JP6964991B2 - Design document evaluation device, design document evaluation method, and program - Google Patents

Description

The present invention relates to a design document evaluation device, a design document evaluation method, and a program.

In system development, it is necessary to improve the quality of design documents in order to ensure the quality of design.

In the document relating to the "development support device" of Patent Document 1, in paragraph [0045], "(The development support device 1 of the present embodiment is a combination of conditions of input elements included in a design document and a combination of the conditions. Score calculation that calculates the score indicating the quality of the design document based on the decision table creation unit 40 that creates the decision table that corresponds to the processing of the output elements according to A part 60 and the like are provided. "

Japanese Unexamined Patent Publication No. 2014-174932

Conventionally, skilled inspection personnel have inspected design documents. However, if there are variations in the inspection techniques of inspection personnel, the inspection results will be biased.

In addition, when system development is carried out based on various design viewpoints, it is important to evaluate the design document according to the design viewpoint. The technique according to Patent Document 1 does not consider reflecting the design viewpoint in the evaluation of the design document.

The present invention has been made in view of the above points, and an object of the present invention is to provide a technique for more appropriately evaluating a design document.

The present application includes a plurality of means for solving the above problems, and examples thereof are as follows.

In order to solve the above problem, the design document evaluation device according to one aspect of the present invention has inspection knowledge in which a search term combination including one or a plurality of search terms and a type of design viewpoint related to the search term combination are associated with each other. A storage unit that stores information, a search unit that searches for a design document to be evaluated using the search term, the number of the search terms included in the design document, and the type related to the search term are used. It is characterized by including an evaluation unit for generating evaluation information of the design document and an output unit for outputting the evaluation information.

The output unit displays an evaluation table for each inspection knowledge information indicating the evaluation information in which information indicating whether or not at least one of the search terms is included in the design document is associated with each search term combination, and the inspection is performed. The evaluation table for each knowledge information can input an opinion on the search term combination, and the evaluation unit is characterized in that the evaluation information is generated using the opinion input in the evaluation table for each inspection knowledge information. May be good.

The evaluation unit may be characterized in that the search term combination in which the opinion is input is determined to include the search term.

The inspection knowledge information is associated with a hierarchy indicating the importance of the search term combination, and the evaluation unit uses the inspection knowledge information for each combination of the type and the hierarchy. The description rate of the search term may be calculated, and the output unit may output an evaluation table for each importance that displays the description rate.

The design document evaluation device includes an input unit that accepts selection of a hierarchy indicating the importance of the search term combination, and the inspection knowledge information is associated with the hierarchy with respect to the search term combination, and the evaluation is performed. When the unit accepts the selection of the hierarchy, the unit calculates the description rate of the search term for each of the types of the search term combination associated with the hierarchy, and the output unit calculates the description rate of the search term in the selected hierarchy. It may be characterized by outputting an evaluation chart for each importance showing the above-mentioned description rate for each.

The design document evaluation device includes an input unit that accepts an input of an opinion on the search term combination, and the evaluation unit relates to the search term combination that receives the input when the input unit accepts the input of the opinion. It may be characterized in that the description rate is calculated as including the search term.

The design document evaluation device includes an input unit that accepts the selection of the type, and the inspection knowledge information is associated with a hierarchy indicating the importance of the search term combination, and the evaluation unit is the type. When the selection of is accepted, the description rate of the search term is calculated for each layer associated with the type, and the output unit evaluates each type indicating the description rate for each layer in the selected type. It may be characterized by outputting a figure.

The design viewpoint is associated with the search term combination in the inspection knowledge information, and the evaluation unit uses the number of the search terms included in the design document to design the design document for each design viewpoint. The output unit may calculate the deficiency indication rate and output a viewpoint-based evaluation table showing the indication rate for each design viewpoint.

Further, in order to solve the above problems, the design document evaluation method according to another aspect of the present invention is a design document evaluation method using a design document evaluation device, and the design document evaluation device is evaluated by a search unit. The search unit includes a unit and an output unit, and the search unit refers to inspection knowledge information in which a search term combination including one or a plurality of search terms and a type of design viewpoint related to the search term combination are associated with each other. A search procedure for searching a design document to be evaluated is executed using the search term, and the evaluation unit uses the number of the search terms included in the design document and the type related to the search term. An evaluation procedure for evaluating the design document is executed, and the output unit executes an output procedure for outputting the evaluation result evaluated by the evaluation unit.

Further, in order to solve the above problems, the program according to another aspect of the present invention is a program that causes a computer to function as a design document evaluation device, and outputs the design document evaluation device to a search unit, an evaluation unit, and the like. The search unit is made to function as a unit, and the search unit refers to the inspection knowledge information in which the search term combination including one or more search terms and the type of the design viewpoint related to the search term combination are associated with each other, and the search term is used. The search procedure for searching the design document to be evaluated is executed, and the evaluation unit evaluates the design document using the number of the search terms included in the design document and the type related to the search term. It is characterized in that the evaluation procedure is executed, and the output unit executes an output procedure for outputting the evaluation result evaluated by the evaluation unit.

According to the present invention, it is possible to provide a technique for more appropriately evaluating a design document.

Issues, configurations, and effects other than those described above will be clarified by the description of the following embodiments.

It is a figure which shows an example of the functional block of the design document evaluation apparatus. It is a figure which shows an example of the data structure of inspection knowledge information. It is a figure which shows the hardware configuration example of the design document evaluation apparatus. It is a flowchart which shows an example of the design document evaluation process. It is a figure which shows an example of the evaluation table by inspection knowledge information. It is a figure which shows an example of the evaluation table by importance. It is a figure which shows an example of the evaluation table by viewpoint. It is a figure which shows an example of the display information selection screen. It is a figure which shows an example of the 1st evaluation screen which displays the evaluation table by inspection knowledge information. It is a figure which shows an example of the 2nd evaluation screen which displays the evaluation table by importance. It is a figure which shows an example of the 3rd evaluation screen which displays the evaluation table by viewpoint. It is a figure (the 1) which shows an example of the 4th evaluation screen which displays the evaluation graph by importance. It is a figure which shows an example of the 5th evaluation screen which displays the evaluation graph for each type. It is a figure (the 2) which shows an example of the 4th evaluation screen which displays the evaluation graph by importance. It is a figure which shows an example of the data structure of inspection knowledge information in a modification.

Hereinafter, examples of embodiments of the present invention will be described with reference to the drawings. FIG. 1 is a diagram showing an example of a functional block of the design document evaluation device 10. The design document evaluation device 10 is an information processing device such as a PC (Personal Computer) or a server device.

The design document evaluation device 10 includes a control unit 110, a communication unit 120, an input unit 130, an output unit 140, and a storage unit 150. The control unit 110 comprehensively controls the entire design document evaluation device 10. The storage unit 150 stores information necessary for processing of the control unit 110. The communication unit 120 mediates the transmission and reception of information with other devices (not shown).

The input unit 130 receives input of information to the design document evaluation device 10 via the input device included in the design document evaluation device 10. The output unit 140 outputs the information stored in the design document evaluation device 10 via the output device included in the design document evaluation device 10. The output unit 140 outputs an evaluation table for each inspection knowledge information, an evaluation table for each importance, an evaluation table for each viewpoint, an evaluation graph for each importance, and an evaluation graph for each type, which will be described later.

The control unit 110 includes an evaluation target acquisition unit 111, a search unit 112, and an evaluation unit 113. The evaluation target acquisition unit 111 acquires the design document to be evaluated. The evaluation target acquisition unit 111 may acquire the design document stored in the storage area (not shown) stored in the storage unit 150, or may acquire the design document stored in the storage unit 150 from another device connected via the network via the communication unit 120. You may obtain a design document. The design document is electronic data such as Word and Excel (registered trademark).

The search unit 112 uses a search engine that searches for search terms from a document, and searches for a design document using each search term in the inspection knowledge information stored in the storage unit 150. The search unit 112 creates an arbitrary search term list using, for example, inspection knowledge information, and obtains a search result indicating whether or not each search term in the search term list is included in the design document. Further, when the search term is included in the design document, the search unit 112 obtains a search result that specifies the number of the included search terms for each search term.

The evaluation unit 113 evaluates the design document based on the number of each search term included in the design document and the type of design viewpoint related to the search term. Although the details will be described later, the evaluation unit 113 generates the evaluation information as the evaluation result of the design document by using the inspection knowledge information in the storage unit 150.

The storage unit 150 stores the inspection knowledge information 151. The inspection knowledge information 151 is information in which a search term combination including one or a plurality of search terms is associated with a type of design viewpoint related to the search term combination.

Each processing unit in the control unit 110 may realize its function by a processing unit included in another device connected via a network (not shown). For example, the search unit 112 may transmit the above-mentioned search term list to another device and acquire the search result obtained by using the search engine included in the device. Alternatively, the search unit 112 may directly transmit the inspection knowledge information 151 to another device and acquire the search result.

FIG. 2 is a diagram showing an example of the data structure of the inspection knowledge information 151. The inspection knowledge information 151 includes an identifier 151a, a category 151b, a viewpoint 151c, an importance 151d, a source 151e, and keywords 151f, 151g, 151h. The keywords 151f, 151g, 151h included in the same record will be described as a search term combination.

The identifier 151a is identification information that identifies each record of the inspection knowledge information 151. Category 151b is information indicating the type of the design viewpoint of the system targeted by the design document. The viewpoint 151c is information indicating the design viewpoint of the system. In addition, in the inspection knowledge information 151, the same viewpoint 151c may be included in different records.

The importance level 151d is hierarchical information indicating the importance level of the search term combination included in the same record. The keywords 151f, 151g, and 151h are character strings indicating search terms, respectively. Each record of test knowledge information 151 contains at least one search term. The upper limit of the number of search terms included in each record is not limited to the example shown in FIG.

The evaluation of the design document is performed based on each record of the inspection knowledge information 151, and if at least one search term among the combinations of search terms belonging to the same record is included in the design document, the design document is affirmed with respect to the record. Is evaluated. Therefore, it is desirable that the search term combination is a combination of search terms having a similar meaning from the viewpoint of the related viewpoint 151c.

FIG. 3 is a diagram showing a hardware configuration example of the design document evaluation device 10. The design document evaluation device 10 includes an arithmetic unit 11, a memory 12, an external storage device 13, an input IF (Interface) 14, an output IF 15, a communication IF 16, and a storage medium drive device 17, and each component is included. Is connected by a bus.

The arithmetic unit 11 is an arithmetic unit such as a CPU (Central Processing Unit), and executes processing according to a program recorded in the memory 12 or the external storage device 13. Each processing unit constituting the control unit 110 realizes each function by executing a program by the arithmetic unit 11.

The memory 12 is a storage device such as a RAM (Random Access Memory) or a flash memory, and functions as a storage area for temporarily reading programs and data. The external storage device 13 is a writable and readable storage medium such as an HDD (Hard Disc Drive), a CD-R (Compact Disc-Recordable), a DVD-RAM (Digital Versatile Disc-Random Access Memory), and a storage media drive. Equipment, etc. The function of the storage unit 150 is realized by the memory 12 or the external storage device 13. The function of the storage unit 150 may be realized by a storage device connected via the communication IF 16.

The input IF 14 is an interface for receiving an input operation from an operator, and is connected to an input device such as a touch panel, a keyboard, a mouse, or a microphone. The output IF 15 is an interface for outputting information to an output device such as an LCD (Liquid Crystal Display) display built in the design document evaluation device 10.

The communication IF 16 is an interface for connecting the design document evaluation device 10 to a network (not shown), and is connected to a communication device such as a LAN (Local Area Network) card. The storage medium drive device 17 is a device that inputs and outputs information from a portable medium 18 such as a CD (Compact Disc) or a DVD (Digital Versatile Disc).

The processing of each component of the design document evaluation device 10 may be executed by one hardware or may be executed by a plurality of hardware. Further, the processing of each component of the design document evaluation device 10 may be realized by one program or may be realized by a plurality of programs. Further, the function of the design document evaluation device 10 may be realized by a WEB browser.

FIG. 4 is a flowchart showing an example of the design document evaluation process. This process is started, for example, when the design document evaluation device 10 receives an instruction to start the design document evaluation process.

First, the evaluation target acquisition unit 111 acquires the evaluation target (step S01). Specifically, the evaluation target acquisition unit 111 identifies the evaluation target input to the evaluation target identification screen (not shown), and the evaluation target design document from the storage unit 150 or another device connected via the network. To get.

Next, the search unit 112 searches for search terms (step S02). Specifically, the search unit 112 creates a search term list and determines whether or not each search term in the search term list is included in the design document. Further, when the search term is included in the design document, the search unit 112 specifies the number of each search term included in the design document.

Next, the evaluation unit 113 evaluates the design document for each inspection knowledge information 151 (step S03). Specifically, the evaluation unit 113 identifies the record of the inspection knowledge information 151, and uses the determination result obtained in step S02 to incorporate at least one search term included in the search term combination in the record into the design document. Determine if it is included.

The evaluation unit 113 makes a determination for each record in the inspection knowledge information 151, generates evaluation information in which the determination result indicating whether or not there is a search term is associated with the identifier 151a of each record, and illustrates the storage unit 150. Do not store in storage area. Further, the evaluation unit 113 aggregates the number of each search term included in the design document using the determination result obtained in step S02, and stores it as evaluation information in a storage area (not shown) of the storage unit 150.

FIG. 5 is a diagram showing an example of the evaluation table 211 according to inspection knowledge information. The evaluation table 211 according to the inspection knowledge information is the evaluation information showing the evaluation result in which the evaluation unit 113 evaluated the design document for each inspection knowledge information 151. The evaluation unit 113 stores the evaluation table 211 according to the inspection knowledge information created as the evaluation result in the storage area of the storage unit 150.

The evaluation table 211 according to inspection knowledge information includes an identifier 211a, a category 211b, a search result 211c, an importance level 211d, an opinion 211e, and keywords 211f, 211g, 211h. The identifier 211a is identification information that identifies each record in the evaluation table 211 according to the inspection knowledge information. The identifier 211a corresponds to the identifier 151a of the inspection knowledge information 151.

Category 211b is information indicating the type of the system design viewpoint, and corresponds to category 151b of the inspection knowledge information 151. The search result 211c is information indicating whether or not at least one of the related keywords 211f, 211g, and 211h is included in the design document. For example, the search result 211c is "1" (white circle in FIG. 5) when at least one of the keywords (search terms) is included, and "0" (x in FIG. 5) when no keyword (search term) is included. Mark) is displayed.

The importance level 211d is hierarchical information indicating the importance level of the search term combination included in the same record, and corresponds to the importance level 151d of the inspection knowledge information 151. The opinion 211e is a character string indicating an opinion on the search term combination. The opinion 211e may be category 211b, which is a type of related design viewpoint, or information indicating an opinion on the viewpoint related to the type.

The keyword 211f is information indicating the search term and the number of the search term included in the design document. The same applies to the keywords 211g and 211h. The search terms in the keywords 211f, 211g, 211h correspond to the keywords 151f, 151g, 151h of the inspection knowledge information 151.

The explanation is returned to FIG. Next, the evaluation unit 113 evaluates the design document for each importance (step S04). Specifically, the evaluation unit 113 calculates the description rate of the search term for each combination of the type and importance of the design viewpoint by using the evaluation information stored in the storage unit 150 in step S03.

FIG. 6 is a diagram showing an example of the evaluation table 221 according to importance. The evaluation table 221 by importance is evaluation information showing the evaluation result in which the evaluation unit 113 evaluated the design document for each combination of the design viewpoint and the importance. The evaluation unit 113 stores the importance-based evaluation table 221 created as the evaluation result in the storage area of the storage unit 150.

The importance-based evaluation table 221 includes a category 221a, an importance 221b, a term number 221c, a description number 221d, and a description rate 221e. Category 221a is information indicating the type of the system design viewpoint, and corresponds to category 151b of the inspection knowledge information 151. The importance level 221b is hierarchical information indicating the importance level of the search term combination included in the same record, and corresponds to the importance level 151d of the inspection knowledge information 151.

The term number 221c is information indicating the number of records including the combination of the category 221a and the importance 221b associated with the term number 221c among the records of the inspection knowledge information 151. The description number 221d is information indicating the number of records in which at least one search term is included in the design document among the records of the inspection knowledge information 151 including the combination of the related category 221a and the importance 221b.

That is, the description number 221d is a search result 211c indicating that the search term is included in the design document among the records of the evaluation table 211 according to the inspection knowledge information including the combination of the category 221a and the importance 221b associated with the description number 221d. Information indicating the number of records having. The description rate 221e is the ratio of the number of descriptions 221d to the number of related terms 221c.

In the present embodiment, the evaluation unit 113 refers to the inspection knowledge information 151 and extracts all combinations of the category 151b and the importance 151d. The evaluation unit 113 refers to the evaluation table 211 according to the inspection knowledge information using the combination of the extracted category and the importance, and for each combination of the extracted category and the importance, the evaluation table 211 according to the inspection knowledge information including the combination. The number of records of is specified as the number of terms 221c.

Further, the evaluation unit 113 specifies the number of records for which the search result 211c is "1" among the records in the evaluation table 211 according to the inspection knowledge information related to the specified number of records as the description number 221d, and sets the description rate 221e. calculate. The evaluation unit 113 associates the term number 221c, the description number 221d, and the description rate 221e with each combination of the category 221a and the importance degree 221b, and creates an evaluation table 221 by importance as evaluation information.

The explanation is returned to FIG. Next, the evaluation unit 113 evaluates the design document for each viewpoint (step S05). Specifically, the evaluation unit 113 calculates the rate of pointing out deficiencies in the design document for each design viewpoint by using the evaluation information stored in the storage unit 150 in step S03. The evaluation unit 113 stores the viewpoint-based evaluation table 231 created as the evaluation result in the storage area of the storage unit 150.

FIG. 7 is a diagram showing an example of the viewpoint-based evaluation table 231. The viewpoint-based evaluation table 231 is evaluation information showing the evaluation results of the evaluation unit 113 evaluating the design document for each design viewpoint. The evaluation unit 113 stores the viewpoint-based evaluation table 231 created as the evaluation result in the storage area of the storage unit 150.

The viewpoint-based evaluation table 231 includes categories 231a, viewpoints 231b, indication rates 231c, and evaluations 231d. Category 231a is information indicating the type of the system design viewpoint, and corresponds to category 151b of the inspection knowledge information 151. The viewpoint 231b is information indicating the design viewpoint of the system, and corresponds to the viewpoint 151c of the inspection knowledge information 151.

The indication rate 231c is a value indicating the ratio of the number of records not including the search term to the total number of records of the inspection knowledge information 151 including the viewpoint 231b associated with the indication rate 231c. The evaluation 231d is an evaluation for the indication rate 231c. For example, the evaluation 231d is an evaluation value obtained by using a predetermined threshold value with respect to the indication rate 231c.

Specifically, the evaluation unit 113 refers to the inspection knowledge information 151 and extracts all combinations of the category 151b and the viewpoint 151c. The evaluation unit 113 specifies the records of the inspection knowledge information 151 including the combination for each combination of the extracted category 151b and the viewpoint 151c, and totals the number of the specified records. The evaluation unit 113 refers to the evaluation table 211 according to the inspection knowledge information, identifies the record of the specified inspection knowledge information 151 and the corresponding record of the evaluation table 211 according to the inspection knowledge information, and the search result 211c is “0” (that is, that is). Aggregate the number of records that do not contain any search terms).

The evaluation unit 113 obtains an indication rate of deficiency in the design document 231c by dividing the number of records in the aggregated inspection knowledge information-specific evaluation table 211 by the number of records in the aggregated inspection knowledge information 151. The evaluation unit 113 creates an evaluation table 231 for each viewpoint by associating the extracted category, the viewpoint, the calculated indication rate, and the evaluation specified from the indication rate.

The explanation is returned to FIG. Next, the evaluation unit 113 displays the display information selection screen (step S06).

FIG. 8 is a diagram showing an example of the display information selection screen 240. The display information selection screen 240 includes an evaluation table selection button 241 by inspection knowledge information, an evaluation table selection button 242 by importance, an evaluation table selection button 243 by viewpoint, an evaluation graph selection button 244 by importance, and each type. The evaluation graph selection button 245 and the evaluation graph selection button 245 are displayed so as to be selectable.

When the selection of the evaluation table selection button 241 according to the inspection knowledge information is accepted, the display screen transitions to the first evaluation screen described later. When the selection of the evaluation table selection button 242 by importance is accepted, the display screen transitions to the second evaluation screen described later. When the selection of the viewpoint-based evaluation table selection button 243 is accepted, the display screen transitions to the third evaluation screen described later. When the selection of the evaluation graph selection button 244 by importance is accepted, the display screen transitions to the fourth evaluation screen described later. When the selection of the evaluation graph selection button 245 for each type is accepted, the display screen transitions to the fifth evaluation screen described later.

When the output unit 140 accepts the selection of the importance-based evaluation graph selection button 244 on the display information selection screen 240, the output unit 140 displays a hierarchical information selection screen (not shown). On the hierarchical information selection screen, hierarchical information indicating the importance of the search term combination included in the importance 151d in the inspection knowledge information 151 is selectably displayed. The input unit 130 accepts the selection of any one of the hierarchical information such as "high", "medium", and "low". When the output unit 140 receives the selection of the hierarchical information, the output unit 140 displays a fourth evaluation screen, which will be described later, showing an evaluation graph for each importance according to the hierarchical information.

Further, when the output unit 140 receives the selection of the evaluation graph selection button 245 for each type on the display information selection screen 240, the output unit 140 displays a type selection screen (not shown). On the type selection screen, information indicating the type of the design viewpoint in the category 151b included in the inspection knowledge information 151 is displayed in a selectable manner. When the output unit 140 accepts the selection of one type, the output unit 140 displays a fifth evaluation screen, which will be described later, showing an evaluation graph for each type according to the type.

The explanation is returned to FIG. Next, the input unit 130 determines whether or not the inspection knowledge information-specific evaluation table 211 is selected on the display information selection screen 240 (step S07). Specifically, the input unit 130 shifts the process to step S08 when the evaluation table selection button 241 for each inspection knowledge information is selected on the display information selection screen 240.

Further, the input unit 130 selects one of the importance-based evaluation table selection button 242, the viewpoint-based evaluation table selection button 243, the importance-based evaluation graph selection button 244, and the type-based evaluation graph selection button 245. If so, the process is shifted to step S13.

In step S07, when the input unit 130 determines that the inspection knowledge information-specific evaluation table selection button 241 is selected on the display information selection screen 240 (when “YES” in step S07), the output unit 140 determines the inspection knowledge information. Another evaluation table 211 is displayed (step S08).

FIG. 9 is a diagram showing an example of the first evaluation screen 210 displaying the evaluation table 211 according to inspection knowledge information. The first evaluation screen 210 includes an evaluation table 211 according to inspection knowledge information, a recount button 212, a back button 213, and an end button 214. In the evaluation table 211 according to inspection knowledge information displayed on the first evaluation screen 210, an opinion column can be input for each record.

The recount button 212 is a button for receiving a re-evaluation instruction of the design document from the user. Although the details will be described later, when the opinion is input to at least one of the opinion columns of the evaluation table 211 according to the inspection knowledge information displayed on the first evaluation screen 210 and the recount button 212 is selected, the input information is entered. The design document is re-evaluated using.

The back button 213 is a button for receiving a screen transition instruction from the user to the state before the display of the first evaluation screen 210. The end button 214 is a button for receiving an instruction from the user to end the display of the first evaluation screen 210.

The first evaluation screen 210 can accept the designation of information that is not displayed on the first evaluation screen 210 in the evaluation table 211 according to the inspection knowledge information. For example, when an input of a type of a design viewpoint having a low relevance to the design document is accepted, it is possible to hide the record including the category 211b related to the type.

In the evaluation table 211 according to inspection knowledge information in the present embodiment, whether or not at least one of the search terms is included in the design document is associated with each search term combination. By displaying the evaluation table 211 according to inspection knowledge information, the user can recognize whether or not the design document contains terms that are required to be described in the design document, and the quality of the design document can be improved. Contribute. Further, by setting similar search terms in the search term combination, it is possible to grasp whether or not different similar terms are included in the design document, and it is possible to recognize variations in the description in the design document.

The explanation is returned to FIG. Next, the input unit 130 determines whether or not the recount instruction has been accepted (step S09). Specifically, when the input unit 130 inputs information to at least one of the opinion columns of the evaluation table 211 according to inspection knowledge information on the first evaluation screen 210 and the recount button 212 is selected, the input unit 130 re-aggregates. It is determined that the aggregation instruction has been accepted. When the input unit 130 determines that the recount instruction is not accepted (when “NO” in step S09), the output unit 140 shifts the process to step S11.

When the input unit 130 determines that the recount instruction has been accepted (when “YES” in step S09), the evaluation unit 113 evaluates each inspection knowledge information 151 (step S10). Specifically, the evaluation unit 113 specifies the record of the inspection knowledge information 151 corresponding to the input record of the opinion 211e in the evaluation table 211 according to the inspection knowledge information being displayed.

The evaluation unit 113 determines that the record of the specified inspection knowledge information 151 includes the search term, and creates the evaluation information by associating the determination result indicating that the search term is included with the identifier 151a of the record. Then, it is stored in a storage area (not shown) of the storage unit 150.

The output unit 140 may finish displaying the evaluation table 211 according to the inspection knowledge information, and may newly display the evaluation table according to the inspection knowledge information by using the evaluation information stored in the storage unit 150. In that case, the search result 211c included in the record of the evaluation table 211 according to the inspection knowledge information in which the opinion 211e is input includes the search term in the design document regardless of whether or not the search term is actually included in the design document. It may be information indicating that the information is to be received.

Next, the input unit 130 determines whether or not the selection of the back button has been accepted (step S11). Specifically, the input unit 130 determines whether or not the selection of the back button 213 included in the first evaluation screen 210 being displayed has been accepted.

When it is determined that the input unit 130 has accepted the selection of the return button 213 (when "YES" in step S11), the input unit 130 shifts the process to step S04.

When it is determined that the input unit 130 has not accepted the selection of the return button 213 (when "NO" in step S11), the input unit 130 determines whether or not the selection of the end button 214 has been accepted (step S12). When the input unit 130 determines that the selection of the end button 214 is not accepted (when “NO” in step S12), the input unit 130 shifts the process to step S9.

When the input unit 130 determines that the selection of the end button 214 has been accepted (when “YES” in step S12), the output unit 140 ends the display of the evaluation table 211 according to the inspection knowledge information, and processes this flowchart. finish.

If it is determined in step S11 that the input of the back button 213 has been accepted, the evaluation unit 113 evaluates the importance in step S04. At this time, the description rate is totaled using the evaluation information stored in the storage unit 150 in step S10. That is, for the record in which the opinion 211e is input in the evaluation table 211 according to the inspection knowledge information, the description rate is totaled assuming that the search term is included.

Further, when the evaluation unit 113 evaluates each viewpoint in step S05, the evaluation unit 113 calculates the indication rate assuming that the record in which the opinion 211e is input in the evaluation table 211 according to the inspection knowledge information includes the search term.

In step S07, when the output unit 140 determines that the evaluation table 211 according to inspection knowledge information is not selected on the display information selection screen 240 (when “NO” in step S07), the output unit 140 responds to the selection. Display the screen (step S13). Specifically, the output unit 140 displays either the second evaluation screen, the third evaluation screen, the fourth evaluation screen, or the fifth evaluation screen in response to the input to the display information selection screen 240. indicate.

FIG. 10 is a diagram showing an example of a second evaluation screen 220 displaying the evaluation table 221 according to importance. The second evaluation screen 220 includes a back button 222 and an end button 223, in addition to the importance-based evaluation table 221.

The back button 222 is a button for receiving a screen transition instruction from the user to the state before the display of the second evaluation screen 220. The end button 223 is a button for receiving an instruction from the user to end the display of the second evaluation screen 220. As with the first evaluation screen 210, the second evaluation screen 220 can accept the designation of information not to be displayed in the importance-based evaluation table 221.

By referring to the evaluation table 221 by importance in the present embodiment, it is possible to grasp the description rate by importance for the type of design viewpoint. As a result, the user can recognize the description rate of the search term having high (or low) importance in the type of attention.

FIG. 11 is a diagram showing an example of a third evaluation screen 230 displaying the viewpoint-based evaluation table 231. The third evaluation screen 230 includes a viewpoint-based evaluation table 231, a back button 232, and an end button 233. Similar to the first evaluation screen 210 and the second evaluation screen 220, the third evaluation screen 230 can accept the designation of information not to be displayed in the viewpoint-based evaluation table 231.

The back button 232 is a button for receiving a screen transition instruction from the user to the state before the display of the third evaluation screen 230. The end button 233 is a button for receiving an instruction from the user to end the display of the third evaluation screen 230.

By referring to the viewpoint-based evaluation table 231 in the present embodiment, it is possible to easily confirm the design viewpoint in which the description of the search term is not sufficient. As a result, the user can take measures such as enhancing the description of the design document for the design viewpoints that are highly important in the system design.

FIG. 12 is a diagram (No. 1) showing an example of the fourth evaluation screen 250 displaying the evaluation graph 251 by importance. The fourth evaluation screen 250 includes an evaluation graph 251 by importance, a back button 252, and an end button 253. The evaluation graph 251 by importance is evaluation information showing the description rate for each type of design viewpoint in the hierarchical information selected by the user.

More specifically, the evaluation unit 113 refers to the evaluation table 221 by importance shown in FIG. 6 and extracts records including the selected importance 221b. Using the extracted records, the output unit 140 generates display information of a graph showing the category 221a on the horizontal axis and the description rate 221e on the vertical axis, and displays the evaluation graph 251 by importance on the fourth evaluation screen 250. ..

The importance-based evaluation graph 251 may include the target value x. The output unit 140 superimposes the target value determined in advance for each type (category) of the design viewpoint on the information indicating the description rate and displays it on the importance-based evaluation graph 251. The target value x may be the same value for each type.

The back button 252 is a button for receiving a screen transition instruction from the user to the state before the display of the fourth evaluation screen 250. The end button 253 is a button for receiving an instruction from the user to end the display of the fourth evaluation screen 250.

By referring to the evaluation graph 251 by importance in the present embodiment, it is possible to confirm the description rate for each type of each design viewpoint according to the importance. In addition, since the description rate is displayed in a graph, it is possible to intuitively recognize how much the search term combination of a specific importance is described in the design document according to each type. In addition, by setting the target value, it is possible to intuitively grasp the difference between the target value and the actual description rate.

FIG. 13 is a diagram showing an example of a fifth evaluation screen 260 for displaying the type-by-type evaluation graph 261. The fifth evaluation screen 260 includes an evaluation graph 261 for each type, a back button 262, and an end button 263. The type-specific evaluation graph 261 is evaluation information showing the description rate for each hierarchical information in the type selected by the user.

More specifically, the evaluation unit 113 refers to the evaluation table 221 by importance shown in FIG. 6 and extracts records including the category 221a corresponding to the selected type. The evaluation unit 113 calculates the description rate by totaling the number of terms 221c and the number of descriptions 221d for each importance degree 221b of the extracted record and dividing the total number of descriptions by the total number of terms. The output unit 140 generates hierarchical information corresponding to the importance 221b on the horizontal axis and display information of a graph showing the calculated description rate on the vertical axis, and displays the evaluation graph 261 for each type on the fifth display screen.

The type-specific evaluation graph 261 may include a target value, as in the importance-based evaluation graph 251 shown in FIG.

The back button 262 is a button for receiving a screen transition instruction from the user to the state before the display of the fifth evaluation screen 260. The end button 263 is a button for receiving an instruction from the user to end the display of the fifth evaluation screen 260.

By referring to the evaluation graph 261 for each type in the present embodiment, it is possible to confirm the description rate for each hierarchical information indicating the importance according to the type of the design viewpoint. Further, since the description rate is displayed in a graph, it is possible to intuitively recognize how much a specific type of search term combination is described in the design document according to each hierarchical information.

The explanation is returned to FIG. Next, the input unit 130 determines whether or not the selection of the back button has been accepted (step S14). Specifically, the input unit 130 determines whether or not the selection of the back button included in the evaluation screen displayed in step S13 has been accepted. When the input unit 130 determines that the selection of the back button has been accepted (when "YES" in step S14), the output unit 140 shifts the process to step S06 and displays the display information selection screen 240.

When it is determined that the input unit 130 has not accepted the selection of the back button (when "NO" in step S14), the input unit 130 determines whether or not the selection of the end button has been accepted (step S15). Specifically, the input unit 130 determines whether or not the selection of the end button included in the evaluation screen displayed in step S13 has been accepted. When the input unit 130 determines that the selection of the end button is not accepted (when "NO" in step S15), the input unit 130 shifts the process to step S14. That is, the processing of steps S14 and S15 is continued until the input of the back button or the end button is accepted.

When the input unit 130 determines that the selection of the end button has been accepted (when "YES" in step S15), the output unit 140 ends the display of the evaluation screen being displayed and ends the processing of this flowchart.

The inspection knowledge information 151 can be modified after the evaluation of the design document. In that case, the modified inspection knowledge information 151 is stored in the storage unit 150, and the modified inspection knowledge information 151 is used by acquiring the design document to be evaluated again in the design document evaluation process shown in FIG. The design document can be evaluated.

Moreover, after the evaluation of the design document, the design document to be evaluated can be modified. In that case, in the design document evaluation process shown in FIG. 4, the modified design document may be acquired as the design document to be evaluated.

FIG. 14 is a diagram (No. 2) showing an example of the fourth evaluation screen 250 displaying the evaluation graph 251 by importance. In this figure, after the importance-based evaluation graph 251 shown in FIG. 12 is displayed, the input of the opinion 211e is accepted in the inspection knowledge information-based evaluation table 211, and the design document is evaluated again using the input opinion. The evaluation graph 251 according to the importance is shown. Compared with the evaluation graph 251 by importance in FIG. 12, the description rate of the graph whose type is "performance" is improved.

This means that in the evaluation table 211 according to the inspection knowledge information, the opinion was input to the opinion 211e related to the combination of the hierarchical information that received the display instruction and the corresponding importance 211d and the category 211b that is "performance". Shown.

According to the present embodiment, after the evaluation of the design document, it is possible to input an opinion on the search term combination to be excluded from the evaluation and perform the evaluation again. As a result, for example, after evaluating the design document, if an opinion is input for a search term combination that is judged not to require a search, the design document can be re-evaluated by excluding the search term combination from the evaluation target. , More appropriate evaluation results can be obtained.

In addition, it is possible to evaluate various design documents using general-purpose inspection knowledge information 151, input opinions in consideration of the design viewpoints and circumstances of each design document, and re-evaluate. As a result, the inspection knowledge information 151 can be shared by a plurality of design documents, which contributes to the reduction of the amount of data and enables efficient evaluation of the design documents.

<Modification example>

Next, the design document evaluation device 10 in the modified example will be described. Hereinafter, points different from the above-described embodiment will be described. The inspection knowledge information 151 stored in the design document evaluation device 10 in the modified example has the function of the evaluation table 211 according to the inspection knowledge information. The inspection knowledge information 151 in this modification is created for each design document.

FIG. 15 is a diagram showing an example of the data structure of the inspection knowledge information 151 in the modified example. The inspection knowledge information 151 includes an identifier 151a, a category 151b, a viewpoint 151c, an importance 151d, a source 151e, keywords 151f, 151g, 151h, a search result 151x, and an opinion 151y.

The search result 151x is information indicating whether or not at least one of the related keywords 151f, 151g, and 151h is included in the design document. More specifically, the search result 151x is information indicating that at least one of the keywords (search terms) is included, or also includes one, as in the search result 211c of the evaluation table 211 according to the inspection knowledge information. Either the information indicates that it is not. When the design document is not evaluated using the inspection knowledge information 151, the search result 151x is information (for example, null) indicating that there is no result.

The opinion 151y is the information input to the opinion 211e of the evaluation table 211 according to the inspection knowledge information. When the design document is not evaluated using the inspection knowledge information 151, the opinion 151y is information (for example, null) indicating that the information is not input.

In step S03 of the design document evaluation process shown in FIG. 4, when the evaluation for each record of the inspection knowledge information 151 is executed, the evaluation unit 113 provides the information indicating whether or not the search term is included in the design document as the inspection knowledge information. It is stored in the search result 151x of 151. When the input unit 130 determines that the evaluation table 211 according to inspection knowledge information is selected in step S07, the output unit 140 displays the inspection knowledge information 151 as the evaluation table 211 according to inspection knowledge information on the first evaluation screen 210. Let me. After that, when an opinion is input to the opinion 211e of the evaluation table 211 according to the inspection knowledge information, the input unit 130 stores the input information in the opinion 151y of the inspection knowledge information 151.

According to this modification, the inspection knowledge information 151 functions as an evaluation table 211 according to the inspection knowledge information. As a result, the inspection knowledge information 151 stored in the storage unit 150 is displayed as it is as the evaluation table 211 according to the inspection knowledge information, so that the information visibility of the user can be improved and the amount of data in the storage area can be expected to be reduced.

Although each embodiment of the present invention has been described above, the present invention is not limited to one example of the above-described embodiment, and includes various modifications. For example, an example of the above-described embodiment has been described in detail for the sake of clarity of the present invention, and the present invention is not limited to those having all the configurations described here. Further, it is possible to replace a part of the configuration of one example of a certain embodiment with the configuration of another example. It is also possible to add the configuration of another example to the configuration of one example of one embodiment. Further, it is possible to add / delete / replace a part of the configuration of one example of each embodiment with another configuration. Further, each of the above configurations, functions, processing units, processing means and the like may be realized by hardware by designing a part or all of them by, for example, an integrated circuit. In addition, the control lines and information lines in the figure show what is considered necessary for explanation, and do not necessarily show all of them. You can think of almost all configurations as interconnected.

Further, the functional configurations of the design document evaluation device 10 are classified according to the main processing contents in order to facilitate understanding. The invention of the present application is not limited by the method of classifying the components and the name. As shown above, the configuration of the design document evaluation device 10 can be further classified into more components according to the processing content. It can also be categorized so that one component performs more processing.

10: Design document evaluation device, 11: Arithmetic device, 12: Memory, 13: External storage device, 14: Input IF, 15: Output IF, 16: Communication IF, 17: Storage medium drive device, 18: Media, 110: Control unit, 111: Evaluation target acquisition unit, 112: Search unit, 113: Evaluation unit, 120: Communication unit, 130: Input unit, 140: Output unit, 150: Storage unit, 151: Inspection knowledge information, 210: First Evaluation screen, 211: Evaluation table by inspection knowledge information, 212: Recount button, 213, 222, 232, 252, 262: Back button, 214, 223, 233, 253, 263: End button, 220: Second Evaluation screen, 221: Evaluation table by importance, 230: Third evaluation screen, 231: Evaluation table by viewpoint, 240: Display information selection screen, 241: Evaluation table selection button by inspection knowledge information, 242: Evaluation by importance Table selection button, 243: Evaluation table selection button by viewpoint, 244: Evaluation graph selection button by importance, 245: Evaluation graph selection button by type, 250: Fourth evaluation screen, 251: Evaluation graph by importance, 260: Fifth evaluation screen, 261: Evaluation graph for each type

Claims (9)

A storage unit that stores inspection knowledge information in which a search term combination including one or a plurality of search terms and a type of design viewpoint related to the search term combination are associated with each other.
A search unit that searches for design documents to be evaluated using the above search terms, and
An evaluation unit that generates evaluation information of the design document using the number of the search terms included in the design document and the type related to the search term.
It is provided with an output unit that outputs the evaluation information .
That before SL output unit, wherein at least one search term for displaying examination knowledge information-based evaluation table showing the evaluation information associated with the information indicating whether or not included in the design specifications for each of the search term combined A featured design document evaluation device. The design document evaluation device according to claim 1.
In the evaluation table for each inspection knowledge information, it is possible to input an opinion on the search term combination.
The evaluation unit generates the evaluation information by using the opinion input in the evaluation table for each inspection knowledge information.
The evaluation unit is a design document evaluation device, characterized in that it determines that the search term combination in which the opinion is input includes the search term. A storage unit that stores inspection knowledge information in which a search term combination including one or a plurality of search terms and a type of design viewpoint related to the search term combination are associated with each other.
A search unit that searches for design documents to be evaluated using the above search terms,
An evaluation unit that generates evaluation information of the design document using the number of the search terms included in the design document and the type related to the search term.
It is provided with an output unit that outputs the evaluation information .
The front Stories examination knowledge information, has an associated hierarchy indicating the importance to the search term combination,
Using the inspection knowledge information, the evaluation unit calculates the description rate of the search term for each combination of the type and the hierarchy.
The output unit is a design document evaluation device, characterized in that it outputs an evaluation table for each importance that displays the description rate. A storage unit that stores inspection knowledge information in which a search term combination including one or a plurality of search terms and a type of design viewpoint related to the search term combination are associated with each other.
A search unit that searches for design documents to be evaluated using the above search terms, and
An evaluation unit that generates evaluation information of the design document using the number of the search terms included in the design document and the type related to the search term.
It is provided with an output unit that outputs the evaluation information .
An input unit for receiving a selection of the hierarchy showing the importance of the previous SL search term combination,
In the inspection knowledge information, the hierarchy is associated with the search term combination, and when the evaluation unit receives the selection of the hierarchy, the evaluation unit receives the selection of the hierarchy for each of the types of the search term combination associated with the hierarchy. , Calculate the description rate of the search term,
The output unit is a design document evaluation device, characterized in that it outputs an evaluation diagram for each importance indicating the description rate for each type in the selected layer. The design document evaluation device according to claim 4.
It is provided with an input unit that accepts input of opinions on the search term combination.
The evaluation unit is characterized in that when the input unit receives an input of the opinion, the evaluation unit calculates the description rate assuming that the search term related to the search term combination that has received the input is included. Device. A storage unit that stores inspection knowledge information in which a search term combination including one or a plurality of search terms and a type of design viewpoint related to the search term combination are associated with each other.
A search unit that searches for design documents to be evaluated using the above search terms, and
An evaluation unit that generates evaluation information of the design document using the number of the search terms included in the design document and the type related to the search term.
It is provided with an output unit that outputs the evaluation information .
An input unit for receiving a selection of pre-Symbol type,
The inspection knowledge information is associated with a hierarchy indicating the importance of the search term combination.
When the evaluation unit accepts the selection of the type, the evaluation unit calculates the description rate of the search term for each of the layers associated with the type.
The output unit is a design document evaluation device, characterized in that it outputs a type-by-type evaluation diagram showing the description rate for each layer in the selected type. A storage unit that stores inspection knowledge information in which a search term combination including one or a plurality of search terms and a type of design viewpoint related to the search term combination are associated with each other.
A search unit that searches for design documents to be evaluated using the above search terms,
An evaluation unit that generates evaluation information of the design document using the number of the search terms included in the design document and the type related to the search term.
It is provided with an output unit that outputs the evaluation information .
The front Stories examination knowledge information, said design viewpoint are associated Nitaishite the search terms Kumiawase,
The evaluation unit calculates the rate of pointing out deficiencies in the design document for each design viewpoint by using the number of the search terms included in the design document.
The output unit is a design document evaluation device, characterized in that it outputs a viewpoint-based evaluation table showing the indication rate for each design viewpoint. It is a design document evaluation method using a design document evaluation device.
The design document evaluation device includes a search unit, an evaluation unit, and an output unit.
The search unit refers to inspection knowledge information that associates a search term combination including one or a plurality of search terms with a type of design viewpoint related to the search term combination, and designs an evaluation target using the search term. Perform a search procedure to search for books,
The evaluation unit executes an evaluation procedure for evaluating the design document using the number of the search terms included in the design document and the type related to the search term.
The output unit executes an output procedure for outputting the evaluation result evaluated by the evaluation unit .
The output procedure is characterized by displaying an evaluation table for each inspection knowledge information indicating the evaluation result in which information indicating whether or not at least one of the search terms is included in the design document is associated with each search term combination. Design document evaluation method. A program that makes a computer function as a design document evaluation device.
The design document evaluation device is made to function as a search unit, an evaluation unit, and an output unit.
The search unit refers to the inspection knowledge information in which the search term combination including one or a plurality of search terms and the type of the design viewpoint related to the search term combination are associated with each other, and the design of the evaluation target is designed using the search term. Perform the search procedure to search for books,
The evaluation unit is made to execute an evaluation procedure for evaluating the design document using the number of the search terms included in the design document and the type related to the search term.
The output unit is made to execute an output procedure for outputting the evaluation result evaluated by the evaluation unit .
In the output procedure, the Rukoto to display at least one inspection knowledge information-based evaluation table showing the evaluation results of associated information indicating whether or not included in the design specifications for each of the search term combinations of the search terms Characteristic program.

Images