-
Thoughts on Learning Human and Programming Languages
Authors:
Daniel S. Katz,
Jeffrey C. Carver
Abstract:
This is a virtual dialog between Jeffrey C. Carver and Daniel S. Katz on how people learn programming languages. It's based on a talk Jeff gave at the first US-RSE Conference (US-RSE'23), which led Dan to think about human languages versus computer languages. Dan discussed this with Jeff at the conference, and this discussion continued asynchronous, with this column being a record of the discussio…
▽ More
This is a virtual dialog between Jeffrey C. Carver and Daniel S. Katz on how people learn programming languages. It's based on a talk Jeff gave at the first US-RSE Conference (US-RSE'23), which led Dan to think about human languages versus computer languages. Dan discussed this with Jeff at the conference, and this discussion continued asynchronous, with this column being a record of the discussion.
△ Less
Submitted 22 July, 2024;
originally announced July 2024.
-
AIRA: A Low-cost IR-based Approach Towards Autonomous Precision Drone Landing and NLOS Indoor Navigation
Authors:
Yanchen Liu,
Minghui Zhao,
Kaiyuan Hou,
Junxi Xia,
Charlie Carver,
Stephen Xia,
Xia Zhou,
Xiaofan Jiang
Abstract:
Automatic drone landing is an important step for achieving fully autonomous drones. Although there are many works that leverage GPS, video, wireless signals, and active acoustic sensing to perform precise landing, autonomous drone landing remains an unsolved challenge for palm-sized microdrones that may not be able to support the high computational requirements of vision, wireless, or active audio…
▽ More
Automatic drone landing is an important step for achieving fully autonomous drones. Although there are many works that leverage GPS, video, wireless signals, and active acoustic sensing to perform precise landing, autonomous drone landing remains an unsolved challenge for palm-sized microdrones that may not be able to support the high computational requirements of vision, wireless, or active audio sensing. We propose AIRA, a low-cost infrared light-based platform that targets precise and efficient landing of low-resource microdrones. AIRA consists of an infrared light bulb at the landing station along with an energy efficient hardware photodiode (PD) sensing platform at the bottom of the drone. AIRA costs under 83 USD, while achieving comparable performance to existing vision-based methods at a fraction of the energy cost. AIRA requires only three PDs without any complex pattern recognition models to accurately land the drone, under $10$cm of error, from up to $11.1$ meters away, compared to camera-based methods that require recognizing complex markers using high resolution images with a range of only up to $1.2$ meters from the same height. Moreover, we demonstrate that AIRA can accurately guide drones in low light and partial non line of sight scenarios, which are difficult for traditional vision-based approaches.
△ Less
Submitted 8 July, 2024;
originally announced July 2024.
-
Human Error Management in Requirements Engineering: Should We Fix the People, the Processes, or the Environment?
Authors:
Sweta Mahaju,
Jeffrey C. Carver,
Gary L. Bradshaw
Abstract:
Context: Software development is human-centric and vulnerable to human error. Human errors are errors in the human thought process. To ensure software quality, practitioners must understand how to manage these human errors. Organizations often change the requirements engineering process to prevent human errors from occurring or to mitigate the harm caused when those errors do occur. While there ar…
▽ More
Context: Software development is human-centric and vulnerable to human error. Human errors are errors in the human thought process. To ensure software quality, practitioners must understand how to manage these human errors. Organizations often change the requirements engineering process to prevent human errors from occurring or to mitigate the harm caused when those errors do occur. While there are studies on human error management in other disciplines, research on the prevention and mitigation of human errors in software engineering, and requirements engineering specifically, are limited. The software engineering studies do not provide strong results about the types of changes that are most effective in requirements engineering. Objective: The goal of this paper is to develop a taxonomy of human error prevention and mitigation strategies based on data from requirements engineering professionals. Method: We performed a qualitative analysis of two practitioner surveys on requirements engineering practices to identify and classify strategies for the prevention and mitigation of human errors. Results: We organized the human error management strategies into a taxonomy based on whether they primarily affect People, Processes, or the Environment. Inside each high-level category, we further organized the strategies into low-level classes. More than 50% of the reported strategies require a change in Process, 23% require a change in Environment, 21% require a change in People, with the remaining 5% too ambiguous to classify. In addition, more than 50\% of the strategies focus on Management activities. Conclusions: The Human Error Management Taxonomy provides a systematic classification and organization of strategies for prevention and mitigation of human errors in requirements engineering. This systematic organization provides a foundation upon which research can build.
△ Less
Submitted 5 April, 2023;
originally announced April 2023.
-
Community Smells -- The Sources of Social Debt: A Systematic Literature Review
Authors:
Eduardo Cabllero-Espinosa,
Jeffrey C. Carver,
Kimberly Stowers
Abstract:
Context: Social debt describes the accumulation of unforeseen project costs (or potential costs) from sub-optimal software development processes. Community smells are sociotechnical anti-patterns and one source of social debt that impact software teams, development processes, outcomes, and organizations. Objective: To provide an overview of community smells based on published literature, and descr…
▽ More
Context: Social debt describes the accumulation of unforeseen project costs (or potential costs) from sub-optimal software development processes. Community smells are sociotechnical anti-patterns and one source of social debt that impact software teams, development processes, outcomes, and organizations. Objective: To provide an overview of community smells based on published literature, and describe future research. Method: We conducted a systematic literature review (SLR) to identify properties, understand origins and evolution, and describe the emergence of community smells. This SLR explains the impact of community smells on teamwork and team performance. Results: We include 25 studies. Social debt describes the impacts of poor socio-technical decisions on work environments, people, software products, and society. For each of the 30 identified community smells, we provide a description, management approaches, organizational strategies, and mitigation effectiveness. We identify five groups of management approaches: organizational strategies, frameworks, models, tools, and guidelines. We describe 11 properties of community smells. We develop the Community Smell Stages Framework to concisely describe the origin and evolution of community smells. We describe the causes and effects for each community smell. We identify and describe 8 types of causes and 11 types of effects for community smells. Finally, we provide 8 Sankey diagrams that offer insights into threats the community smells pose to teamwork factors and team performance. Conclusion: Community smells explain the influence work conditions have on software developers. The literature is scarce and focuses on a small number of community smells. Thus, community smells still need more research. This review organizes the state of the art about community smells and provides motivation for future research along with educational material.
△ Less
Submitted 21 September, 2022;
originally announced September 2022.
-
Testing Research Software: A Survey
Authors:
Nasir U. Eisty,
Jeffrey C. Carver
Abstract:
Background: Research software plays an important role in solving real-life problems, empowering scientific innovations, and handling emergency situations. Therefore, the correctness and trustworthiness of research software are of absolute importance. Software testing is an important activity for identifying problematic code and helping to produce high-quality software. However, testing of research…
▽ More
Background: Research software plays an important role in solving real-life problems, empowering scientific innovations, and handling emergency situations. Therefore, the correctness and trustworthiness of research software are of absolute importance. Software testing is an important activity for identifying problematic code and helping to produce high-quality software. However, testing of research software is difficult due to the complexity of the underlying science, relatively unknown results from scientific algorithms, and the culture of the research software community. Aims: The goal of this paper is to better understand current testing practices, identify challenges, and provide recommendations on how to improve the testing process for research software development. Method: We surveyed members of the research software developer community to collect information regarding their knowledge about and use of software testing in their projects. Results: We analysed 120 responses and identified that even though research software developers report they have an average level of knowledge about software testing, they still find it difficult due to the numerous challenges involved. However, there are a number of ways, such as proper training, that can improve the testing process for research software. Conclusions: Testing can be challenging for any type of software. This difficulty is especially present in the development of research software, where software engineering activities are typically given less attention. To produce trustworthy results from research software, there is a need for a culture change so that testing is valued and teams devote appropriate effort to writing and executing tests.
△ Less
Submitted 31 May, 2022;
originally announced May 2022.
-
Training Computing Educators to Become Computing Education Researchers
Authors:
Jeffrey C. Carver,
Sarah Heckman,
Mark Sherriff
Abstract:
The computing education community endeavors to consistently move forward, improving the educational experience of our students. As new innovations in computing education practice are learned and shared, however, these papers may not exhibit the desired qualities that move simple experience reports to true Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL). We report on our six years of experience in runn…
▽ More
The computing education community endeavors to consistently move forward, improving the educational experience of our students. As new innovations in computing education practice are learned and shared, however, these papers may not exhibit the desired qualities that move simple experience reports to true Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL). We report on our six years of experience in running professional development for computing educators in empirical research methods for social and behavioral studies in the classroom. Our goal is to have a direct impact on instructors who are in the beginning stages of transitioning their educational innovations from anecdotal to empirical results that can be replicated by instructors at other institutions. To achieve this, we created a year-long mentoring experience, beginning with a multi-day workshop on empirical research methods during the summer, followed by regular mentoring sessions with participants, and culminating in a follow-up session at the following year's SIGCSE Technical Symposium. From survey results and as evidenced by eventual research results and publications from participants, we believe that our method of structuring empirical research professional development was successful and could be a model for similar programs in other areas.
△ Less
Submitted 11 October, 2021;
originally announced October 2021.
-
Developers Perception of Peer Code Review in Research Software Development
Authors:
Nasir U. Eisty,
Jeffrey C. Carver
Abstract:
Background: Research software is software developed by and/or used by researchers, across a wide variety of domains, to perform their research. Because of the complexity of research software, developers cannot conduct exhaustive testing. As a result, researchers have lower confidence in the correctness of the output of the software. Peer code review, a standard software engineering practice, has h…
▽ More
Background: Research software is software developed by and/or used by researchers, across a wide variety of domains, to perform their research. Because of the complexity of research software, developers cannot conduct exhaustive testing. As a result, researchers have lower confidence in the correctness of the output of the software. Peer code review, a standard software engineering practice, has helped address this problem in other types of software. Aims: Peer code review is less prevalent in research software than it is in other types of software. In addition, the literature does not contain any studies about the use of peer code review in research software. Therefore, through analyzing developers perceptions, the goal of this work is to understand the current practice of peer code review in the development of research software, identify challenges and barriers associated with peer code review in research software, and present approaches to improve the peer code review in research software. Method: We conducted interviews and a community survey of research software developers to collect information about their current peer code review practices, difficulties they face, and how they address those difficulties. Results: We received 84 unique responses from the interviews and surveys. The results show that while research software teams review a large amount of their code, they lack formal process, proper organization, and adequate people to perform the reviews. Conclusions: Use of peer code review is promising for improving the quality of research software and thereby improving the trustworthiness of the underlying research results. In addition, by using peer code review, research software developers produce more readable and understandable code, which will be easier to maintain.
△ Less
Submitted 22 September, 2021;
originally announced September 2021.
-
A Systematic Literature Review of Empiricism and Norms of Reporting in Computing Education Research Literature
Authors:
Sarah Heckman,
Jeffrey C. Carver,
Mark Sherriff,
Ahmed Al-Zubidy
Abstract:
Computing Education Research (CER) is critical for supporting the increasing number of students who need to learn computing skills. To systematically advance knowledge, publications must be clear enough to support replications, meta-analyses, and theory-building. The goal of this study is to characterize the reporting of empiricism in CER literature by identifying whether publications include info…
▽ More
Computing Education Research (CER) is critical for supporting the increasing number of students who need to learn computing skills. To systematically advance knowledge, publications must be clear enough to support replications, meta-analyses, and theory-building. The goal of this study is to characterize the reporting of empiricism in CER literature by identifying whether publications include information to support replications, meta-analyses, and theory building. The research questions are: RQ1) What percentage of papers in CER venues have empirical evaluation? RQ2) What are the characteristics of the empirical evaluation? RQ3) Do the papers with empirical evaluation follow reporting norms (both for inclusion and for labeling of key information)? We conducted an SLR of 427 papers published during 2014 and 2015 in five CER venues: SIGCSE TS, ICER, ITiCSE, TOCE, and CSE. We developed and applied the CER Empiricism Assessment Rubric. Over 80% of papers had some form of empirical evaluation. Quantitative evaluation methods were the most frequent. Papers most frequently reported results on interventions around pedagogical techniques, curriculum, community, or tools. There was a split in papers that had some type of comparison between an intervention and some other data set or baseline. Many papers lacked properly reported research objectives, goals, research questions, or hypotheses, description of participants, study design, data collection, and threats to validity. CER authors are contributing empirical results to the literature; however, not all norms for reporting are met. We encourage authors to provide clear, labeled details about their work so readers can use the methodologies and results for replications and meta-analyses. As our community grows, our reporting of CER should mature to help establish computing education theory to support the next generation of computing learners.
△ Less
Submitted 2 July, 2021;
originally announced July 2021.
-
Addressing Research Software Sustainability via Institutes
Authors:
Daniel S. Katz,
Jeffrey C. Carver,
Neil P. Chue Hong,
Sandra Gesing,
Simon Hettrick,
Tom Honeyman,
Karthik Ram,
Nicholas Weber
Abstract:
Research software is essential to modern research, but it requires ongoing human effort to sustain: to continually adapt to changes in dependencies, to fix bugs, and to add new features. Software sustainability institutes, amongst others, develop, maintain, and disseminate best practices for research software sustainability, and build community around them. These practices can both reduce the amou…
▽ More
Research software is essential to modern research, but it requires ongoing human effort to sustain: to continually adapt to changes in dependencies, to fix bugs, and to add new features. Software sustainability institutes, amongst others, develop, maintain, and disseminate best practices for research software sustainability, and build community around them. These practices can both reduce the amount of effort that is needed and create an environment where the effort is appreciated and rewarded. The UK SSI is such an institute, and the US URSSI and the Australian AuSSI are planning to become institutes, and this extended abstract discusses them and the strengths and weaknesses of this approach.
△ Less
Submitted 5 March, 2021;
originally announced March 2021.
-
Sustaining Research Software via Research Software Engineers and Professional Associations
Authors:
Jeffrey C. Carver,
Ian A. Cosden,
Chris Hill,
Sandra Gesing,
Daniel S. Katz
Abstract:
Research software is a class of software developed to support research. Today a wealth of such software is created daily in universities, government, and commercial research enterprises worldwide. The sustainability of this software faces particular challenges due, at least in part, to the type of people who develop it. These Research Software Engineers (RSEs) face challenges in developing and sus…
▽ More
Research software is a class of software developed to support research. Today a wealth of such software is created daily in universities, government, and commercial research enterprises worldwide. The sustainability of this software faces particular challenges due, at least in part, to the type of people who develop it. These Research Software Engineers (RSEs) face challenges in developing and sustaining software that differ from those faced by the developers of traditional software. As a result, professional associations have begun to provide support, advocacy, and resources for RSEs. These benefits are critical to sustaining RSEs, especially in environments where their contributions are often undervalued and not rewarded. This paper focuses on how professional associations, such as the United States Research Software Engineer Association (US-RSE), can provide this.
△ Less
Submitted 2 March, 2021;
originally announced March 2021.
-
How do Practitioners Perceive the Relevance of Requirements Engineering Research?
Authors:
Xavier Franch,
Daniel Mendez,
Andreas Vogelsang,
Rogardt Heldal,
Eric Knauss,
Marc Oriol,
Guilherme H. Travassos,
Jeffrey C. Carver,
Thomas Zimmermann
Abstract:
The relevance of Requirements Engineering (RE) research to practitioners is vital for a long-term dissemination of research results to everyday practice. Some authors have speculated about a mismatch between research and practice in the RE discipline. However, there is not much evidence to support or refute this perception. This paper presents the results of a study aimed at gathering evidence fro…
▽ More
The relevance of Requirements Engineering (RE) research to practitioners is vital for a long-term dissemination of research results to everyday practice. Some authors have speculated about a mismatch between research and practice in the RE discipline. However, there is not much evidence to support or refute this perception. This paper presents the results of a study aimed at gathering evidence from practitioners about their perception of the relevance of RE research and at understanding the factors that influence that perception. We conducted a questionnaire-based survey of industry practitioners with expertise in RE. The participants rated the perceived relevance of 435 scientific papers presented at five top RE-related conferences. The 153 participants provided a total of 2,164 ratings. The practitioners rated RE research as essential or worthwhile in a majority of cases. However, the percentage of non-positive ratings is still higher than we would like. Among the factors that affect the perception of relevance are the research's links to industry, the research method used, and respondents' roles. The reasons for positive perceptions were primarily related to the relevance of the problem and the soundness of the solution, while the causes for negative perceptions were more varied. The respondents also provided suggestions for future research, including topics researchers have studied for decades, like elicitation or requirement quality criteria.
△ Less
Submitted 3 December, 2020; v1 submitted 10 November, 2020;
originally announced November 2020.
-
Software Engineering Practices for Scientific Software Development: A Systematic Mapping Study
Authors:
Elvira-Maria Arvanitou,
Apostolos Ampatzoglou,
Alexander Chatzigeorgiou,
Jeffrey C. Carver
Abstract:
Background: The development of scientific software applications is far from trivial, due to the constant increase in the necessary complexity of these applications, their increasing size, and their need for intensive maintenance and reuse. Aim: To this end, developers of scientific software (who usually lack a formal computer science background) need to use appropriate software engineering (SE) pr…
▽ More
Background: The development of scientific software applications is far from trivial, due to the constant increase in the necessary complexity of these applications, their increasing size, and their need for intensive maintenance and reuse. Aim: To this end, developers of scientific software (who usually lack a formal computer science background) need to use appropriate software engineering (SE) practices. This paper describes the results of a systematic mapping study on the use of SE for scientific application development and their impact on software quality. Method: To achieve this goal we have performed a systematic mapping study on 359 papers. We first describe a catalogue of SE practices used in scientific software development. Then, we discuss the quality attributes of interest that drive the application of these practices, as well as tentative side-effects of applying the practices on qualities. Results: The main findings indicate that scientific software developers are focusing on practices that improve implementation productivity, such as code reuse, use of third-party libraries, and the application of "good" programming techniques. In addition, apart from the finding that performance is a key-driver for many of these applications, scientific software developers also find maintainability and productivity to be important. Conclusions: The results of the study are compared to existing literature, are interpreted under a software engineering prism, and various implications for researchers and practitioners are provided. One of the key findings of the study, which is considered as important for driving future research endeavors is the lack of evidence on the trade-offs that need to be made when applying a software practice, i.e., negative (indirect) effects on other quality attributes.
△ Less
Submitted 19 October, 2020;
originally announced October 2020.
-
Understanding Peer Review of Software Engineering Papers
Authors:
Neil A. Ernst,
Jeffrey C. Carver,
Daniel Mendez,
Marco Torchiano
Abstract:
Peer review is a key activity intended to preserve the quality and integrity of scientific publications. However, in practice it is far from perfect.
We aim at understanding how reviewers, including those who have won awards for reviewing, perform their reviews of software engineering papers to identify both what makes a good reviewing approach and what makes a good paper.
We first conducted a…
▽ More
Peer review is a key activity intended to preserve the quality and integrity of scientific publications. However, in practice it is far from perfect.
We aim at understanding how reviewers, including those who have won awards for reviewing, perform their reviews of software engineering papers to identify both what makes a good reviewing approach and what makes a good paper.
We first conducted a series of in-person interviews with well-respected reviewers in the software engineering field. Then, we used the results of those interviews to develop a questionnaire used in an online survey and sent out to reviewers from well-respected venues covering a number of software engineering disciplines, some of whom had won awards for their reviewing efforts.
We analyzed the responses from the interviews and from 175 reviewers who completed the online survey (including both reviewers who had won awards and those who had not). We report on several descriptive results, including: 45% of award-winners are reviewing 20+ conference papers a year, while 28% of non-award winners conduct that many. 88% of reviewers are taking more than two hours on journal reviews. We also report on qualitative results. To write a good review, the important criteria were it should be factual and helpful, ranked above others such as being detailed or kind. The most important features of papers that result in positive reviews are clear and supported validation, an interesting problem, and novelty. Conversely, negative reviews tend to result from papers that have a mismatch between the method and the claims and from those with overly grandiose claims.
The main recommendation for authors is to make the contribution of the work very clear in their paper. In addition, reviewers viewed data availability and its consistency as being important.
△ Less
Submitted 17 June, 2021; v1 submitted 2 September, 2020;
originally announced September 2020.
-
Assessing Expert System-Assisted Literature Reviews With a Case Study
Authors:
Zhe Yu,
Jeffrey C. Carver,
Gregg Rothermel,
Tim Menzies
Abstract:
Given the large number of publications in software engineering, frequent literature reviews are required to keep current on work in specific areas. One tedious work in literature reviews is to find relevant studies amongst thousands of non-relevant search results. In theory, expert systems can assist in finding relevant work but those systems have primarily been tested in simulations rather than i…
▽ More
Given the large number of publications in software engineering, frequent literature reviews are required to keep current on work in specific areas. One tedious work in literature reviews is to find relevant studies amongst thousands of non-relevant search results. In theory, expert systems can assist in finding relevant work but those systems have primarily been tested in simulations rather than in application to actual literature reviews. Hence, few researchers have faith in such expert systems. Accordingly, using a realistic case study, this paper assesses how well our state-of-the-art expert system can help with literature reviews.
The assessed literature review aimed at identifying test case prioritization techniques for automated UI testing, specifically from 8,349 papers on IEEE Xplore. This corpus was studied with an expert system that incorporates an incrementally updated human-in-the-loop active learning tool. Using that expert system, in three hours, we found 242 relevant papers from which we identified 12 techniques representing the state-of-the-art in test case prioritization when source code information is not available. These results were then validated by six other graduate students manually exploring the same corpus. Without the expert system, this task would have required 53 hours and would have found 27 additional papers. That is, our expert system achieved 90% recall with 6% of the human effort cost when compared to a conventional manual method. Significantly, the same 12 state-of-the-art test case prioritization techniques were identified by both the expert system and the manual method. That is, the 27 papers missed by the expert system would not have changed the conclusion of the literature review.
Hence, if this result generalizes, it endorses the use of our expert system to assist in literature reviews.
△ Less
Submitted 8 April, 2022; v1 submitted 16 September, 2019;
originally announced September 2019.
-
Guidelines for Systematic Mapping Studies in Security Engineering
Authors:
Michael Felderer,
Jeffrey C. Carver
Abstract:
Security engineering in the software lifecycle aims at protecting information and systems to guarantee confidentiality, integrity, and availability. As security engineering matures and the number of research papers grows, there is an increasing need for papers that summarize results and provide an overview of the area. A systematic mapping study "maps" a research area by classifying papers to iden…
▽ More
Security engineering in the software lifecycle aims at protecting information and systems to guarantee confidentiality, integrity, and availability. As security engineering matures and the number of research papers grows, there is an increasing need for papers that summarize results and provide an overview of the area. A systematic mapping study "maps" a research area by classifying papers to identify which topics are well-studied and which need additional study. Therefore, systematic mapping studies are becoming increasingly important in security engineering. This chapter provides methodological support for systematic mapping studies in security engineering based on examples from published security engineering papers. Because security engineering is similar to software engineering in that it bridges research and practice, researchers can use the same basic systematic mapping process, as follows: (1) study planning, (2) searching for studies, (3) study selection, (4) study quality assessment, (5) data extraction, (6) data classification, (7) data analysis, and (8) reporting of results. We use published mapping studies to describe the tailoring of this process for security engineering. In addition to guidance on how to perform systematic mapping studies in security engineering, this chapter should increase awareness in the security engineering community of the need for additional mapping studies.
△ Less
Submitted 21 January, 2018;
originally announced January 2018.
-
How do Practitioners Perceive the Relevance of Requirements Engineering Research? An Ongoing Study
Authors:
X. Franch,
D. Méndez Fernández,
M. Oriol,
A. Vogelsang,
R. Heldal,
E. Knauss,
G. Horta Travassos,
J. C. Carver,
O. Dieste,
T. Zimmermann
Abstract:
The relevance of Requirements Engineering (RE) research to practitioners is a prerequisite for problem-driven research in the area and key for a long-term dissemination of research results to everyday practice. To better understand how industry practitioners perceive the practical relevance of RE research, we have initiated the RE-Pract project, an international collaboration conducting an empiric…
▽ More
The relevance of Requirements Engineering (RE) research to practitioners is a prerequisite for problem-driven research in the area and key for a long-term dissemination of research results to everyday practice. To better understand how industry practitioners perceive the practical relevance of RE research, we have initiated the RE-Pract project, an international collaboration conducting an empirical study. This project opts for a replication of previous work done in two different domains and relies on survey research. To this end, we have designed a survey to be sent to several hundred industry practitioners at various companies around the world and ask them to rate their perceived practical relevance of the research described in a sample of 418 RE papers published between 2010 and 2015 at the RE, ICSE, FSE, ESEC/FSE, ESEM and REFSQ conferences. In this paper, we summarise our research protocol and present the current status of our study and the planned future steps.
△ Less
Submitted 14 June, 2017; v1 submitted 17 May, 2017;
originally announced May 2017.
