The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Understanding code mobility
Abstract
The technologies, architectures, and methodologies traditionally used to develop distributed applications exhibit a variety of limitations and drawbacks when applied to large scale distributed settings (e.g., the Internet). In particular, they fail in providing the desired degree of configurability, scalability, and customizability. To address these issues, researchers are investigating a variety of innovative approaches. The most promising and intriguing ones are those based on the ability of moving code across the nodes of a network, exploiting the notion of mobile code. As an emerging research field, code mobility is generating a growing body of scientific literature and industrial developments. Nevertheless, the field is still characterized by the lack of a sound and comprehensive body of concepts and terms. As a consequence, it is rather difficult to understand, assess, and compare the existing approaches. In turn, this limits our ability to fully exploit them in practice, and to further promote the research work on mobile code. Indeed, a significant symptom of this situation is the lack of a commonly accepted and sound definition of the term mobile code itself. This paper presents a conceptual framework for understanding code mobility. The framework is centered around a classification that introduces three dimensions: technologies, design paradigms, and applications. The contribution of the paper is two-fold. First, it provides a set of terms and concepts to understand and compare the approaches based on the notion of mobile code. Second, it introduces criteria and guidelines that support the developer in the identification of the classes of applications that can leverage off of mobile code, in the design of these applications, and, finally, in the selection of the most appropriate implementation technologies. The presentation of the classification is intertwined with a review of state-of-the-art in the field. Finally, the use of the classification is exemplified in a case study.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Intelligent agents: theory and practice
Wooldridge, M., & Jennings, N. R. (1995) · The Knowledge Engineering Review · doi:10.1017/s0269888900008122 · Cited by 6,810
Cited by
Principled design of the modern Web architecture
Fielding, R. T., & Taylor, R. N. (2000) · Proceedings of the 22nd international conference on Software engineering - ICSE '00 · doi:10.1145/337180.337228 · Cited by 263
On the Architecture of Liquid Software: Technology Alternatives and Design Space
Gallidabino, A., Pautasso, C., Ilvonen, V., Mikkonen, T., Systa, K., Voutilainen, J.-P., & Taivalsaari, A. (2016) · 2016 13th Working IEEE/IFIP Conference on Software Architecture (WICSA) · doi:10.1109/wicsa.2016.14 · Cited by 26
Simulating malware with MAlSim
Leszczyna, R., Nai Fovino, I., & Masera, M. (2010) · Journal in Computer Virology · doi:10.1007/s11416-008-0088-y · Cited by 23
Metadata
- Authors
- Fuggetta, A., Picco, G. P., & Vigna, G.
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering
- Published
- 1998-05
- Volume
- 24
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 342-361
- ISSN
- 0098-5589 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2106529232
- Cited by
- 1,172
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 74.83
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Understanding code mobility. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/32.685258
- The paper
- Fuggetta, A., Picco, G. P., & Vigna, G. (1998). Understanding code mobility. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering. https://doi.org/10.1109/32.685258
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.