respond to the following: Classmates: The possibility that a gap could exist between the animated model and original specification depends on whether the functional requirements

respond to the following: Classmates: The possibility that a gap could exist between the animated model and original specification depends on whether the functional requirements were correctly translated from the operational requirements.  According to Lamsweerde (2009), simulated and animated models are one of many methods of validating functional requirements and often done to ensure that the requirements are as accurate as possible.  In order to the find gaps, I would propose that the project team work with the stakeholders to ensure that specification requirements are accurate as possible by inputting validation scenarios, as mentioned in the textbook, and ensuring that the results are the same as what the stakeholder expects.  Once this is done, the project team can move forward and convert the specification requirements into an executable format and test it using the same validation scenarios and a simulated model of the product.  This should be done with stakeholders and the customer so that the project team can receive immediate feedback about whether the results still meet expectations.  Once the stakeholders see the simulated results, depending whether any changes are needed, the project team can move forward and continue to test the model with events that mimic the system behavior in its natural environment. Fig. Pros and Cons of Large VS Small Number of Reviewers Figure one above presents some advantages and disadvantages of having a large number versus small number of reviewers.  According to Lamsweerde (2009), inspection reviews are an effective way of finding errors and issues with requirements.  When applied to requirement documents (RDs), the process can result more errors being corrected, increased quality benefits, and more cost savings.  For example, when there are more reviewers reviewing the RD, the project team can obtain find more errors and issues to fix, which results improved quality of the RD.  External reviewers should be used that do not have any interest in the project because the feedback needs to not contain any bias.  If internal reviewers are used, it is highly likely they may value in someway from the project and, therefore, provide feedback that is not as in quality as revewers who have no affliation with the organization.  However, they should have expertise in the field of the project and be allowed to think freely in order to provide valuable feedback. A disadvantage of using a large number of reviewers is feedback consolidation.  During the review process, it may be hard to consolidate all feedback into an agreeable list of things to fix and make improvements on.  A smaller number of reviewers is easier to manage in terms of feedback consolidation but can result in less number of defects, issues, and lower quality RD. In general, the project team should balance the number of external reviewers with a quantity that is manageable and can provide valuable feedback.  Another option is to use more meeting facilitators who can with managing and consolidating feedback from a large number of external reviewers.  For example, two more meeting facilitators can work as a team to ensure that everyone’s feedback is being accurately received and transcribed into a list of errors to fix and things to improve. Lamsweerde, A. V. (2009). Chichester, West Sussex, England: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Retrieved April 15, 2018, from

Need your ASSIGNMENT done? Use our paper writing service to score better and meet your deadline.

Click Here to Make an Order Click Here to Hire a Writer