An Experimental Study on Detecting Semantic Defects in Object-Oriented Programs using Software Reading Techniques

Mohammed, Alfaroq O.; Abdelnabi, Ziad A.; Maatuk, Abdelsalam M.; Abdalla, Abdalmunam

doi:10.1145/2832987.2833025

Cited by 12 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Thus, such common defect types existing in the literature occurs in the studies of Brykczynski (1999;Biffl and Halling, 2000;Laitenberger et al, 2001;Sabaliauskaite et al, 2002a;2004;Thelin et al, 2003;Denger and Paech, 2004;Cox et al, 2004a;Staron et al, 2005;Mohammed et al, 2015). A brief discussion of each study of such techniques/approaches is presented as follows:…”

Section: Research Question 2 (Rq2a and Rq2b)mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Therefore, stereotypes are essential to ensure quality of the carried out software inspections. Mohammed et al (2015) present a controlled experimental study to compare the effectiveness and efficiency of three reading techniques: CBR; FunctionalBased Reading (FBR) and Systematic-Based Reading based on an approach to discovering semantic defects in object oriented programming. The results of such study showed that FBR technique is more productive and effective than the Systematic-Based Reading and CBR.…”

Section: Research Question 2 (Rq2a and Rq2b)mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…According to the method of their work can also prevent defects and optimize V&V activities throughout a proposal of a generic process that suggest corrections of defects. The following adaptations were applied in ODC: Felderer et al (2014), UBR in Thelin et al (2003) and Systematic-Based Reading and FBR in Mohammed et al (2015). Thus, a brief discussion of such studies of such techniques/approaches is presented as follows: Gopinath et al (2014) attempted identify real faults in mutations analysis applying patches in different programming languages (Java, C, Python, Haskell) for detect distinct bugs.…”

Section: Research Question 2 (Rq2a and Rq2b)mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In summary, the studies presented in this section answered RQ2 and provide evidence of the existing inspection techniques or approaches associated with defect types, encompassing studies, such as: (i) several academic validation studies that compare and evaluate the effectiveness of the main inspection techniques (e.g., CBR, PBR, SBR, Ad hoc, among others) in distinct contexts (Biffl and Halling, 2000;Cox et al 2004a;Denger and Paech, 2004;Laitenberger et al, 2001;Mohammed et al, 2015;Sabaliauskaite et al, 2002a;2003;Staron et al, 2005;Thelin et al, 2003); (ii) case studies in industry (Felderer et al, 2014;Ma et al, 2014; and (iii) application and adaptation of systematic classifications such as ODC (Gopinath et al, 2014;Ma et al 2014;.…”

Section: Research Question 2 (Rq2a and Rq2b)mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Defect Types and Software Inspection Techniques: A Systematic Mapping Study

OliveiraJr¹,

Geraldi²

2017

Journal of Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Software inspection has been used to guarantee and control the quality of products by detecting defects, which can be spread out throughout the entire software life cycle. Therefore, the main premise is to identify and reduce the number of defect types in software artifacts during inspections. This work focuses on providing an up to dated overview of existing defects in the context of software inspection techniques. A systematic mapping was carried out, from which 2096 primary studies were retrieved and 32 were final selected. From the analysis, classification and aggregation of the retrieved studies, important different defect types were identified. Most studies encompass defect types by means of experiments and proposed techniques and approaches. Thus, as a main result, the identification of several different studies with distinct proposals concerned on defect types is evident. Although researchers have conducted studies over time, a general pattern on the detection of defects could not be established. Therefore, the scenario in which this study was carried out provides researchers with the capability of conducting further research in a motivating and challenging research topic, as well as practitioners with the adoption of empirically evaluated inspection techniques and respective defect types.

show abstract

Section: Research Question 2 (Rq2a and Rq2b)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Research Question 2 (Rq2a and Rq2b)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Research Question 2 (Rq2a and Rq2b)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Research Question 2 (Rq2a and Rq2b)mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Defect Types and Software Inspection Techniques: A Systematic Mapping Study

OliveiraJr¹,

Geraldi²

2017

Journal of Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Validation in requirements engineering is the process to eliminate the conflicts among requirements in SRS [1][2] [41]. Besides, it relates to the analysis since it is involved with detecting problems associated with the SRS, i.e., inconsistencies, incompleteness and ambiguities [2] [43].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Framework for Aspectual Requirements Validation: an Experimental Study

Maatuk¹,

Alshareef²,

Abdelaziz³

2021

IJSEA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Requirements engineering is a discipline of software engineering that is concerned with the identification and handling of user and system requirements. Aspect-Oriented Requirements Engineering (AORE) extends the existing requirements engineering approaches to cope with the issue of tangling and scattering resulted from crosscutting concerns. Crosscutting concerns are considered as potential aspects and can lead to the phenomena “tyranny of the dominant decomposition”. Requirements-level aspects are responsible for producing scattered and tangled descriptions of requirements in the requirements document. Validation of requirements artefacts is an essential task in software development. This task ensures that requirements are correct and valid in terms of completeness and consistency, hence, reducing the development cost, maintenance and establish an approximately correct estimate of effort and completion time of the project. In this paper, we present a validation framework to validate the aspectual requirements and the crosscutting relationship of concerns that are resulted from the requirements engineering phase. The proposed framework comprises a high-level and low-level validation to implement on software requirements specification (SRS). The high-level validation validates the concerns with stakeholders, whereas the low-level validation validates the aspectual requirement by requirements engineers and analysts using a checklist. The approach has been evaluated using an experimental study on two AORE approaches. The approaches are viewpoint-based called AORE with ArCaDe and lexical analysis based on Theme/Doc approach. The results obtained from the study demonstrate that the proposed framework is an effective validation model for AORE artefacts.

show abstract