A unifying framework for the definition of syntactic measures over conceptual schema diagrams (extended version)

There are many approaches that propose the use of measures for assessing the quality of conceptual schemas. Many of these measures focus purely on the syntactic aspects of the conceptual schema diagrams, e.g. their size, their shape, etc. Similarities among different measures may be found both at the intra-model level (i.e., several measures over the same type of diagram are defined following the same layout) and at the inter-model level (i.e., measures over different types of diagrams are similar considering an appropriate metaschema correspondence). In this paper we analyse these similarities for a particular family of diagrams used in conceptual modelling, those that can be ultimately seen as a combination of nodes and edges of different types. We propose a unifying measuring framework for this family and illustrate its application on a particular type, namely business process diagrams.Preprin

iStarJSON : a lightweight data-format for i* models

JSON is one of the most widely used data-interchange format. There is a large number of tools open for modelling with i*. However, none of them provides supporting for JSON. In this paper we propose iStarJSON language, a JSON-based proposal for interchanging i* models. We also, present an open source software that transforms XML-based format models to JSON models that expose a set of web services for mining iStarJSON models.Peer ReviewedPostprint (author's final draft

On the meanings of subsetting, specialization and redefinition in UML

UML 2 has improved the expressiveness of the language with respect to associations in several manners. A significant one has been the introduction of the association redefinition concept. Association subsetting and association specialization have been included in UML since its earliest versions and share some relevant features with association redefinition. These similarities among the three constructs make it frequently difficult, especially to novice users, to: decide which one of these concepts is the best suited to model a particular situation; systematically justify their modelling choices. In this report, we present a preliminary empirical investigation on these constructs using as a benchmark a catalogue of model examples produced by different authors which can be considered experts in the conceptual modelling field.Preprin

On the semantics of redefinition, specialization and subsetting of associations in UML (extended version)

The definition of the exact meaning of conceptual modeling concepts is considered a relevant issue since it enhances their effective and appropriate use by designers and facilitates the automatic processing of the models where they are included. Three related concepts that permit to improve the definition of an association in UML and which still lack of a formal semantic definition are: association redefinition, association specialization and association subsetting. This paper formalizes their semantics and points out the similarities and differences that exist among them. The formalization we propose is based on the meta-modelling approach and a semantic domain composed of a set of basic UML concepts and OCL expressions, which have a previous formal definition in the literature and which are well-understood.Preprin

Research on NLP for RE at UPC: a report

[Team Overview] The Software and Service Engineering Group (GESSI) of UPC has traditionally conducted research in many fields of software engineering. [Research Plan on NLP] As a result of our participation in the OpenReq project, natural language processing (NLP) has become one of our highest priority research fields. We are using NLP for interdependency detection and requirements reuse, being the center piece of both tasks the identification of similar requirements.Peer ReviewedPostprint (published version

How tertiary studies perform quality assessment of secondary studies in software engineering

Best Paper Award a l’Experimental Software Engineering Track (ESELAW) de la XXIV Ibero-American Conference on Software Engineering, CIbSE 2021Context: Tertiary studies are becoming increasingly popular in software engineering as an instrument to synthesise evidence on a research topic in a systematic way. In order to understand and contextualize their findings, it is important to assess the quality of the selected secondary studies. Objective: This paper aims to provide a state of the art on the assessment of secondary studies’ quality as conducted in tertiary studies in the area of software engineering, reporting the frameworks used as instruments, the facets examined in these frameworks, and the purposes of the quality assessment. Method: We designed this study as a systematic mapping responding to four research questions derived from the objective above. We applied a rigorous search protocol over the Scopus digital library, resulting in 47 papers after application of inclusion and exclusion criteria. The extracted data was synthesised using content analysis. Results: A majority of tertiary studies perform quality assessment. It is not often used for excluding studies, but to support some kind of investigation. The DARE quality assessment framework is the most frequently used, with customizations in some cases to cover missing facets. We outline the first steps towards building a new framework to address the shortcomings identified. Conclusion: This paper is a step forward establishing a foundation for researchers in two different ways. As authors of tertiary studies, understanding the different possibilities in which they can perform quality assessment of secondary studies. As readers, having an instrument to understand the methodological rigor upon which tertiary studies may claim their findings.Peer ReviewedAward-winningPostprint (author's final draft

QuESo: A quality model for open source software ecosystems

© 2014 IEEE. Personal use of this material is permitted. Permission from IEEE must be obtained for all other uses, in any current or future media, including reprinting/republishing this material for advertising or promotional purposes,creating new collective works, for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or reuse of any copyrighted component of this work in other works.Open source software has witnessed an exponential growth in the last two decades and it is playing an increasingly important role in many companies and organizations leading to the formation of open source software ecosystems. In this paper we present a quality model that will allow the evaluation of those ecosystems in terms of their relevant quality characteristics such as health or activeness. To design this quality model we started by analysing the quality measures found during the execution of a systematic literature review on open source software ecosystems and, then, we classified and reorganized the set of measures in order to build a solid quality model.Peer ReviewedPostprint (author's final draft

Open source software ecosystems : a systematic mapping

Context: Open source software (OSS) and software ecosystems (SECOs) are two consolidated research areas in software engineering. OSS influences the way organizations develop, acquire, use and commercialize software. SECOs have emerged as a paradigm to understand dynamics and heterogeneity in collaborative software development. For this reason, SECOs appear as a valid instrument to analyze OSS systems. However, there are few studies that blend both topics together. Objective: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the current state of the art in OSS ecosystems (OSSECOs) research, specifically: (a) what the most relevant definitions related to OSSECOs are; (b) what the particularities of this type of SECO are; and (c) how the knowledge about OSSECO is represented. Method: We conducted a systematic mapping following recommended practices. We applied automatic and manual searches on different sources and used a rigorous method to elicit the keywords from the research questions and selection criteria to retrieve the final papers. As a result, 82 papers were selected and evaluated. Threats to validity were identified and mitigated whenever possible. Results: The analysis allowed us to answer the research questions. Most notably, we did the following: (a) identified 64 terms related to the OSSECO and arranged them into a taxonomy; (b) built a genealogical tree to understand the genesis of the OSSECO term from related definitions; (c) analyzed the available definitions of SECO in the context of OSS; and (d) classified the existing modelling and analysis techniques of OSSECOs. Conclusion: As a summary of the systematic mapping, we conclude that existing research on several topics related to OSSECOs is still scarce (e.g., modelling and analysis techniques, quality models, standard definitions, etc.). This situation calls for further investigation efforts on how organizations and OSS communities actually understand OSSECOs.Peer ReviewedPostprint (author's final draft

Protocol for a SLR on software ecosystems: technical report

Open Source Software (OSS) and Ecosystems (SECO) are two emergent research areas in software engineering. We are interested on the published works that join these two topics, to do it we used a well-known technique called Systematic Literature Review (SLR).Preprin