Monteiro, A. S., A. B. Almeida, M. Goulao, F. B. Abreu, and P. Sousa,
"A Software Defect Report and Tracking System in an intranet",
Third European Conference on Software Maintenance and Reengineering, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, IEEE Computer Society, pp. 198-201, 1999.
Abstractn/a
n/a
Goulão, M., A. S. Monteiro, J. F. Martins, F. B. Abreu, A. B. Almeida, and P. Sousa,
"A Software Evolution Experiment",
European Software Control and Metrics Conference (ESCOM'98), Rome, Italy, Shakter Publishing B. V., 1998.
Abstractn/a
n/a
Goulão, M., N. Fonte, M. Wermelinger, and F. B. Abreu,
"Software Evolution Prediction Using Seasonal Time Analysis: a Comparative Study",
16th European Conference on Software Maintenance and Reengineering (CSMR 2012), Szeged, Hungary, IEEE Computer Society, 30 Mar., 2012.
Abstracthttp://doi.ieeecomputersociety.org/10.1109/CSMR.2012.30
Prediction models of software change requests are useful for supporting rational and timely resource
allocation to the evolution process. In this paper we use a time series forecasting model to predict software
maintenance and evolution requests in an open source software project (Eclipse), as an example of projects with seasonal release cycles. We build an ARIMA model based on data collected from Eclipse’s change request tracking system since the project’s start. A change request may refer to defects found in the software, but also to suggested improvements in the system under scrutiny. Our model includes the identification of seasonal patterns and tendencies, and is validated through the forecast of the change requests evolution for the next 12 months. The usage of seasonal information significantly improves the estimation ability of this model, when compared to other ARIMA models found in the literature, and does so for a much longer estimation period. Being able to accurately forecast the change requests’ evolution over a fairly long time period is an important ability for enabling adequate process control in maintenance activities, and facilitates
effort estimation and timely resources allocation. The approach presented in this paper is suitable for projects with a relatively long history, as the model building process relies on historic data.
Goulão, M., A. Moreira, J. Araújo, and J. P. Santos,
"Streamlining scenario modeling with Model-Driven Development: a case study",
Model-Driven Requirements Engineering Workshop (MoDRE 2011), at the 19th International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE 2011), Trento, Italy, IEEE Computer Society, pp. 55-63, 29 Aug., 2011.
Abstracthttp://dx.doi.org/10.1109/MoDRE.2011.6045367
Scenario modeling can be realized through different perspectives. In UML, scenarios are often modeled with activity models, in an early stage of development. Later, sequence diagrams are used to detail object interactions. The migration from activity diagrams to sequence diagrams is a repetitive and error-prone task. Model-Driven Development (MDD) can help streamlining this process, through transformation rules. Since the information in the activity model is insufficient to generate the corresponding complete sequence model, manual refinements are required. Our goal is to compare the relative effort of building the sequence diagrams manually with that of building them semi-automatically. Our results show a decrease in the number of operations required to build and refine the sequence model of approximately 64% when using MDD, when compared to the manual approach.
Almeida, C., M. Goulão, and J. Araújo,
"A Systematic Comparison of i* Modelling Tools Based on Syntactic and Well-Formedness Rules",
6th International i* (iStar) Workshop, Valencia, Spain, 17-18 Jun. , 2013.
AbstractThere are several tools currently available in the i * community. These tools have different features and purposes. Choosing the most adequate tool for a specific modelling situation can be a challenge. To overcome this diffculty, we present a systematic comparison of the i * tools listed in the i * wiki page, according to their features, syntax coverage and semantic analysis support. Our comparison highlights the
different strengths of those tools, to help identifying situations for which each tool might be particularly useful. We contribute with an aggregated vision of current i * tool support to the body of knowledge of the i * community. In addition, this comparison also helps identifying opportunities for further evolution of the surveyed tools.
Abreu, F. B., M. Goulão, and R. Esteves,
"Toward the Design Quality Evaluation of Object-Oriented Software Systems",
5th International Conference on Software Quality, Austin, Texas, EUA, American Society for Quality, pp. 44-57, 1995.
Abstractn/a
n/a
Barišić, A., V. Amaral, and M. Goulão,
"Usability Evaluation of Domain-Specific Languages",
Simpósio de Estudantes de Doutoramento em Engenharia de Software (SEDES 2012), hosted by QUATIC 2012, Lisbon, Portugal, IEEE CPS, 3 Sep., 2012.
AbstractDomain-Specific Languages (DSLs) are claimed to bring important productivity improvements to developers,
when compared to General-Purpose Languages (GPLs). The increased Usability is regarded as one of the key benefits of DSLs when compared to GPLs, and has an important impact on the achieved productivity of the DSL users. So, it is essential to build in good usability while developing the DSL. The purpose of this proposal is to contribute to the systematic activity of Software Language Engineering by focusing on the
issue of the Usability evaluation of DSLs. Usability evaluation is often skipped, relaxed, or at least omitted from papers reporting development of DSLs. We argue that a systematic approach based on User Interface experimental validation techniques should be used to assess the impact of new DSLs. For that purpose, we propose to merge common Usability evaluation processes with the DSL development process. In order to provide reliable metrics and tools we should reuse and identify good practices that exist in Human-Computer
Interaction community.
Bombonatti, D., C. Gralha, A. Moreira, J. Araújo, and M. Goulão,
"Usability of Requirements Techniques: A Systematic Literature Review",
The 31st ACM/SIGAPP Symposium on Applied Computing, Pisa, Italy, ACM/SIGAPP, 4-8 Apr., 2016.
AbstractThe usability of requirements engineering (RE) techniques has been recognised as a key factor for their successful adoption by industry. RE techniques must be accessible to stakeholders with different backgrounds, so they can be empowered to effectively and efficiently contribute to building successful systems. When selecting an appropriate requirements engineering technique for a given context, one should consider the usability supported by each of the candidate techniques. The first step towards achieving this goal is to gather the best evidence available on the usability of RE approaches by performing a systematic literature review, to answer one research question: How is the usability of requirements engineering techniques and tools addressed? We systematically review articles published in the Requirements Engineering Journal, one of the main sources for mature work in RE, to motivate a research roadmap to make RE approaches more accessible to stakeholders with different backgrounds.
Santos, M., C. Gralha, M. Goulão, J. Araújo, A. Moreira, and J. Cambeiro,
"What is the Impact of Bad Layout in the Understandability of Social Goal Models?",
24th IEEE International Conference on Requirements Engineering, Beijing, China, IEEE, 12-16, Sep., 2016.
AbstractThe i* community has published guidelines, including model layout guidelines, for the construction of models. Our goal is to evaluate the effect of the layout guidelines on the i* novice stakeholders’ ability to understand and review i* models. We conducted a quasi-experiment where participants were given two understanding and two reviewing tasks. Both tasks involved a model with a bad layout and another model following the i* layout guidelines. We evaluated the impact of layouts by combining the success level in those tasks and the required effort to accomplish them. Effort was assessed using time, perceived complexity (with NASA TLX), and eye-tracking data. Participants were more successful in understanding than in reviewing tasks. However, we found no statistically significant difference in the success, time taken, or perceived complexity, between tasks conducted with models with a bad layout and models with a good layout. Most participants had little to no prior knowledge in i*, making them more representative of stakeholders with no requirements engineering expertise. They were able to understand the models fairly well after a short tutorial, but struggled when reviewing models. Adherence to the existing i* layout guidelines did not significantly impact i* model understanding and reviewing performance.