Software quality trade-offs: A systematic map

Barney, Sebastian; Petersen, Kai; Svahnberg, Mikael; Aurum, Aybüke; Barney, Hamish T.

doi:10.1016/j.infsof.2012.01.008

Cited by 57 publications

(43 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Only 8 validation papers and 21 evaluation papers were unveiled in our systematic mapping. As mentioned earlier, this confirms results from other fields, such as software product line testing [Engström and Runeson 2011] and software quality trade-offs [Barney et al 2012], where the same lack was found. This nevertheless raises the question why most of the solution proposals were not subjected to empirical validation?.…”

Section: Evolution Of Ria Researchsupporting

confidence: 90%

“…This is not a RIA-specific problem, and has been unveiled by systematic mapping studies in other software engineering fields, e.g. [Engström and Runeson 2011;Barney et al 2012]. While there is a huge amount of "models, methods & methodologies" publications, most of them propose a solution and contribute models and methods, while there is a clear lack of validation and evaluation of the proposed models and methods, and a lack of experience reports.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In literature, the main shortcomings of systematic maps have been identified as (i) bias in the screening of publications [Barney et al 2012], and (ii) errors when classifying the publications into detailed categories [Engström and Runeson 2011]. Here, we acknowledge one additional threat: (iii) possible misleading summarization data due to a large amount of so-called "delta papers".…”

Section: Threats To Validitymentioning

confidence: 93%

“…Stemming from the medical field [Petersen et al 2008] and recently being applied in software engineering (e.g., [Afzal et al 2009;Barney et al 2012;Condori-Fernández et al 2009;Engström and Runeson 2011]), these studies aim to provide a thorough overview of a research field by using a scientific and repeatable method, and establish a baseline for further research activities, such as tracking research trends over time, performing in depth studies on specific topics, contextualizing reports and research articles by using a set of known references, or even as an education resource [Kitchenham et al 2011]. A systematic mapping study is thus complementary to a systematic literature review, and a useful tool on itself as it is performed "at a higher granularity level with the aim to identify research gaps and clusters of evidence in order to direct future research" [Engström and Runeson 2011].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Ten Years of Rich Internet Applications

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND. The term Rich Internet Applications (RIAs) is generally associated with Web applications that provide the features and functionality of traditional desktop applications. Ten years after the introduction of the term, an ample amount of research has been carried out to study various aspects of RIAs. It has thus become essential to summarize this research and provide an adequate overview. OBJECTIVE. The objective of our study is to assemble, classify, and analyze all RIA research performed in the scientific community, thus providing a consolidated overview thereof, and to identify well-established topics, trends, and open research issues. Additionally, we provide a qualitative discussion of the most interesting findings. This work therefore serves as a reference work for beginning and established RIA researchers alike, as well as for industrial actors that need an introduction in the field, or seek pointers to (a specific subset of) the state-of-the-art. METHOD. A systematic mapping study is performed in order to identify all RIA-related publications, define a classification scheme, and categorize, analyze, and discuss the identified research according to it. RESULTS. Our source identification phase resulted in 133 relevant, peer-reviewed publications, published between 2002 and 2011 in a wide variety of venues. They were subsequently classified according to four facets: development activity, research topic, contribution type, and research type. Pie, stacked bar, and bubble charts were used to depict and analyze the results. A deeper analysis is provided for the most interesting and/or remarkable results. CONCLUSION. Analysis of the results shows that, although the RIA term was coined in 2002, the first RIA-related research appeared in 2004. From 2007 there was a significant increase in research activity, peaking in 2009 and decreasing to pre-2009 levels afterwards. All development phases are covered in the identified research, with emphasis on “design” (33%) and “implementation” (29%). The majority of research proposes a “method” (44%), followed by “model” (22%), “methodology” (18%), and “tools” (16%); no publications in the category “metrics” were found. The preponderant research topic is “models, methods and methodologies” (23%) and, to a lesser extent, “usability and accessibility” and “user interface” (11% each). On the other hand, the topic “localization, internationalization and multilinguality” received no attention at all, and topics such as “deep Web” (under 1%), “business processing”, “usage analysis”, “data management”, “quality and metrics” (all under 2%), “semantics”, and “performance” (slightly above 2%) received very little attention. Finally, there is a large majority of “solution proposals” (66%), few “evaluation research” (14%), and even fewer “validation” (6%), although the latter have been increasing in recent years.

show abstract

Section: Evolution Of Ria Researchsupporting

confidence: 90%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Threats To Validitymentioning

confidence: 93%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Ten Years of Rich Internet Applications

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In addition, knowledge body from several studies in different areas, such as Barney et al (2012;Neto et al, 2011;Mohabbati et al, 2013;Novais et al, 2013), served as a basis to provide directions on how to conduct this SM.…”

Section: The Search Processmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

Software quality model for a research‐driven organization—An experience report

Wolski

Walter

Kupiński

et al. 2017

J Software Evolu Process

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the paper, we present a measurement framework for evaluating quality in software products developed within the research and innovation framework project GÉANT. The proposed framework is based on the quality models by Boehm and McCall, but also addresses the presence and point of view of a third stakeholder: an external funding agency (EU), which has started and is temporally financing the project, but aims at making it self-financing in the future. We also provide results of evaluation of 2 projects from the GÉANT ecosystem and one open-source system with this framework. KEYWORDS quality models, software measurement, software process improvement, software quality

show abstract

Software quality trade-offs: A systematic map

Cited by 57 publications

References 41 publications

Ten Years of Rich Internet Applications

Ten Years of Rich Internet Applications

Defect Types and Software Inspection Techniques: A Systematic Mapping Study

Software quality model for a research‐driven organization—An experience report

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About