Source author record

Jean-michel Bruel

Jean-michel Bruel appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record

Catalog footprint

What is connected

2works
3topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Log in to claim

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

2 published item(s)

preprint2026arXiv

Engineering Decisions in MBSE: Insights for a Decision Capture Framework Development

Decision-making is a core engineering design activity that conveys the engineer's knowledge and translates it into courses of action. Capturing this form of knowledge can reap potential benefits for the engineering teams and enhance development efficiency. Despite its clear value, traditional decision capture often requires a significant amount of effort and still falls short of capturing the necessary context for reuse. Model-based systems engineering (MBSE) can be a promising solution to address these challenges by embedding decisions directly within system models, which can reduce the capture workload while maintaining explicit links to requirements, behaviors, and architectural elements. This article discusses a lightweight framework for integrating decision capture into MBSE workflows by representing decision alternatives as system model slices. Using a simplified industry example from aircraft architecture, we discuss the main challenges associated with decision capture and propose preliminary solutions to address these challenges.

preprint2020arXiv

The role of formalism in system requirements (full version)

A major determinant of the quality of software systems is the quality of their requirements, which should be both understandable and precise. Most requirements are written in natural language, good for understandability but lacking in precision. To make requirements precise, researchers have for years advocated the use of mathematics-based notations and methods, known as "formal". Many exist, differing in their style, scope and applicability. The present survey discusses some of the main formal approaches and compares them to informal methods. The analysis uses a set of 9 complementary criteria, such as level of abstraction, tool availability, traceability support. It classifies the approaches into five categories: general-purpose, natural-language, graph/automata, other mathematical notations, seamless (programming-language-based). It presents approaches in all of these categories, altogether 22 different ones, including for example SysML, Relax, Eiffel, Event-B, Alloy. The review discusses a number of open questions, including seamlessness, the role of tools and education, and how to make industrial applications benefit more from the contributions of formal approaches. (This is the full version of the survey, including some sections and two appendices which, because of length restrictions, do not appear in the submitted version.)