Storing and retrieving software components: a refinement based system

Mili, Ali; Mili, Rym; Mittermeir, Roland T.

doi:10.1109/icse.1994.296769

Cited by 48 publications

(43 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, while previous approaches take into account the method signature they often discount the importance of labels 8 and the semantic information imparted by the same. In our work we now exploit not only the semantic information in labels, but also the syntactic and semantic information contained in properties, event, and the design that are intrinsic parts of a component.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Many techniques ranging from keyword-based to full-fledged specification-based heuristics have been proposed in the literature [7,12,8,21,22,6,4] to provide effective retrieval of qualified components during the discovery process. The keyword-based approach [7] is simple and flexible as users simply specify the query as a set of keywords representing the component requirements in which they are interested.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Finding a Needle in the Haystack: A Technique for Ranking Matches Between Components

Tansalarak

Claypool

2005

Component-Based Software Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Searching and subsequently selecting reusable components from component repositories has become a key impediment for not only component-based development but also for achieving the overall usability of component development environments and the ultimate re-usability of the components themselves. Component matching, a fundamental aspect of the component search problem, has been a well-studied problem, resulting in many different matching techniques such as keyword, facet, signature and specification matching techniques. However, each matching technique individually applied for component search often yields a small or large number of (sometimes irrelevant) hits. In this paper, we propose a disciplined combination of the different matching techniques to provide a ranked set of highly qualified components from component repositories. Our work is based on a unique Quality of Match (QoM) metric that measures the overall "goodness" of the match between two given components. In particular, we provide qualitative and quantitative analysis to evaluate the QoM of two given components based on component information. Moreover, we present QoMym, a QoM-based hybrid match algorithm, that combines the strengths of different matching techniques and provides higher accuracy than existing matching techniques.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Finding a Needle in the Haystack: A Technique for Ranking Matches Between Components

Tansalarak

Claypool

2005

Component-Based Software Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…2 A third extension uses the hierarchical relationships between key terms to 'classify' the query within a virtual classification structure of components that is based on the relationships between their attribute values, returning the most 'specific' components that are more 'general' than the query. The 'specialization' relationship has a formal meaning in this case [17]. Neither of the last two extensions was used in the experiments of Section 5, and will not be discussed further.…”

Section: Multi-faceted Controlled-vocabulary Retrievalmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Refs. [10,17,38]). Different methods rely on more or less complex descriptions for both software components and search queries, and strike different trade-offs between performance and cost of implementation [22]; the cost of implementation involves both initial set-up costs, and the cost associated with formulating, executing and refining queries.…”

Section: The Component Retrieval Problemmentioning

confidence: 99%

An experiment in software component retrieval

Mili¹,

Ah-Ki²,

Godin³

et al. 2003

Information and Software Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Our research centers around exploring methodologies for developing reusable software, and developing methods and tools for building inter-enterprise information systems with reusable components. In this paper, we focus on an experiment in which different component indexing and retrieval methods were tested. The results are surprising. Earlier work had often shown that controlled vocabulary indexing and retrieval performed better than full-text indexing and retrieval [IEEE Trans. Software Engng (1994) 1, IEEE Trans. Software Engng 17 (1991) 800], but the differences in performance were often so small that some questioned whether those differences were worth the much greater cost of controlled vocabulary indexing and retrieval [Commun. Assoc. Comput. Mach. 28 (1985) 289, Commun. Assoc. Comput. Mach. 29 (1986) 648]. In our experiment, we found that full-text indexing and retrieval of software components provided comparable precision but much better recall than controlled vocabulary indexing and retrieval of components. There are a number of explanations for this somewhat counter-intuitive result, including the nature of software artifacts, and the notion of relevance that was used in our experiment. We bring to the fore some fundamental questions related to reuse repositories. q

show abstract

“…As market competition intensifies, supply chain coordination plays a dominant role in the supply chain strategy in the Internet era [1]. The synergy of online and offline dual-channel supply chain is mainly to coordinate the cooperative activities of all upstream and _________________________________________ Hui YE, Xiaolan HU, Wuhan Business University, Development Research Center of Wuhan Modern Logistic, Wuhan, China downstream alliance Enterprises in the supply chain [2,3]. Synergy is the strategic element of the enterprise as well as product market scope, competitive advantage and direction of development.…”

Section: Research Statusmentioning

confidence: 99%