The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A Systematic Survey of Program Comprehension through Dynamic Analysis
Open accessAbstract
Program comprehension is an important activity in software maintenance, as software must be sufficiently understood before it can be properly modified. The study of a program's execution, known as dynamic analysis, has become a common technique in this respect and has received substantial attention from the research community, particularly over the last decade. These efforts have resulted in a large research body of which currently there exists no comprehensive overview. This paper reports on a systematic literature survey aimed at the identification and structuring of research on program comprehension through dynamic analysis. From a research body consisting of 4,795 articles published in 14 relevant venues between July 1999 and June 2008 and the references therein, we have systematically selected 176 articles and characterized them in terms of four main facets: activity, target, method, and evaluation. The resulting overview offers insight in what constitutes the main contributions of the field, supports the task of identifying gaps and opportunities, and has motivated our discussion of several important research directions that merit additional consideration in the near future.
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
Empirical studies of agile software development: A systematic review
Dybå, T., & Dingsøyr, T. (2008) · Information and Software Technology · doi:10.1016/j.infsof.2008.01.006 · Cited by 2,668 · cited 1×
“In a first pass, we study all papers and write down words of interest that could be relevant for a particular facet (e.g., “survey,” or “feature analysis” for the activity facet).”
Background
Cited by
Ampatzoglou, A., Bibi, S., Avgeriou, P., Verbeek, M., & Chatzigeorgiou, A. (2019) · Information and Software Technology · doi:10.1016/j.infsof.2018.10.006 · Cited by 305
How do professionals perceive legacy systems and software modernization?
Khadka, R., Batlajery, B. V., Saeidi, A. M., Jansen, S., & Hage, J. (2014) · Proceedings of the 36th International Conference on Software Engineering · doi:10.1145/2568225.2568318 · Cited by 111
Using Data Fusion and Web Mining to Support Feature Location in Software
Revelle, M., Dit, B., & Poshyvanyk, D. (2010) · 2010 IEEE 18th International Conference on Program Comprehension · doi:10.1109/icpc.2010.10 · Cited by 105
On using grey literature and google scholar in systematic literature reviews in software engineering
Yasin, A., Fatima, R., Wen, L., Afzal, W., Azhar, M., & Torkar, R. (2020) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2020.2971712 · Cited by 85
Motivation and Satisfaction of Software Engineers
Franca, C., da Silva, F. Q. B., & Sharp, H. (2020) · IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering · doi:10.1109/tse.2018.2842201 · Cited by 79
Metadata
- Authors
- Cornelissen, B., Zaidman, A., van Deursen, A., Moonen, L., & Koschke, R.
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering
- Published
- 2009-09
- Volume
- 35
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 684-702
- ISSN
- 0098-5589 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2157943826
- Cited by
- 420
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 90.92
- Type
- journal article
- 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.
