Aggregating Empirical Evidence about the Benefits and Drawbacks of Software Reference Architectures

Silverio Martínez-Fernández, P. Santos, Claudia P. Ayala, Xavier Franch, G. Travassos
{"title":"Aggregating Empirical Evidence about the Benefits and Drawbacks of Software Reference Architectures","authors":"Silverio Martínez-Fernández, P. Santos, Claudia P. Ayala, Xavier Franch, G. Travassos","doi":"10.1109/ESEM.2015.7321184","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Context: Several empirical studies investigated the benefits and drawbacks of acquiring a Software Reference Architecture (SRA) to construct a family of software systems with similar architectural needs. However, these empirical results have not been synthesized by any study yet. Such synthesized evidence is essential to make informed decisions whether or not to adopt an SRA in an organization. Goal: To aggregate existing empirically- grounded evidence about the benefits and drawbacks of SRAs, aiming at supporting organizations' decision making on their adoption. Method: To identify primary studies in the technical literature through a systematic literature review, and then, use the Structured Synthesis Method (SSM) to aggregate qualitative and quantitative evidence through the use of diagrammatic models. Results: From the five identified primary studies, five SRA benefits have considerably increased their belief value after aggregation: interoperability of software systems, reduced development costs, improved communication among stakeholders, reduced risk, and reduced time- to-market. Also, one drawback of SRAs has increased its belief value: the required learning curve for developers. Conclusions: The aggregated results consolidate knowledge and confidence on some of the studied SRA effects. The commonly reported effects showed a clear increment of their belief and pointed out to broader generalization. The effects that did not show any belief increment are important to detect areas requiring further evidence to reach a higher degree of consolidation. Practitioners might benefit from these results to support the decision of adopting an SRA in practice.","PeriodicalId":258843,"journal":{"name":"2015 ACM/IEEE International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement (ESEM)","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-11-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"26","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2015 ACM/IEEE International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement (ESEM)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ESEM.2015.7321184","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 26

Abstract

Context: Several empirical studies investigated the benefits and drawbacks of acquiring a Software Reference Architecture (SRA) to construct a family of software systems with similar architectural needs. However, these empirical results have not been synthesized by any study yet. Such synthesized evidence is essential to make informed decisions whether or not to adopt an SRA in an organization. Goal: To aggregate existing empirically- grounded evidence about the benefits and drawbacks of SRAs, aiming at supporting organizations' decision making on their adoption. Method: To identify primary studies in the technical literature through a systematic literature review, and then, use the Structured Synthesis Method (SSM) to aggregate qualitative and quantitative evidence through the use of diagrammatic models. Results: From the five identified primary studies, five SRA benefits have considerably increased their belief value after aggregation: interoperability of software systems, reduced development costs, improved communication among stakeholders, reduced risk, and reduced time- to-market. Also, one drawback of SRAs has increased its belief value: the required learning curve for developers. Conclusions: The aggregated results consolidate knowledge and confidence on some of the studied SRA effects. The commonly reported effects showed a clear increment of their belief and pointed out to broader generalization. The effects that did not show any belief increment are important to detect areas requiring further evidence to reach a higher degree of consolidation. Practitioners might benefit from these results to support the decision of adopting an SRA in practice.
关于软件参考体系结构优缺点的经验证据汇总
背景:一些实证研究调查了获取软件参考体系结构(SRA)来构建具有类似体系结构需求的软件系统家族的好处和缺点。然而,这些实证结果尚未被任何研究综合。这种综合证据对于在组织中作出是否采用SRA的明智决策至关重要。目标:收集现有的基于经验的关于sra的优点和缺点的证据,旨在支持组织在采用sra时做出决策。方法:通过系统的文献综述来识别技术文献中的初步研究,然后使用结构化综合方法(SSM)通过使用图表模型来汇总定性和定量证据。结果:从五个确定的主要研究中,五个SRA的好处在聚合后显著地增加了它们的信念价值:软件系统的互操作性,降低了开发成本,改善了涉众之间的沟通,降低了风险,缩短了上市时间。此外,sra的一个缺点增加了它的信念价值:开发人员所需的学习曲线。结论:综合结果巩固了对某些SRA效应的认识和信心。通常报告的效果显示出他们的信念明显增加,并指出了更广泛的推广。没有显示任何信念增量的效应对于发现需要进一步证据才能达到更高巩固程度的领域很重要。从业者可能会从这些结果中受益,以支持在实践中采用SRA的决定。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信