Empirical Research in Software Architecture How far have we come?

被引:9
|
作者
Galster, Matthias [1 ]
Weyns, Danny [2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Canterbury, Dept Comp Sci & Software Engn, Christchurch, New Zealand
[2] Katholieke Univ Leuven, Dept Comp Sci, Leuven, Belgium
[3] Linnaeus Univ, Vaxjo, Sweden
关键词
software architecture; empirical research; state-of-practice; ENGINEERING RESEARCH;
D O I
10.1109/WICSA.2016.10
中图分类号
TP3 [计算技术、计算机技术];
学科分类号
0812 ;
摘要
Context: Empirical research helps gain well-founded insights about phenomena. Furthermore, empirical research creates evidence for the validity of research results. Objective: We aim at assessing the state-of-practice of empirical research in software architecture. Method: We conducted a comprehensive survey based on the systematic mapping method. We included all full technical research papers published at major software architecture conferences between 1999 and 2015. Results: 17% of papers report empirical work. The number of empirical studies in software architecture has started to increase in 2005. Looking at the number of papers, empirical studies are about equally frequently used to a) evaluate newly proposed approaches and b) to explore and describe phenomena to better understand software architecture practice. Case studies and experiments are the most frequently used empirical methods. Almost half of empirical studies involve human participants. The majority of these studies involve professionals rather than students. Conclusions: Our findings are meant to stimulate researchers in the community to think about their expectations and standards of empirical research. Our results indicate that software architecture has become a more mature domain with regards to applying empirical research. However, we also found issues in research practices that could be improved (e.g., when describing study objectives and acknowledging limitations).
引用
收藏
页码:11 / 20
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Building European software architecture community: how far have we come?
    Muhammad Ali Babar
    Ian Gorton
    Flavio Oquendo
    [J]. Software & Systems Modeling, 2013, 12 : 435 - 438
  • [2] Building European software architecture community: how far have we come?
    Babar, Muhammad Ali
    Gorton, Ian
    Oquendo, Flavio
    [J]. SOFTWARE AND SYSTEMS MODELING, 2013, 12 (02): : 435 - 438
  • [3] How Far We Have Come, How Far We Have Yet to Go in Atherosclerosis Research
    Libby, Peter
    Bornfeldt, Karin E.
    [J]. CIRCULATION RESEARCH, 2020, 126 (09) : 1107 - 1111
  • [4] Global software development: How far have we come?
    Damian, Daniela
    Moitra, Deependra
    [J]. IEEE SOFTWARE, 2006, 23 (05) : 17 - 19
  • [5] Software engineering education: How far we've come and how far we have to go
    Mead, Nancy R.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF SYSTEMS AND SOFTWARE, 2009, 82 (04) : 571 - 575
  • [6] Software engineering education: How far we've come and how far we have to go
    Mead, Nancy R.
    [J]. 21ST CONFERENCE ON SOFTWARE ENGINEERING EDUCATION AND TRAINING, PROCEEDINGS, 2008, : 18 - 22
  • [7] HOW FAR HAVE WE COME
    ROSENZWEIG, L
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF MENTAL DEFICIENCY, 1959, 64 (01): : 12 - 18
  • [8] HOW FAR HAVE WE COME
    HEIMLICH, HJ
    [J]. EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES, 1982, 11 (01): : 82 - 83
  • [9] HOW FAR HAVE WE COME
    不详
    [J]. HUMAN ORGANIZATION, 1956, 15 (02) : 1 - 2
  • [10] How far have we come?
    Robinson, Priscilla
    Kool, Bridget
    [J]. AUSTRALIAN AND NEW ZEALAND JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH, 2015, 39 (06) : 505 - 505