## 5 Case Study: Detecting Fault-Prone Software Requirements Specification for Edge/Cloud Application
### Analysis of Fault-Prone Edge/Cloud Application Software Requirements Specification
Other factors, such as the clarity of the title and description and the presence of intended users, are also capable of impacting the fault-prone score. The fault-prone SRS score is typically used to prioritize testing and quality assurance efforts with SRSs that have a higher score, indicating a lower likelihood of defects or failures in the resulting software product. Figure 11 illustrates the comparison of fault-prone SRS score and ADI for each SRS. By utilizing these three formulas, we were able to produce a fault-prone severity scale, which serves as a reliable measure of the level of ambiguity and potential for errors in  
Figure 10: Comparison of fault-prone and clean SRS based on year established. the SRS for our case study. Equation (3) shows the formula linear mapping function for software requirements (LMF). \[\textit{Linear Mapping Function for Software Requirements}\left(LMF\right)=10*\left(1-e^{(-x)}\right) \tag{3}\]  
\[\textit{where }x=\frac{\textit{Clear requirements}}{\textit{Ambiguous requirements}}\]  
Equation (4) shows the formula ambiguity density index (ADI). \[\textit{Ambiguity Density Index}\left(ADI\right)=\frac{\textit{Number of occurrences of ambiguous words in each SRS}}{\textit{Total number of words in each SRS}} \tag{4}\]  
Equation (5) shows the formula fault-prone SRS score as shown in Equation (5). \[\textit{Fault}-\textit{prone SRS Score}=10-[\ (Software\ requirements*w1)+(ADI*w2)+( Title*w3)+\] \[(Description*w4\ )+(Intended\ Users*w5)\ ] \tag{5}\]  
Table 13 depicts the distribution of weighttage for each factor. A weight of 0.5 was assigned to the software requirements, indicating its importance in determining the clear and ambiguous software requirements in the SRS. A weight of 0.2 was assigned to the ADI, indicating its importance in determining the overall level of ambiguity in the SRS. The clarity of the title and description was assigned a weight of 0.1, reflecting the importance of conveying a clear and concise message to the reader. Finally, the presence of intended users was assigned a weight of 0.1, reflecting the importance of specifying the target audience of the software. With that in mind, the clarity of the title and description was assessed using a score of 0 or 1, where 1 indicates complete clarity and 0 indicates complete ambiguity. Similarly, the presence of intended users in the SRS scored 0 or 1, where 1 indicates the extent to which the document specifies the target audience of the software and 0 indicates none of the intended users are stated in the SRS documents or the intended users stated are not related to the system. We introduced the fault-prone severity scale to determine the degree of ambiguity present in each SRS (Table 14). \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c} \hline \hline
**Factor** & **Weightage Distribution** \\ \hline \multicolumn{3}{c}{Software Requirements} & 0.5 \\ ADI & 0.2 \\ Clear SRS Title & 0.1 \\ Clear SRS Description & 0.1 \\ Presence of Intended Users & 0.1 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 13: Weightage distribution. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c} \hline \hline
**Factor** & **Weightage Distribution** \\ \hline \multicolumn{3}{c}{Software Requirements} & 0.5 \\ ADI & 0.2 \\ Clear SRS Title & 0.1 \\ Clear SRS Description & 0.1 \\ Presence of Intended Users & 0.1 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 14: Fault-prone Score SRS. The fault-prone severity scale is utilized to assess the level of faults present in individual SRS components. This is typically carried out by evaluating the degree to which a requirement is clear and unambiguous versus how much room there is for interpretation or misinterpretation, clarity of the title and description, and the presence of intended users in the SRS. To determine the level of fault-prone for each SRS, we apply a scale that ranges from low to high ambiguity. The SRS components that are deemed to have a low fault-prone score are clear and unambiguous with no room for interpretation.