指定系统评审的过程模型:一个扩充的建议

L. Olsina, Pablo Becker, Denis Peppino, Guido Tebes
{"title":"指定系统评审的过程模型:一个扩充的建议","authors":"L. Olsina, Pablo Becker, Denis Peppino, Guido Tebes","doi":"10.5753/jserd.2019.460","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Context: Systematic Literature Review (SLR) is a research methodology intended to obtain evidence from scientific articles stored in digital libraries. SLRs can be performed on primary and secondary studies. Although there are guidelines to the SLR process in Software Engineering, the SLR process is not fully and rigorously specified yet. Moreover, it can often be observed a lack of a clear separation of concerns between what to do (process) and how to do it (methods). Objective: To specify the SLR process in a more detailed and rigorous manner by considering different process modeling perspectives, such as functional, behavioral, organizational and informational. The main objective in this work is specifying the SLR activities rather than their methods. Method: The SPEM (Software & Systems Process Engineering Metamodel) language is used to model the SLR process from different perspectives. In addition, we illustrate aspects of the proposed process by using a recently conducted SLR on software testing ontologies. Results: Our SLR process model specifications favor a clear identification of what task/activities should be performed, in which order, by whom, and which are the consumed and produced artifacts as well as their inner structures. Also, we explicitly specify activities related to the SLR pilot test, analyzing the gains. Conclusion: The proposed SLR process considers with higher rigor the principles and benefits of process modeling backing SLRs to be more systematic, repeatable and auditable for researchers and practitioners. In fact, the rigor provided by process modeling, where several perspectives are combined, but can also be independently detached, provides a greater richness of expressiveness in sequences and decision flows, while representing different levels of granularity in the work definitions, such as activity, sub-activity and task.","PeriodicalId":189472,"journal":{"name":"J. Softw. Eng. Res. Dev.","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-12-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"8","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Specifying the Process Model for Systematic Reviews: An Augmented Proposal\",\"authors\":\"L. Olsina, Pablo Becker, Denis Peppino, Guido Tebes\",\"doi\":\"10.5753/jserd.2019.460\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Context: Systematic Literature Review (SLR) is a research methodology intended to obtain evidence from scientific articles stored in digital libraries. SLRs can be performed on primary and secondary studies. Although there are guidelines to the SLR process in Software Engineering, the SLR process is not fully and rigorously specified yet. Moreover, it can often be observed a lack of a clear separation of concerns between what to do (process) and how to do it (methods). Objective: To specify the SLR process in a more detailed and rigorous manner by considering different process modeling perspectives, such as functional, behavioral, organizational and informational. The main objective in this work is specifying the SLR activities rather than their methods. Method: The SPEM (Software & Systems Process Engineering Metamodel) language is used to model the SLR process from different perspectives. In addition, we illustrate aspects of the proposed process by using a recently conducted SLR on software testing ontologies. Results: Our SLR process model specifications favor a clear identification of what task/activities should be performed, in which order, by whom, and which are the consumed and produced artifacts as well as their inner structures. Also, we explicitly specify activities related to the SLR pilot test, analyzing the gains. Conclusion: The proposed SLR process considers with higher rigor the principles and benefits of process modeling backing SLRs to be more systematic, repeatable and auditable for researchers and practitioners. In fact, the rigor provided by process modeling, where several perspectives are combined, but can also be independently detached, provides a greater richness of expressiveness in sequences and decision flows, while representing different levels of granularity in the work definitions, such as activity, sub-activity and task.\",\"PeriodicalId\":189472,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"J. Softw. Eng. Res. Dev.\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-12-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"8\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"J. Softw. Eng. Res. Dev.\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5753/jserd.2019.460\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"J. Softw. Eng. Res. Dev.","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5753/jserd.2019.460","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

摘要

背景:系统文献综述(SLR)是一种旨在从存储在数字图书馆的科学文章中获取证据的研究方法。单反可以用于初级和次级研究。尽管在软件工程中有SLR过程的指导方针,但SLR过程还没有完全和严格地指定。此外,通常可以观察到在做什么(过程)和如何做(方法)之间缺乏明确的关注点分离。目的:通过考虑不同的过程建模视角,如功能、行为、组织和信息,以更详细和严格的方式指定SLR过程。这项工作的主要目标是指定单反活动,而不是它们的方法。方法:使用SPEM(软件与系统过程工程元模型)语言从不同的角度对SLR过程进行建模。此外,我们通过使用最近在软件测试本体上进行的单反来说明所提议过程的各个方面。结果:我们的SLR过程模型规范支持对应该执行的任务/活动的清晰识别,以何种顺序,由谁执行,以及哪些是消耗和产生的工件以及它们的内部结构。此外,我们明确指定了与SLR试点测试相关的活动,并分析了收益。结论:提出的单反过程更严格地考虑了支持单反过程的过程建模的原则和好处,使其对研究人员和从业人员来说更加系统化、可重复和可审计。事实上,流程建模所提供的严密性(其中几个透视图是组合在一起的,但也可以独立分离)在序列和决策流中提供了更丰富的表达性,同时在工作定义中表示不同的粒度级别,例如活动、子活动和任务。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Specifying the Process Model for Systematic Reviews: An Augmented Proposal
Context: Systematic Literature Review (SLR) is a research methodology intended to obtain evidence from scientific articles stored in digital libraries. SLRs can be performed on primary and secondary studies. Although there are guidelines to the SLR process in Software Engineering, the SLR process is not fully and rigorously specified yet. Moreover, it can often be observed a lack of a clear separation of concerns between what to do (process) and how to do it (methods). Objective: To specify the SLR process in a more detailed and rigorous manner by considering different process modeling perspectives, such as functional, behavioral, organizational and informational. The main objective in this work is specifying the SLR activities rather than their methods. Method: The SPEM (Software & Systems Process Engineering Metamodel) language is used to model the SLR process from different perspectives. In addition, we illustrate aspects of the proposed process by using a recently conducted SLR on software testing ontologies. Results: Our SLR process model specifications favor a clear identification of what task/activities should be performed, in which order, by whom, and which are the consumed and produced artifacts as well as their inner structures. Also, we explicitly specify activities related to the SLR pilot test, analyzing the gains. Conclusion: The proposed SLR process considers with higher rigor the principles and benefits of process modeling backing SLRs to be more systematic, repeatable and auditable for researchers and practitioners. In fact, the rigor provided by process modeling, where several perspectives are combined, but can also be independently detached, provides a greater richness of expressiveness in sequences and decision flows, while representing different levels of granularity in the work definitions, such as activity, sub-activity and task.
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