CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 12Software Engineering ResearchAdvanced Software Engineering MethodologiesModel-Driven Software Engineering Techniques

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

A Case Study of Measuring Degeneration of Software Architectures from a Defect Perspective

Li, Zude, Long, Jun·2011·2011 18th Asia-Pacific Software Engineering Conference
DOI 10.1109/apsec.2011.51
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

It is considered that software architecture usually degrades as the system evolves. This phenomenon is termed as architectural degeneration. This paper describes a defect perspective for measuring architectural degeneration. Several metrics are defined for the measurement performed on two versions of a commercial compiler system. The main results are: (1) the architecture degenerates as the system evolves across the two versions, e.g., the quantity of code files changed to fix a source line of code in the following version increased by 90%; and (2) a few, correlated, components ("hotspots") in the architecture contribute more to the degeneration than other components. This implies that measuring architectural degeneration from the defect perspective can offer a potential to improve system quality and reduce maintenance costs.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/apsec.2011.51

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 30

  1. 10.1109/32.895984 · DOI
  2. 10.1109/ICSE.1994.296790 · DOI
  3. karr, 1996, An empirical exploration of code evolution, Proc of the 1st Int'l Workshop on Empirical Studies of Software Maintenance (WESS'96)
  4. basili, 1994, Goal question metric paradigm, Encyclopedia of Software Engineering, 1, 528
  5. 10.1007/s10664-011-9155-y · DOI
  6. 10.1002/bltj.2101 · DOI
  7. 10.1145/337180.337232 · DOI
  8. bhattacharya, 2007, Architecture assessment model for system evolution, Proc 5th Working IEEE/IFIP Conf on Software Architecture (WICSA'05), 8
  9. 10.1109/ICSM.2009.5306307 · DOI
  10. 10.1016/j.scico.2005.11.002 · DOI
  11. 10.1109/ICSM.1997.624225 · DOI
  12. 10.1109/ICSM.1998.738484 · DOI
  13. 10.1109/2.962984 · DOI
  14. 10.1016/0164-1212(90)90040-S · DOI
  15. 10.1109/32.879815 · DOI
  16. 10.1002/1096-908X(200009/10)12:5<287::AID-SMR214>3.0.CO;2-I · DOI
  17. 10.1145/390016.808455 · DOI
  18. 10.1145/69605.2085 · DOI
  19. 10.1109/32.83917 · DOI
  20. 10.1109/METRIC.2002.1011327 · DOI
  21. 10.1016/j.infsof.2005.05.007 · DOI
  22. tran, 1999, Forward and reverse repair of software architecture, Proc of the 9th Conf of the Centre for Advanced Studies on Collaborative Research (CASCON'99), 12
  23. 10.1016/0164-1212(79)90022-0 · DOI
  24. bass, 2003, Software Architecture in Practice (Second Edition)
  25. 10.1016/S0164-1212(01)00152-2 · DOI
  26. godfrey, 2000, Secrets from the monster: Extracting mozilla's software architecture, Proc of the 2nd Symposium of Constructing Software Engine Tools (CoSET'00), 15
  27. cusumano, 1998, Competing on Internet Time Lessons from Netscape and Its Battle with Microsoft
  28. 10.1145/800027.808439 · DOI
  29. 10.1109/32.917525 · DOI
  30. 10.1016/j.infsof.2004.11.005 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

  • Software Architecture in Practice: Challenges and Opportunities

    Wan, Z., Zhang, Y., Xia, X., Jiang, Y., & Lo, D. (2023) · Proceedings of the 31st ACM Joint European Software Engineering Conference and Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering · doi:10.1145/3611643.3616367 · Cited by 30

    “” Previous studies indicate that certain patterns of co-occurrence of code smells tend to be effective indicators of architectural erosion [9, 35, 53, 59].”
    Background

Metadata

Authors
Li, Z., & Long, J.
Affiliations
  • Western University (CA)
  • Central South University (CN)
ORCID
Long, Jun
Venue
2011 18th Asia-Pacific Software Engineering Conference
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2011-12
Pages
242-249
ISSN
1530-1362 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1109/apsec.2011.51
OpenAlex
W2091122638
Cited by
12
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 1
FWCI
0.48
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Asia-Pacific Software Engineering Conference (APSEC) (publishedVersion)
Funders
Program for New Century Excellent Talents in University
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Software Engineering Research
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Software › Advanced Software Engineering Methodologies
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Software › Model-Driven Software Engineering Techniques
Keywords
software architecture, software evolution, software quality, software maintenance, hot spots, software metrics

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