软件可视化工具的验证:系统的绘图研究

Abderrahmane Seriai, Omar Benomar, Benjamin Cérat, H. Sahraoui
{"title":"软件可视化工具的验证:系统的绘图研究","authors":"Abderrahmane Seriai, Omar Benomar, Benjamin Cérat, H. Sahraoui","doi":"10.1109/VISSOFT.2014.19","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Software visualization as a research field focuses on the visualization of the structure, behavior, and evolution of software. It studies techniques and methods for graphically representing these different aspects of software. Interest in software visualization has grown in recent years, producing rapid advances in the diversity of research and in the scope of proposed techniques, and aiding the application experts who use these techniques to advance their own research. Despite the importance of evaluating software visualization research, there is little work studying validation methods. As a consequence, it is usually difficult producing compelling evidence about the effectiveness of software visualization contributions. The goal of this paper is to study the validation techniques performed in the software visualization literature. We conducted a systematic mapping study of validation methods in software visualization. We consider 752 articles from multiple sources, published between 2000 and 2012, and study the validation techniques of the software visualization articles. The main outcome of this study is the lack in rigor when validating software visualization tool and techniques. Although software visualization has grown in interest in the last decade, it still lacks the necessary maturity to be properly and thoroughly evaluating its claims. Most article evaluations studied in this paper are qualitative case studies, including discussions about the benefits of the proposed visualizations. The results help understand the needs in software visualization validation techniques. They identify the type of evaluations that should be performed to address this deficiency. The specific analysis of SOFTVIS series articles shows that the specialized conference suffers from the same shortage.","PeriodicalId":120482,"journal":{"name":"2014 Second IEEE Working Conference on Software Visualization","volume":"10 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"28","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Validation of Software Visualization Tools: A Systematic Mapping Study\",\"authors\":\"Abderrahmane Seriai, Omar Benomar, Benjamin Cérat, H. Sahraoui\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/VISSOFT.2014.19\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Software visualization as a research field focuses on the visualization of the structure, behavior, and evolution of software. It studies techniques and methods for graphically representing these different aspects of software. Interest in software visualization has grown in recent years, producing rapid advances in the diversity of research and in the scope of proposed techniques, and aiding the application experts who use these techniques to advance their own research. Despite the importance of evaluating software visualization research, there is little work studying validation methods. As a consequence, it is usually difficult producing compelling evidence about the effectiveness of software visualization contributions. The goal of this paper is to study the validation techniques performed in the software visualization literature. We conducted a systematic mapping study of validation methods in software visualization. We consider 752 articles from multiple sources, published between 2000 and 2012, and study the validation techniques of the software visualization articles. The main outcome of this study is the lack in rigor when validating software visualization tool and techniques. Although software visualization has grown in interest in the last decade, it still lacks the necessary maturity to be properly and thoroughly evaluating its claims. Most article evaluations studied in this paper are qualitative case studies, including discussions about the benefits of the proposed visualizations. The results help understand the needs in software visualization validation techniques. They identify the type of evaluations that should be performed to address this deficiency. The specific analysis of SOFTVIS series articles shows that the specialized conference suffers from the same shortage.\",\"PeriodicalId\":120482,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2014 Second IEEE Working Conference on Software Visualization\",\"volume\":\"10 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2014-09-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"28\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2014 Second IEEE Working Conference on Software Visualization\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/VISSOFT.2014.19\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2014 Second IEEE Working Conference on Software Visualization","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/VISSOFT.2014.19","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 28

摘要

软件可视化作为一个研究领域,主要关注软件的结构、行为和进化的可视化。它研究了用图形表示软件的这些不同方面的技术和方法。近年来,人们对软件可视化的兴趣不断增长,在研究的多样性和提出的技术范围方面取得了迅速的进展,并帮助使用这些技术的应用程序专家推进他们自己的研究。尽管评估软件可视化研究很重要,但研究验证方法的工作很少。因此,通常很难产生关于软件可视化贡献的有效性的令人信服的证据。本文的目的是研究在软件可视化文献中执行的验证技术。我们对软件可视化中的验证方法进行了系统的映射研究。我们考虑了2000年至2012年间发表的752篇来自多个来源的文章,并研究了软件可视化文章的验证技术。本研究的主要结果是在验证软件可视化工具和技术时缺乏严谨性。尽管软件可视化在过去十年中越来越受到关注,但它仍然缺乏必要的成熟度,无法正确和彻底地评估其主张。本文中研究的大多数文章评估都是定性的案例研究,包括对所提议的可视化的好处的讨论。结果有助于理解软件可视化验证技术的需求。它们确定了为解决这一缺陷而应执行的评价类型。对SOFTVIS系列文章的具体分析表明,专业会议同样存在不足。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Validation of Software Visualization Tools: A Systematic Mapping Study
Software visualization as a research field focuses on the visualization of the structure, behavior, and evolution of software. It studies techniques and methods for graphically representing these different aspects of software. Interest in software visualization has grown in recent years, producing rapid advances in the diversity of research and in the scope of proposed techniques, and aiding the application experts who use these techniques to advance their own research. Despite the importance of evaluating software visualization research, there is little work studying validation methods. As a consequence, it is usually difficult producing compelling evidence about the effectiveness of software visualization contributions. The goal of this paper is to study the validation techniques performed in the software visualization literature. We conducted a systematic mapping study of validation methods in software visualization. We consider 752 articles from multiple sources, published between 2000 and 2012, and study the validation techniques of the software visualization articles. The main outcome of this study is the lack in rigor when validating software visualization tool and techniques. Although software visualization has grown in interest in the last decade, it still lacks the necessary maturity to be properly and thoroughly evaluating its claims. Most article evaluations studied in this paper are qualitative case studies, including discussions about the benefits of the proposed visualizations. The results help understand the needs in software visualization validation techniques. They identify the type of evaluations that should be performed to address this deficiency. The specific analysis of SOFTVIS series articles shows that the specialized conference suffers from the same shortage.
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信