Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 270

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Context in industrial software engineering research

Open access
Petersen, Kai, Wohlin, Claes·2009·2009 3rd International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement

Abstract

In order to draw valid conclusions when aggregating evidence it is important to describe the context in which industrial studies were conducted. This paper structures the context for empirical industrial studies and provides a checklist. The aim is to aid researchers in making informed decisions concerning which parts of the context to include in the descriptions. Furthermore, descriptions of industrial studies were surveyed.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/esem.2009.5316010

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cited by

See all 270

Metadata

Authors
Petersen, K., & Wohlin, C.
Venue
2009 3rd International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2009-10
Pages
401-404
ISSN
1938-6451 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2037316754
Cited by
270
References
1
FWCI
12.20
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
green

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

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.