How good are my search strings? Reflections on using an existing review as a quasi-gold standard

Huynh Khanh Vi Tran, J. Börstler, Nauman bin Ali, M. Unterkalmsteiner
{"title":"How good are my search strings? Reflections on using an existing review as a quasi-gold standard","authors":"Huynh Khanh Vi Tran, J. Börstler, Nauman bin Ali, M. Unterkalmsteiner","doi":"10.37190/e-inf220103","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Systematic literature studies (SLS) have become a core research methodology in Evidence-based Software Engineering (EBSE). Search completeness, i.e., finding all relevant papers on the topic of interest, has been recognized as one of the most commonly discussed validity issues of SLSs. Aim: This study aims at raising awareness on the issues related to search string construction and on search validation using a quasi-gold standard (QGS). Furthermore, we aim at providing guidelines for search string validation. Method: We use a recently completed tertiary study as a case and complement our findings with the observations from other researchers studying and advancing EBSE. Results: We found that the issue of assessing QGS quality has not seen much attention in the literature, and the validation of automated searches in SLSs could be improved. Hence, we propose to extend the current search validation approach by the additional analysis step of the automated search validation results and provide recommendations for the QGS construction. Conclusion: In this paper, we report on new issues which could affect search completeness in SLSs. Furthermore, the proposed guideline and recommendations could help researchers implement a more reliable search strategy in their SLSs.","PeriodicalId":11452,"journal":{"name":"e Informatica Softw. Eng. J.","volume":"79 9 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"e Informatica Softw. Eng. J.","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.37190/e-inf220103","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Background: Systematic literature studies (SLS) have become a core research methodology in Evidence-based Software Engineering (EBSE). Search completeness, i.e., finding all relevant papers on the topic of interest, has been recognized as one of the most commonly discussed validity issues of SLSs. Aim: This study aims at raising awareness on the issues related to search string construction and on search validation using a quasi-gold standard (QGS). Furthermore, we aim at providing guidelines for search string validation. Method: We use a recently completed tertiary study as a case and complement our findings with the observations from other researchers studying and advancing EBSE. Results: We found that the issue of assessing QGS quality has not seen much attention in the literature, and the validation of automated searches in SLSs could be improved. Hence, we propose to extend the current search validation approach by the additional analysis step of the automated search validation results and provide recommendations for the QGS construction. Conclusion: In this paper, we report on new issues which could affect search completeness in SLSs. Furthermore, the proposed guideline and recommendations could help researchers implement a more reliable search strategy in their SLSs.
我的搜索字符串有多好?对使用现有审查作为准黄金标准的思考
背景:系统文献研究(SLS)已成为循证软件工程(EBSE)的核心研究方法。搜索完整性,即找到与感兴趣的主题相关的所有论文,已被认为是SLSs最常讨论的有效性问题之一。目的:本研究旨在提高人们对搜索字符串构建和使用准金标准(QGS)进行搜索验证相关问题的认识。此外,我们的目标是为搜索字符串验证提供指导。方法:我们以最近完成的一项高等教育研究为例,并与其他研究和推进EBSE的研究人员的观察结果相补充。结果:我们发现QGS质量评估问题在文献中没有得到太多关注,SLSs中自动搜索的验证有待改进。因此,我们建议对现有的搜索验证方法进行扩展,增加对自动搜索验证结果的分析步骤,并为QGS的构建提供建议。结论:本文报告了影响语义语义分析中搜索完整性的一些新问题。此外,所提出的指南和建议可以帮助研究人员在他们的SLSs中实现更可靠的搜索策略。
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信