Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 553

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Experimentation in software engineering

Basili, Victor R., Selby, Richard W., Hutchens, David H.·1986·IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering

Abstract

A framework is presented for analyzing most of the experimental work performed in software engineering over the past several years. The framework of experimentation consists of four categories corresponding to phases of the experimentation process: definition, planning, operation, and interpretation. A variety of experiments are described within the framework and their contribution to the software engineering discipline is discussed. Some recommendations for the application of the experimental process in software engineering are included.

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/tse.1986.6312975

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

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

Cited by

See all 553

Metadata

Authors
Basili, V. R., Selby, R. W., & Hutchens, D. H.
Venue
IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering
Published
1986-07
Volume
SE-12
Issue
7
Pages
733-743
ISSN
0098-5589 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2172287543
Cited by
553
References
0
FWCI
28.54
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: Experimentation in software engineering. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/tse.1986.6312975
The paper
Basili, V. R., Selby, R. W., & Hutchens, D. H. (1986). Experimentation in software engineering. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering. https://doi.org/10.1109/tse.1986.6312975

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.