CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 17

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Software Engineering Antipatterns in Start-Ups

Klotins, Eriks, Unterkalmsteiner, Michael, Gorschek, Tony·2019·IEEE Software
DOI 10.1109/ms.2018.227105530
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

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/ms.2018.227105530

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.

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

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?

  • Software startups typically perform light-weight, informal and ad-hoc requirements engineering, in particular during the early stages of the startup venture due to limited resources.

    “Software startups typically perform light-weight, informal and ad-hoc requirements engineering, in particular during the early stages of the startup venture due to limited resources (Giardino et al. 2014;Klotins et al. 2019;Nguyen-Duc et al. 2017;Terho et al. 2016).”

    From An empirically based model of software prototyping: a mapping study and a multi-case study (2023) · cites this paper as Klotins et al. 2019

    Section 3.1 describes start-ups gathering requirements through interviews, brainstorming and customer feedback, while the Introduction notes their limited resources. The paper does not establish that requirements engineering is typically lightweight, informal and ad hoc, or that resource constraints cause this approach particularly in early stages. Page numbers were not available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 15

  1. melegati, 0, Requirements engineering in software startups: A grounded theory approach, Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Software Startup, 57
  2. 10.1109/52.903168 · DOI
  3. 10.1016/j.jss.2012.12.052 · DOI · Paper page
  4. 10.1109/MS.2014.50 · DOI
  5. 10.1109/MS.2017.84 · DOI
  6. 10.1109/52.854065 · DOI
  7. 10.1109/MS.2014.129 · DOI · Paper page
  8. 10.1007/978-3-319-18612-2_5 · DOI · Paper page
  9. 2018, 287 startup failure post-mortems
  10. crowne, 0, Why software product startups fail and what to do about it, Proc Engineering Management Conf, 338
  11. 10.1007/s10664-015-9380-x · DOI
  12. petersen, 2017, Choosing component origins for software Intensive systems: In-house, COTS, OSS or outsourcing?—A case survey, IEEE Trans Softw Eng, 44, 237, 10.1109/TSE.2017.2677909 · DOI
  13. blank, 2013, Why the Lean start up changes everything, Harv Bus Rev, 91, 64
  14. 2017, The State of European Tech 2017
  15. 10.1109/MS.2008.48 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Klotins, E., Unterkalmsteiner, M., & Gorschek, T.
Affiliations
  • Software Engineering, Blekinge Institute of Technology
  • Free University of Bozen-Bolzano
  • Blekinge Institute of Technology
ORCID
Klotins, Eriks
Venue
IEEE Software
Publisher
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE)
Published
2019-03
Volume
36
Issue
2
Pages
118-126
ISSN
  • 0740-7459
  • 1937-4194
DOI
10.1109/ms.2018.227105530
Cited by
17
References
0
Licence

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