Evaluating the effect of composite states on the understandability of UML statechart diagrams

Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics)

Volumn 3713 LNCS, Issue , 2005, Pages 113-125

  Cruz Lemus, José A ^a   Genero, Marcela ^a   Manso, M Esperanza ^b   Piattini, Mario ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CASTILLA LA MANCHA   (Spain)

^b UNIVERSITY OF VALLADOLID   (Spain)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CODES (SYMBOLS); COMPUTER ARCHITECTURE; COMPUTER SYSTEMS; SOFTWARE ENGINEERING;

COMPOSITE STATES; MODEL DRIVEN ARCHITECTURE (MDA); STATECHART DIAGRAMS;

COMPUTER GRAPHICS;

EID: 33646256553     PISSN: 03029743     EISSN: 16113349     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1007/11557432_9     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (16)

1. Basili, V., Shull, F. and Lanubile, F.: Building Knowledge through Families of Experiments. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, Vol. 25(1999) 456-473
2. Cruz-Lemus, J. A., Genero, M. and Piattini, M.: Metrics for UML Statechart Diagrams. In: Metrics for Software Conceptual Models. Genero, Piattini and Calero (eds.), Imperial College Press, UK (2005)
3. Cruz-Lemus, J. A., Maes, A., Genero, M., Poels, G. and Piattini, M.: Analyzing Data Extracted from a Family of Experiments for Evaluating UML Statechart Diagrams Understandability. Research Working Paper, University of Ghent (to appear) (2005)
4. Denger, C. and Ciolkowski, M.: High Quality Statecharts through Tailored. Perspective-Based Inspections. Proc. of 29th EUROMICRO Conference "New Waves in System Architecture". Belek, Turkey. (2003) 316-325
5. Erickson, J. and Siau, K.: Theoretical and Practical Complexity of UML. Proc. of 10th Americas Conference on Information Systems. New York, USA. (2004) 1669-1674
6. Höst, M., Regnell, B. and Wohlin, C.: Using Students as Subjects - a Comparative Study of Students & Professionals in Lead-Time Impact Assessment. Proc. of 4th Conference on Empirical Assessment & Evaluation in Software Engineering (EASE 2000). Keele, UK. (2000) 201-214
7. Kitchenham, B., Pfleeger, S., Pickard, L., Jones, P., Hoaglin, D., El-Emam, K. and Rosenberg, J.: Preliminary Guidelines for Empirical Research in Software Engineering. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 28 Vol. 8. (2002) 721-734
8. Object Management Group: UML Revision Task Force. OMG Unified Modeling Language Specification, v.1.4. document formal/01-09-67. (2001)
9. Object Management Group: MDA - The OMG Model Driven Architecture. (2002)
10. Reynoso, L., Genero, M. and Piattini, M.: Measuring OCL Expressions: An approach based on Cognitive Techniques. In: Metrics for Software Conceptual Models, Genero, Piattini and Calero (eds.), Imperial College Press, UK. (2005)
11. Rumbaugh, J., Jacobson, I. and Booch, G.: The Unified Modeling Language Reference Manual, Second Edition. Addison-Wesley. (2005)
12. Selic, B.: The Pragmatics of Model-Driven Development. IEEE Software, 20 Vol. 5. (2003) 19-25.
13. SPSS: SPSS 11.5, Syntax Reference Guide, Chicago, USA, SPSS Inc. (2002)
14. Thomas, D.: MDA: Revenge of the Modelers or UML Utopia? IEEE Software, 21 Vol. 3. (2004) 15-17
15. Vereist, J.: The Influence of the Level of Abstraction on the Evolvability of Conceptual Models of Information Systems. Proc. of 3rd International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering (ISESE 2004). Redondo Beach, USA. (2004) 17-26.
16. Wohlin, C., Runeson, P., Hast, M., Ohlsson, M.C., Regnell, B. and Wesslen, A.: Experimentation in Software Engineering: an Introduction. Kluwer Academic Publisher. (2000)