212). For example, a case where 441 that permits denial of a condition value is valid as the output rule constraint 805 will be described. In this case, the output rule holding unit 155 combines the element values of the condition part logical expression of the additional rule 1103 excluding one of the element values that can be taken by the condition item (referred to as r_i1) by a logical sum (r_i2). Search for an element (referred to as ∨r_i3), and if found, replace the logical sum with ¬r_i1. The rule output unit 106 ends the process after updating the output rule (S1213).

  Subsequently, an output rule display screen in the output rule display unit 107 according to the present embodiment will be described with reference to FIG.

  FIG. 16 is an example of an output rule display screen in the output rule display unit 107. The output rule display screen 1600 includes display items such as an ID 1601, a type 1602, a condition part 1603, and a result part 1604. ID 1601 is information for identifying the output rule, and a rule that matches the user-defined rule or a modification to the user-defined rule matches the rule ID of the user-defined rule. The type 1602 represents the type of the output rule, and is information for identifying whether the original user-defined rule has been modified or whether it has been newly added. The condition part 1603 is a condition part of the output rule, and if there is a difference from the original user-defined rule, it includes information for identifying the difference. The information for identifying the difference can be visually identified by, for example, drawing an underline at the position of the difference or making the color different from others. Further, it may be possible to select whether or not to visually differ from the others by user operation. The result part 1604 represents the result part of the output rule. The difference can be specified by comparing the user-defined rule 701 of the user-defined rule holding unit 153 having the same rule ID and the changed rule 1102 of the output rule holding unit 15. By outputting such information to the screen, the user can see which user-defined rules have been modified, what new rules have been added, and what parts have been modified with modified rules. I can understand it easily.

  Next, with reference to FIG. 17, an example of execution of processing by the rule output unit 106 according to the embodiment of the present invention will be described.

  FIG. 17 shows information serving as input for processing of the rule output unit 106 in this embodiment, and includes a user definition rule 1710, a decision table modification rule 1720, and a decision table 1730. The user-defined rule 1710 expresses the user-defined rule data 230 of FIG. 2 with internal representation symbols for the sake of simplicity of explanation. The decision table correction rule 1720 represents the rule of the black circle “●” portion of the decision table 1730 with an internal representation symbol. The decision table 1730 expresses the condition items, result items, condition element values, and result element values of the decision table 300 with internal representation symbols.

  In the example shown in FIG. 17, the rule output condition 801 is set such that the output range option is all the result-defined ranges 412, the user-defined rule utilization mode is modifiable 422, the output unit is the result item combination unit 432, and there is no output rule constraint. Has been. The setting of the modifiable option 803 is as shown in FIG.

  In the case of the above premise, at the end of S1207 in FIG. 12, the rule output unit 106 adds all of the user-defined rules 1710 to the correctable rule set and adds all of the decision table correction rules 1720 to the corrected rule set. Yes.

  Next, the rule output unit 106 executes the processing of S1210 as a result of checking the output unit of the rule output condition 801. The process of S1210 is as shown in FIG. The rule output unit 106 generates the following two conditional part OR combination expressions related to the result element values R11 and R22 by executing S1401 to S1403.

Conditional OR combination formula for the result element value R11:
(C11 ∧ C23 ∧ C32) ∨ (C12 ∧ C21 ∧ C31)
Conditional OR combination formula for the result element value R22:
C11∧C23∧C32

Next, the rule output unit 106 generates the following combination condition part logical expression by executing S1404 to S1406.
((C11 ∧ C23 ∧ C32) ∨ (C12 ∧ C21 ∧ C31)) ∧ (C11 ∧ C23 ∧ C32)

Next, the rule output unit 106 generates the following condition part DNF expression from the combination condition part logical expression by executing S1407.
C11∧C23∧C32

Next, the rule output unit 106 registers a rule having the following condition part logical expression and result part logical expression as an additional rule by executing S1408.
Condition part logical formula: C11∧C23∧C32
Result part logical formula: R11∧R22

  Next, the rule output unit 106 executes S1411 after executing S1409. The processing of S1211 is as shown in FIG. In the example illustrated in FIG. 17, since there is no corrected rule, the rule output unit 106 skips the processing from S1501 to S1504.

Next, the rule output unit 106 acquires a rule in which the additional rule and the result part logical expression match from the correctable rule set by executing S1505 to S1506. In the example shown in FIG. 17, the user-defined rule 1711 is applicable. Further, the rule output unit 106 calculates the logical sum of the condition part logical expression of the additional rule and the condition part logical expression of the user-defined rule 1711, and generates the following corrected logical expression.
C11 ∧ (C21 ∨ C23 ∨ C31)

  Next, in step S1507, the rule output unit 106 evaluates the corrected logical expression based on the correctable option 803. In the example shown in FIG. 17, since there is one corrected logical expression, it is determined whether the corrected logical expression satisfies the condition of the correctable option 803. When the evaluation value of each evaluation index is calculated, the number of added elements is “1” because only “C23” is added, which satisfies the lower and upper limit conditions. The number of deleted elements is “0”, which satisfies the lower and upper limit conditions. The total number of elements satisfies the condition because there are no lower and upper limits. Therefore, in order to satisfy the conditions of each evaluation index of the modifiable option 803, the rule output unit 106 changes the rule in which the modified logical formula is the conditional logical formula and the result logical formula is R11∧R22 to the changed rule 1102 to add.

  Next, the rule output unit 106 executes the remaining processing and ends the processing. The result of executing the output rule display unit 107 after the processing of the rule output unit 106 is as shown in FIG. It can be seen at a glance that the rule with ID 1 is modified and the rule with ID A1 is added.

Second Embodiment Next, a second embodiment of the present invention will be described. In this embodiment, an example of an apparatus that supports management of rules defined by a user will be described.

  FIG. 18 is an example of a configuration diagram of a rule management support apparatus 1800 according to the second embodiment of the present invention. In the present embodiment, the processing unit that uses the decision table 300 is omitted from the rule management support apparatus 100, and the user-defined rule input unit 101, the rule output condition specifying unit 105, the rule output unit 106, and the output rule display unit. 107, the functional logic such as the output rule reflecting unit 108, and data of the user-defined rule holding unit 153, the rule output condition holding unit 154, and the output rule holding unit 155 are stored in the memory 170.

  Since each functional logic and data are the same as those in the first embodiment, description of each functional logic and data is omitted. The feature of this embodiment is that only user-defined rules are handled. With this configuration, rules can be managed by the user-defined rule subject in the IF-THEN format. The correction operation of the decision table in the first embodiment can be replaced by adding a user-defined rule. Further, by individually setting the user-defined rule utilization mode for each user-defined rule, for example, it is possible to generate an output rule only for the user-defined rule added after the review.

  According to the embodiments of the present invention described above, it is possible to provide a rule management support device that makes it possible to easily execute corrections associated with specification changes while ensuring traceability with ground information and minimizing the number of rules. can do.

  In addition, this invention is not limited to above-described embodiment, Various modifications are included. For example, the above-described embodiment has been described in detail for easy understanding of the present invention, and is not necessarily limited to one having all the configurations described. In addition, a part of the configuration of the embodiment can be replaced with another configuration, and another configuration can be added to the configuration of a certain embodiment.

100, 1800 Rule management support device 101 User-defined rule input unit 102 Decision table conversion unit 103 Decision table display unit 104 Decision table editing unit 105 Rule output condition designation unit 106 Rule output unit 107 Output rule display unit 108 Output rule reflection unit 151 decision Table correction rule holding unit 152 Decision table holding unit 153 User defined rule holding unit 154 Rule output condition holding unit 155 Output rule holding unit 160 Processor 170 Memory 180 Input / output device 200 Rule output condition setting screen 500 Correctable option setting screen 600 User defined Rule individual option setting screen 1600 Output rule display screen

Claims (9)

A device for supporting rule management in software specification development,
An input rule receiving unit for receiving one or more input rules including a condition unit for storing a condition for satisfying the rule and a result unit for storing a result when the condition is satisfied, and an output rule are satisfied A rule output condition receiving unit that receives a rule output condition that is a condition for performing, and a rule output unit for outputting a rule based on the input rule and the rule output condition,
The rule output condition accepting unit is a non-modifiable option for instructing to output the input rule as it is for each or all of the input rules, and a modification for instructing the modification of the input rules. An option designating unit for designating the option to be applied to one or more options among possible options and unused options that do not consider the format of the input rule;
The rule output unit refers to the option specifying unit,
If it is determined that the uncorrectable option is specified, the input rule is output as it is,
When it is determined that one of the modifiable options is specified, the similarity between the input rule and the input rule in which the modifiable option is modified , The input rule is determined based on a similarity determination condition that is a determination condition of whether or not the input rule for which the correction option is specified is specified, and the similarity is within an allowable range and can be corrected. Output the modified rule to
When it is determined that the unused option is specified, a rule management support apparatus that outputs a rule that is equivalent to a part or all of the input rules for which the unused option is specified. The rule management support device according to claim 1,
The rule output unit
Read the input rule and the rule output condition,
Output the input rule with the non-modifiable option as it is,
Generating a conditional OR combination expression that is a logical OR of the conditional parts that match the result part of the input rule with the unused option specified;
Generating an additional rule with the condition part OR combination expression as a condition part and a result part as a result part of the input rule;
Generating a corrected logical expression that is a logical sum of the respective condition parts of the input rule in which the correctable option that matches the additional part and the result part is specified;
When the corrected logical expression and the similarity of the input rule are determined based on the similarity determination condition, and the similarity is determined to be within an allowable range, the corrected logical expression is used as a condition part, and a result part A rule management support device that generates a rule having a result part of the input rule as a rule.   3. The rule management support apparatus according to claim 2, wherein a condition part DNF expression is generated by converting the condition part logical sum combination expression into a Disjunctive Normal Form (DNF), and each clause of the condition part DNF expression is set as a condition part. And an additional rule having the result part as a result part of the input rule is generated. The rule management support device according to claim 1,
When the rule output unit outputs a rule obtained by modifying the input rule according to the modifiable option, information indicating that the rule is modified, and identification information indicating a modified part of the rule A rule management support apparatus for outputting output screen information including The rule management support device according to claim 1,
The rule output condition accepting unit further outputs, as an output range output by the rule output unit, an entire range to which all combinations of possible values of the condition items included in the condition unit are output, and a result obtained by the result unit. Range of combinations of values that can be taken by the condition items included in the defined condition part, range of combinations of values that can be taken by the condition items included in the condition part whose result is undefined by the result part, and the selected range The range of input rules, the range of combinations of values that can be taken by the condition items included in the condition part satisfying the conditions of the values that can be taken by the specified condition items, and the conditions that can be taken by the specified result items An output range option designating unit for designating one or more options in a range of combinations of possible values of condition items included in the condition unit;
The rule output unit outputs a rule that satisfies the output range. The rule management support device according to claim 1,
The rule output condition reception unit further as the output unit of the output rule is a rule that the output number 1 and is the result Item Unit result item appearing in results of the output rule, the result of the output rule Appears in a result item combination unit including all result items, and a result item option specifying unit for specifying one or more options among result items included in the result part of the output rule, or a result part of the output rule results the results item number designating section for designating the number of items only including,
The rule output support device outputs a rule that satisfies the designated output unit. The rule management support device according to claim 1,
Whether the rule output condition receiving unit further permits the output rule to negate element values included in the condition unit as an option of an output rule constraint condition indicating a constraint condition for the output rule that is the rule to be output An output constraint condition option specifying unit for specifying the output constraint condition option, including one or more options among options indicating whether or not duplication between the output rules is permitted ,
The rule output unit outputs a rule that satisfies the output rule constraint condition. The rule management support device according to claim 1,
A decision table conversion unit that converts the input rule into a decision table in which element values of the condition part and element values of the result part are arranged for each input rule;
A decision table editor for editing the decision table;
The decision table editor generates a decision table correction rule in a proposition format equivalent to the decision table edit content,
The rule output support device, wherein the rule output unit outputs a rule based on the decision table correction rule and the input rule. A method for supporting management of rules in software specification development, comprising: a computer comprising a processor and a memory;
A rule that is a condition for establishing a rule for accepting and outputting one or more input rules including a condition part for storing a condition for satisfying the rule and a result part for storing a result when the condition is satisfied Accept output conditions,
For each or all of the input rules, a non-modifiable option for instructing to output the input rule as it is, a modifiable option for instructing to permit modification of the input rule, and the input rule Accept one or more of the unused options that do not consider the format,
If it is determined that the uncorrectable option is specified, the input rule is output as it is,
If it is determined that one of the modifiable options is specified, the similarity between the input rule and the input rule that is modified with respect to the input rule for which the modifiable option is specified, A determination is made based on a similarity determination condition that is a determination condition of whether or not the input rule for which the correction option can be specified is specified, and the input rule is determined when the similarity is within an allowable range and is determined to be correctable. Output the modified rule,
A rule management support method comprising: outputting a rule that is equivalent to a part or all of the input rule for which the unused option is specified when it is determined that the unused option is specified.