FMESP: Framework for the modeling and evaluation of software processes

Proceedings of the ACM SIGSOFT Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering

Volumn 05-November-2004, Issue , 2004, Pages 5-13

  García, Félix ^a   Piattini, Mario ^a   Ruiz, Francisco ^a   Canfora, Gerardo ^b   Visaggio, Corrado A ^b  

^a Paseo de la Universidad 4   (Spain)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SANNIO   (Italy)

Author keywords

Conceptual framework; Software engineering environment; Software measurement; Software process modeling

Indexed keywords

ENGINEERING; INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING;

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKS; INTEGRATED MANAGEMENT; MODELING AND MEASUREMENT; SOFTWARE ENGINEERING ENVIRONMENTS; SOFTWARE MEASUREMENT; SOFTWARE PROCESS; SOFTWARE PROCESS MEASUREMENTS; SOFTWARE PROCESS MODELING;

SOFTWARE ENGINEERING;

EID: 84988857019     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1145/1151433.1151435     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (23)

1. Basili, V., and Rombach, H. The TAME project: towards improvement-oriented software environments. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 14, 6 (1988), 728-738.
2. Basili, V., Shull, F., and Lanubile, F. Building Knowledge through Families of Experiments. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 25, 4, (1999), 435-437.
3. Briand., L., Wüstn, J., and Lounis, H.A. Comprehensive Investigation of Quality Factors in Object-Oriented Designs: an Industrial Case Study. Technical Report ISERN-98-29, International Software Engineering Research Network, 1998.
4. Canfora, G., Garcia, F., Piattini, M., Ruiz, F., and Visaggio, C.A. A Family of Experiments to Validate Metrics for Software Process Models. Accepted for publication in Journal Systems and Software, 2005.
5. Canfora, G., Garcia, F., Piattini, M., Ruiz, F., and Visaggio, C.A. Applying a Framework for the Improvement of the Software Process Maturity in a Software Company. Journal Software Practice and Experience (review submitted), December 2004.
6. Ciolkowski, M., Shull, F., and Biffl, S. A Family of Experiments to Investigate the Influence of Context on the Effect of Inspection Techniques. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Empirical Assessment in Software Engineering (EASE), Keele (UK), 2002, 48-60.
7. Cook, J., Wolf, A. Software Process Validation: Quantitatively Measuring the Correspondence of a Process to a Model. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology, 8(2), 147-176.
8. Curtis, B. Maintaining the Software Process. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Software Maintenance (ICSM), IEEE Computer Society Press, Orlando, Florida, 1992, 2-8.
9. Florac, W.A. and Carleton, A.D. Measuring the Software Process. Statistical Process Control for Software Process Improvement, Addison Wesley, 1999.
10. Fuggetta, A. Software Process: A roadmap. In Proceedings of the 22th International Conference on Software Engineering, Limerick, Ireland, 2000, 25-34.
11. García, F., Ruiz, F., Piattini, M., and Polo, M. Conceptual Architecture for the Assessment and Improvement of Software Maintenance. Enterprise Information Systems IV, Piattini and Filipe (ed.), Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2002, 219-226.
12. García, F., Ruiz, F., Cruz, J., and Piattini, M. Integrated Measurement for the Evaluation and Improvement of Software Processes. In Proceedings of the 9th European Workshop on Software Process Technology (EWSPT'9), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, LNCS 2786, Helsinki (Finland), September 1-2, 2003, 94-111.
13. García, F. et al. An Ontology for Software Measurement, Technical Report UCLM DIAB-04-02-2. Computer Science Department, University of Castilla-La Mancha, Spain, 2004. http://www.info-ab.uclm.es/trep.php?&codtrep=DIAB-04-02-2.
14. Goldenson, D., Jarzombek, J. and Rout, T. Measurement and Analysis in Capability Maturity Model Integration Models and Software Process Improvement. CROSSTALK The Journal of Defense Software Engineering, 6(7), 20-24, 2003.
15. Gruber, T. Towards Principles for the Design of Ontologies used for Knowledge Sharing. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 43, 5/6, 1995, 907-928.
16. Meta Object Facility (MOF) Specification; version 1.4. Object Management Group (OMG), 2002.
17. Osterweil, L.J. Software Process are Software Too, Revisited. In Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE), Boston, MA, ACM Press, 1997, 540-548.
18. Poels, G. and Dedene, G. Distance-based software measurement: necessary and sufficient properties for software measures. Information and Software Technology, 42, 1, 2000, 35-46.
19. Ruiz, F., Piattini, M., García, F., and Polo, M. An XMIbased Repository for Software Process Metamodeling. In Proceedings of the Product Focused Software Process Improvement Conference (PROFES'2002), Rovaniemi (Finland), LNCS 2559, 2002, 546-558.
20. Software Process Engineering Metamodel Specification (SPEM); adopted specification, version 1.0. Object Management Group. November (2002).
21. Tautz, C. y Von Wangenheim, C. G. REFSENO: A Representation Formalism for Software Engineering Ontologies, version 1.1. 015.98/E. Fraunhofer IESE, 1998.
22. Vizcaino, A., Favela, J., Piattini, M., and García, F. 'Supporting Software Maintenance in Web Repositories through a Multi-Agent System'. In Proceedings of the Atlantic Web Intelligence Conference (AWIC'03), LNCS 2663, Madrid (Spain), 2003, 307-317.
23. XML Metadata Interchange (XMI) Specification; version 1.2. Object Management Group (OMG), 2002.