Skip to main content

Consistency among Domain Analysts in Selecting Domain Documents and Creating Vocabularies

  • Conference paper
  • 1289 Accesses

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNPSE,volume 7925))

Abstract

A study is reported on the consistency of the domain vocabularies created and the source documents selected by domain analysts for domain analysis using DARE (Domain Analysis and Reuse Environment). Consistency was analyzed by measuring the pairwise overlap scores between the domain analysts. The overlap scores of the vocabularies and the source documents were both found to be significantly greater than zero. The effect sizes were large. A positive correlation was also observed between overlap scores of the vocabularies and overlap scores of the source documents. The variability of domain vocabularies created automatically was compared to the variability of domain vocabularies produced manually by domain engineers. The variability of automatic and manual vocabularies was found to be significantly different. The difference was of medium effect size.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Frakes, W.B., Kang, K.C.: Software reuse research: status and future. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 31(7), 529–536 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Frakes, W., Prieto-Diaz, R., Fox, C.: DARE: Domain analysis and reuse environment. Ann. Softw. Eng. 5, 125–141 (1998)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Harsu, M.: FAST product-line architecture process. Tampere University of Technology (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Kang, K., et al.: Feature-oriented domain analysis (FODA) feasibility study. Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh (1990)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Simos, M.A.: Organization domain modeling (ODM): formalizing the core domain modeling life cycle. SIGSOFT Softw. Eng. Notes 20(SI), 196–205 (1995)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Kang, K., et al.: FORM: A feature-;oriented reuse method with domain-;specific reference architectures. Annals of Software Engineering 5(1), 143–168 (1998)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Tracz, W.: DSSA (Domain-Specific Software Architecture): pedagogical example. SIGSOFT Softw. Eng. Notes 20(3), 49–62 (1995)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Dos Santos, R.F., Frakes, W.B.: DAREonline: A Web-Based Domain Engineering Tool. In: Edwards, S.H., Kulczycki, G. (eds.) ICSR 2009. LNCS, vol. 5791, pp. 246–257. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  9. Riloff, E.: From Manual Knowledge Engineering to Bootstrapping: Progress in Information Extraction and NLP. In: Ashley, K.D., Bridge, D.G. (eds.) ICCBR 2003. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2689, p. 4. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  10. Seljan, S., Gašpar, A.: First Steps in Term and Collocation Extraction from English-Croatian Corpus (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Frakes, W.B., Baeza-Yates, R.: Information retrieval: Data structures & algorithms, vol. 152. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1992)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Yilmaz, O., Frakes, W.B.: A Case Study of Using Domain Engineering for the Conflation Algorithms Domain. In: Edwards, S.H., Kulczycki, G. (eds.) ICSR 2009. LNCS, vol. 5791, pp. 86–94. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  13. Das-Gupta, P., Katzer, J.: A study of the overlap among document representations. ACM, Bethesda (1983)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Tilley, J.: A Comparison of Statistical Filtering Methods for Automatic Term Extraction for Domain Analysis. In: Computer Science and Applications, p. 49. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Frakes, W., Baeza-Yates, R.: Information retrieval: Data structures & algorithms, vol. 152. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1992)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Frakes, W.B.: Stemming Algorithms. In: Frakes, W.B., Baeza-Yates, R. (eds.) Information Retrieval: Data Structures and Algorithms, pp. 131–160. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Porter, M.F.: An algorithm for suffix stripping. In: Karen Sparck, J., Peter, W. (eds.) Readings in Information Retrieval, pp. 313–316. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc. (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Paice, C.D.: Another stemmer. SIGIR Forum 24(3), 56–61 (1990)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Cohen, J.: Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences, 2nd edn. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Hillsdale (1988)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Nemmallapudi, C., Frakes, W.B., Anguswamy, R. (2013). Consistency among Domain Analysts in Selecting Domain Documents and Creating Vocabularies. In: Favaro, J., Morisio, M. (eds) Safe and Secure Software Reuse. ICSR 2013. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 7925. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-38977-1_15

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-38977-1_15

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-38976-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-38977-1

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics