Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem

dc.contributor.authorAlkharabsheh, Khalid
dc.contributor.authorAlawadi, Sadi
dc.contributor.authorCrespo, Yania
dc.contributor.authorManso, M. Esperanza
dc.contributor.authorGonzalez, Jose A. Taboada
dc.date.accessioned2025-01-25T17:56:31Z
dc.date.available2025-01-25T17:56:31Z
dc.date.issued2021
dc.identifier.citationIEEE Access, vol. 9, pp. 145191-145211, 2021es
dc.identifier.issn2169-3536es
dc.identifier.urihttps://uvadoc.uva.es/handle/10324/74392
dc.descriptionProducción Científicaes
dc.description.abstractThe automatic detection of Design Smells has evolved in parallel to the evolution of automatic refactoring tools. There was a huge rise in research activity regarding Design Smell detection from 2010 to the present. However, it should be noted that the adoption of Design Smell detection in real software development practice is not comparable to the adoption of automatic refactoring tools. On the basis of the assumption that it is the objectiveness of a refactoring operation as opposed to the subjectivity in definition and identification of Design Smells that makes the difference, in this paper, the lack of agreement between different evaluators when detecting Design Smells is empirically studied. To do so, a series of experiments and studies were designed and conducted to analyse the concordance in Design Smell detection of different persons and tools, including a comparison between them. This work focuses on two well known Design Smells: God Class and Feature Envy. Concordance analysis is based on the Kappa statistic for inter-rater agreement (particularly Kappa-Fleiss). The results obtained show that there is no agreement in detection in general, and, in those cases where a certain agreement appears, it is considered to be a fair or poor degree of agreement, according to a Kappa-Fleiss interpretation scale. This seems to confirm that there is a subjective component which makes the raters evaluate the presence of Design Smells differently. The study also raises the question of a lack of training and experience regarding Design Smells.es
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdfes
dc.language.isoenges
dc.publisherIEEEes
dc.rights.accessRightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesses
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/*
dc.subject.classificationTools;Software;Codees
dc.subject.classificationFeature extractiones
dc.subject.classificationMaintenance engineeringes
dc.subject.classificationFormal concept analysises
dc.subject.classificationDesign smelles
dc.subject.classificationsurvey;empirical study;experimentes
dc.subject.classificationinter-rater agreement;Kappa-Fleisses
dc.titleAnalysing Agreement Among Different Evaluators in God Class and Feature Envy Detectiones
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/articlees
dc.rights.holderThe Authorses
dc.identifier.doi10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3123123es
dc.relation.publisherversionhttps://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3123123es
dc.identifier.publicationfirstpage145191es
dc.identifier.publicationlastpage145211es
dc.identifier.publicationtitleIEEE Accesses
dc.identifier.publicationvolume9es
dc.peerreviewedSIes
dc.identifier.essn2169-3536es
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internacional*
dc.type.hasVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiones


Ficheros en el ítem

Thumbnail

Este ítem aparece en la(s) siguiente(s) colección(ones)

Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem