关于UML的进一步证据是什么?-系统文献综述

Min Guo, Cheng Zhang, Futian Wang
{"title":"关于UML的进一步证据是什么?-系统文献综述","authors":"Min Guo, Cheng Zhang, Futian Wang","doi":"10.1109/APSECW.2017.28","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Context: Unified Modeling Language (UML) is a modeling language in software engineering. It has become the industrial standard for software development. Although the Unified Modeling Language has been widely studied, it still has little further empirical knowledge about the notations of the UML. Objectives: To determine the further development trend of the notations of the UML, as well as their benefits, in different aspects of UML, and to identify which diagrams of the UML have been studied in most frequently. Method: Based on a systematic review in 2008 and several related works we performed an extended systematic literature review, and classified them according to the identified categories-comprehension, model quality, adoption, metrics, methods and tools. Results: We found 420 candidate papers, and 33 empirical papers of them had been identified, the results were expressed in the article. Conclusions: Compared the original study, the larger group of empirical studies of the UML through our analysis concentrates on comprehension, model quality and adoption, but adoption of UML is being studied by researchers and will be more and more interested in industry practitioners.","PeriodicalId":172357,"journal":{"name":"2017 24th Asia-Pacific Software Engineering Conference Workshops (APSECW)","volume":"45 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"What is the Further Evidence about UML? - A Systematic Literature Review\",\"authors\":\"Min Guo, Cheng Zhang, Futian Wang\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/APSECW.2017.28\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Context: Unified Modeling Language (UML) is a modeling language in software engineering. It has become the industrial standard for software development. Although the Unified Modeling Language has been widely studied, it still has little further empirical knowledge about the notations of the UML. Objectives: To determine the further development trend of the notations of the UML, as well as their benefits, in different aspects of UML, and to identify which diagrams of the UML have been studied in most frequently. Method: Based on a systematic review in 2008 and several related works we performed an extended systematic literature review, and classified them according to the identified categories-comprehension, model quality, adoption, metrics, methods and tools. Results: We found 420 candidate papers, and 33 empirical papers of them had been identified, the results were expressed in the article. Conclusions: Compared the original study, the larger group of empirical studies of the UML through our analysis concentrates on comprehension, model quality and adoption, but adoption of UML is being studied by researchers and will be more and more interested in industry practitioners.\",\"PeriodicalId\":172357,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2017 24th Asia-Pacific Software Engineering Conference Workshops (APSECW)\",\"volume\":\"45 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2017 24th Asia-Pacific Software Engineering Conference Workshops (APSECW)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/APSECW.2017.28\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2017 24th Asia-Pacific Software Engineering Conference Workshops (APSECW)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/APSECW.2017.28","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

背景:统一建模语言(UML)是软件工程中的一种建模语言。它已经成为软件开发的工业标准。尽管统一建模语言已经得到了广泛的研究,但是关于UML符号的经验知识仍然很少。目的:确定UML符号的进一步发展趋势,以及它们在UML的不同方面的好处,并确定UML的哪些图被研究得最频繁。方法:在2008年系统综述及相关文献的基础上,对相关文献进行扩展的系统综述,并根据已确定的理解、模型质量、采用、度量、方法和工具进行分类。结果:共发现候选论文420篇,筛选出实证论文33篇,结果在文中表示。结论:与最初的研究相比,通过我们的分析,UML的更大的实证研究群体集中在理解、模型质量和采用上,但是UML的采用正在被研究人员研究,并将越来越多地引起行业从业者的兴趣。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
What is the Further Evidence about UML? - A Systematic Literature Review
Context: Unified Modeling Language (UML) is a modeling language in software engineering. It has become the industrial standard for software development. Although the Unified Modeling Language has been widely studied, it still has little further empirical knowledge about the notations of the UML. Objectives: To determine the further development trend of the notations of the UML, as well as their benefits, in different aspects of UML, and to identify which diagrams of the UML have been studied in most frequently. Method: Based on a systematic review in 2008 and several related works we performed an extended systematic literature review, and classified them according to the identified categories-comprehension, model quality, adoption, metrics, methods and tools. Results: We found 420 candidate papers, and 33 empirical papers of them had been identified, the results were expressed in the article. Conclusions: Compared the original study, the larger group of empirical studies of the UML through our analysis concentrates on comprehension, model quality and adoption, but adoption of UML is being studied by researchers and will be more and more interested in industry practitioners.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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