.png){kind=icon}
返回
A study into the practice of reporting software engineering experiments
.png){kind=icon}
OA
AI
DOI：10.1007/s10664-021-10007-3.png)
.png){kind=icon}
.png){kind=icon}
分享.png){kind=icon}
收藏
摘要
En 中文
It has been argued that reporting software engineering experiments in a standardized way helps researchers find relevant information, understand how experiments were conducted and assess the validity of their results. Various guidelines have been proposed specifically for software engineering experiments. The benefits of such guidelines have often been emphasized, but the actual uptake and practice of reporting have not yet been investigated since the introduction of many of the more recent guidelines. In this research, we utilize a mixed-method study design including sequence analysis techniques for evaluating to which extent papers follow such guidelines. Our study focuses on the four most prominent software engineering journals and the time period from 2000 to 2020. Our results show that many experimental papers miss information suggested by guidelines, that no de facto standard sequence for reporting exists, and that many papers do not cite any guidelines. We discuss these findings and implications for the discipline of experimental software engineering focusing on the review process and the potential to refine and extend guidelines, among others, to account for theory explicitly.
Keyword:
Guideline for software engineering experiments
Controlled experiments
Process mining
Method mining
AI总结
对已上传原文的论文进行重点信息的提取，主要内容包括：简要概述、研究摘要、背景介绍、关键亮点、图文解析、展望与总结。
期刊
IF:
3.6
论文数:
2.0K
被引数:
5.3K
机构
引用论文
.png){kind=icon}
分享收藏Electricity market prices for day-ahead ancillary services and energy: Texas前一天辅助服务和能源的电力市场价格: 德克萨斯州
PREAI
分享收藏
查看更多内容