This i* Guide has provided recommendations on the use of i* notation for developing consistent, readable, understandable, and usable SD and SR models. However, i* models can be useful beyond their initial creation. By performing some sort of structured analysis on the models, they can be used to answer high-level design and interesting domain questions. Performing such analysis provokes model iteration, pointing out areas of the model that can be improved and expanded, allowing modelers to improve the quality of the model and the solutions it depicts.
After a model has been created, we would like to know whether the web of internal elements is really fulfilled and if Actors’ goals and dependencies are satisfied? What is the effect of one element on other elements? What are the effects of each design alternative? Which alternatives are viable? The answers to these questions touch the very essence of i* modeling framework, using i* models to support the reasoning and rational behind informed design decisions.
This section introduces two different types of concepts which aides in the analysis of i* models. First, a set of useful analysis concepts, as introduced by Yu (1995), are summarized. Then, we introduce a qualitative evaluation procedure which propagates evidence of element satisfaction throughout the model in order to answer useful analysis questions. Using the lightweight analysis provided by the analysis concepts or the more involved propagation procedure will help modelers to get the most out of their models.
For questions regarding i* syntax please click on the "discuss" tab. This feature is available for registered users only. For registration information please see the Registration and User Rights Policy for the i* Wiki.