Rafael Figueira Goncalves
ABSTRACT
Context: the Internet of Things (IoT) is a paradigm that provides an ecosystem for a fast-growing quantity of connected devices, also defined as cyber-physical devices. Problem: the creation of Internet of Things solutions is fairly complex, having to integrate and communicate between sensors, devices, and larger systems, presenting many technical challenges not present in the same magnitude as other paradigms. One of the most affected segments is the development of cyber-physical devices. Much of its development energy is spent on the connecting and efficacy of these devices, often overlooking the future impacts of the proposed solution, caused by a lack of software quality. Solution: The execution of a Systematic Mapping in order to bring attention to possible research gaps. SI Theory: This work follows the accepted protocols for systematic mappings, meta-analysis, and Hermeneutics. Methodology: this paper executes a systematic mapping, following well-accepted guidelines in order to systematically gather, include and classify scientific papers according to IoT devices’ own characteristics. Results: 8146 studies were found and reduced to 211 relevant studies that focused on client-side IoT development had their data graphed and analyzed. Our results show a lack of software metrics used, many research gaps and correlations were discovered, when in respect to specific software quality properties as described by the ISO25010 and other characteristics collected, such as programming languages and study domain. Contributions: The main contribution of this study is to expose multiple research gaps present in IoT client-side development. Providing a background for future information system studies on techniques and tools to improve IoT development.
- [n.d.]. World Internet Users Statistics and 2019 World Population Stats. https://www.internetworldstats.com/stats.htmGoogle Scholar
- Fadele Ayotunde Alaba, Mazliza Othman, Ibrahim Abaker Targio Hashem, and Faiz Alotaibi. 2017. Internet of Things security: A survey. Journal of Network and Computer Applications 88, March(2017), 10–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnca.2017.04.002Google ScholarDigital Library
- Mohsen Hallaj Asghar, Atul Negi, and Nasibeh Mohammadzadeh. 2015. Principle application and vision in Internet of Things (IoT). International Conference on Computing, Communication and Automation, ICCCA 2015 (2015), 427–431. https://doi.org/10.1109/CCAA.2015.7148413Google ScholarCross Ref
- Luigi Atzori, Antonio Iera, and Giacomo Morabito. 2010. The Internet of Things: A survey. Computer Networks 54, 15 (oct 2010), 2787–2805. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comnet.2010.05.010Google ScholarDigital Library
- Miroslav Bures, Tomas Cerny, and Bestoun S. Ahmed. 2018. Internet of Things: Current challenges in the quality assurance and testing methods. arXiv (2018), 625–634.Google Scholar
- Louis Coetzee and Johan Eksteen. 2011. Internet of things–promise for the future? An Introduction. (2011).Google Scholar
- Mariela Cortés, Raphael Saraiva, Marcia Souza, Patricia Mello, and Pamella Soares. 2019. Adoption of software testing in internet of things: a systematic literature mapping. In Proceedings of the IV Brazilian Symposium on Systematic and Automated Software Testing.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Ricardo Theis Geraldi, Sheila Reinehr, and Andreia Malucelli. 2020. Software product line applied to the internet of things: A systematic literature review. Information and Software Technology 124, February (2020), 106293. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2020.106293Google ScholarCross Ref
- Richard Grimmett. 2015. Raspberry Pi robotics projects. Packt Publishing Ltd.Google Scholar
- Jayavardhana Gubbi, Rajkumar Buyya, Slaven Marusic, and Marimuthu Palaniswami. 2013. Internet of Things (IoT): A vision, architectural elements, and future directions. Future generation computer systems 29, 7 (2013), 1645–1660. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.future.2013.01.010Google ScholarDigital Library
- Jenalea Howell. [n.d.]. Number of Connected IoT Devices Will Surge to 125 Billion by 2030, IHS Markit Says. https://technology.ihs.com/596542/number-of-connected-iot-devices-will-surge-to-125-billion-by-2030-ihs-markit-saysGoogle Scholar
- Mehdi Imani, Abolfazl Qiasi Moghadam, Nasrin Zarif, Maaruf Ali, Omekolsoom Noshiri, Kimia Faramarzi, Hamid Arabnia, and Majid Joudaki. 2018. A comprehensive survey on addressing methods in the Internet of Things. arXiv preprint arXiv:1807.02173(2018).Google Scholar
- ISO 25010:2011 2011. ISO25010 - Systems and software engineering — Systems and software Quality Requirements and Evaluation (SQuaRE) — System and software quality models. Standard. International Organization for Standardization.Google Scholar
- Adeel Javed. 2016. Building Arduino projects for the Internet of Things: experiments with real-world applications. Apress.Google Scholar
- Barbara Kitchenham, O. Pearl Brereton, David Budgen, Mark Turner, John Bailey, and Stephen Linkman. 2009. Systematic literature reviews in software engineering - A systematic literature review. Information and Software Technology 51, 1 (2009), 7–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2008.09.009Google ScholarDigital Library
- Barbara A. Kitchenham, David Budgen, and O. Pearl Brereton. 2010. The value of mapping studies – A participant-observer case study. (2010). https://doi.org/10.14236/ewic/ease2010.4Google Scholar
- Hari Kishan Kondaveeti, Nandeesh Kumar Kumaravelu, Sunny Dayal Vanambathina, Sudha Ellison Mathe, and Suseela Vappangi. 2021. A systematic literature review on prototyping with Arduino: Applications, challenges, advantages, and limitations. Computer Science Review 40 (2021), 100364. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosrev.2021.100364Google ScholarDigital Library
- Mohit Kuri, Sai Anirudh Karre, and Y Raghu Reddy. 2021. Understanding Software Quality Metrics for Virtual Reality Products - A Mapping Study. In 14th Innovations in Software Engineering Conference (Formerly Known as India Software Engineering Conference)(ISEC 2021). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA. https://doi.org/10.1145/3452383.3452391Google ScholarDigital Library
- JR Landis and GG Koch. 1977. Landis amd Koch1977_agreement of categorical data. Biometrics 33, 1 (1977), 159–174.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Wei Li. 1998. Another metric suite for object-oriented programming. Journal of Systems and Software 44, 2 (1998), 155–162. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0164-1212(98)10052-3Google ScholarDigital Library
- Leonardo Ribeiro Machado, Francisco J da Silva, Alex Barradas, Davi Viana, Ariel Teles, and Luciano Coutinho. 2020. Product Quality for Smart Cities Applications: A Mapping Study. In XVI Brazilian Symposium on Information Systems. 1–8.Google Scholar
- Phu Hong Nguyen, Nicolas Ferry, Gencer Erdogan, Hui Song, Stéphane Lavirotte, Jean-Yves Tigli, and Arnor Solberg. 2019. A Systematic Mapping Study of Deployment and Orchestration Approaches for IoT.. In IoTBDS. 69–82.Google Scholar
- Alberto S. Nuñez-Varela, Héctor G. Pérez-Gonzalez, Francisco E. Martínez-Perez, and Carlos Soubervielle-Montalvo. 2017. Source code metrics: A systematic mapping study. Journal of Systems and Software 128 (2017), 164–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2017.03.044Google ScholarDigital Library
- K. V.Jeeva Padmini, H. M.N. Dilum Bandara, and Indika Perera. 2015. Use of software metrics in agile software development process. MERCon 2015 - Moratuwa Engineering Research Conference (2015), 312–317. https://doi.org/10.1109/MERCon.2015.7112365Google ScholarCross Ref
- Kai Petersen, Robert Feldt, Shahid Mujtaba, and Michael Mattsson. 2008. Systematic mapping studies in software engineering. In 12th International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering (EASE) 12. 1–10.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Kai Petersen, Sairam Vakkalanka, and Ludwik Kuzniarz. 2015. Guidelines for conducting systematic mapping studies in software engineering: An update. Information and Software Technology 64 (2015), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2015.03.007Google ScholarDigital Library
- Rafael Roberto, João Paulo Lima, and Veronica Teichrieb. 2016. Tracking for mobile devices: A systematic mapping study. Computers and Graphics (Pergamon) 56 (2016), 20–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cag.2016.02.002Google ScholarDigital Library
- Paul C. Van Oorschot and Sean W. Smith. 2019. The Internet of Things: Security Challenges. IEEE Security and Privacy 17, 5 (2019), 7–9. https://doi.org/10.1109/MSEC.2019.2925918Google ScholarCross Ref
- Gary White, Vivek Nallur, and Siobhán Clarke. 2017. Quality of service approaches in IoT: A systematic mapping. Journal of Systems and Software 132 (2017), 186–203.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Sabine Wolny, Alexandra Mazak, and Bernhard Wally. 2018. An Initial Mapping Study on MDE4IoT.. In MODELS Workshops. 524–529.Google Scholar
- Michalis Xenos, D Stavrinoudis, K Zikouli, and D Christodoulakis. 2000. Object-oriented metrics-a survey. Proceedings of the FESMA, 1–10.Google Scholar
Index Terms
- Systematic Mapping on Internet of Things’ Client-Sided Development
Recommendations
The internet of things: a survey
In recent year, the Internet of Things (IoT) has drawn significant research attention. IoT is considered as a part of the Internet of the future and will comprise billions of intelligent communicating `things'. The future of the Internet will consist of ...
Internet of Things: information security challenges and solutions
Keeping up with the burgeoning Internet of Things (IoT) requires staying up to date on the latest network attack trends in dynamic and complicated cyberspace, and take them into account while developing holistic information security (IS) approaches for ...
A systematic mapping study on internet of things challenges
SERP4IoT '19: Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Software Engineering Research & Practices for the Internet of ThingsThe challenge of developing IoT-based systems has been found to be a complex problem It is influenced by number of factors: heterogeneous devices/resources, various perception-action cycles and widely distributed devices and computing resources. ...
Comments