The extensive amount of detailsdetail involved in describing the numerous requirements for a large-scale system using natural language can lead to [[short-term memory]] overload,<ref name="dromey07EngLgeScale">Dromey, R.G. 2007. [http://www.beworld.org/BE/resource/presentation/Eng-LargeScale-Systems.pdf Principles for Engineering Large-Scale Software-Intensive Systems]</ref><ref name="raytheonSysResearch">Boston, J. 2008. [http://www.raytheon.com.au/Default.aspx?x=501 Raytheon Australia supports pioneering systems research] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090915050723/http://www.raytheon.com.au/Default.aspx?x=501|date=15 September 2009}}</ref> hindering a comprehensive understanding of the system's needs.<ref name="raytheonAustJoint" /> In the use of [[natural language]], there are often ambiguities, aliases, inconsistencies, redundancies, and incomplete information.<ref name = "dromey03K1-Dromey"/> This creates uncertainties,uncertainty and makingmakes the system appearingappear more complex.
The behavior tree representation (with the help of the composition tree,<ref name = "compositionTree">Behavior Engineering. [http://www.behaviorengineering.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=24&Itemid=34 Composition Trees] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090302063932/http://www.behaviorengineering.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=24&Itemid=34 |date=2 March 2009 }}</ref> the representation that already resolves alias and other vocabulary problems with large sets of requirements) attempts to eliminate these problems,byto producingproduce a deep, accurate, and holistic representation of the system's needs<ref name = "dromey07EngLgeScale"/> that can be understood by all of its readers (often [[Project stakeholder|stakeholders]]), because it strictly uses the vocabulary of the original requirements. Since the behavior tree notation uses [[Semantics of programming languages|formal semantics]], it can be transformedmade into an [[executable]] for any given example.
