2016
DOI: 10.1016/j.jss.2015.11.036
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

What recommendation systems for software engineering recommend: A systematic literature review

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
17
0
4

Year Published

2016
2016
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
3
2

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 61 publications
(21 citation statements)
references
References 18 publications
0
17
0
4
Order By: Relevance
“…Could it be that some researchers wait to find an algorithm whose experimentation is acceptable before publishing, a tendency known as publication bias? This bias has already been documented in systematic reviews on recommender systems (Gasparic & Janes, 2016).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 71%
“…Could it be that some researchers wait to find an algorithm whose experimentation is acceptable before publishing, a tendency known as publication bias? This bias has already been documented in systematic reviews on recommender systems (Gasparic & Janes, 2016).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 71%
“…We used the SLR approach as a major tool in previous studies [48]- [50], as it methodically supports primary assessments [45] and for which we transcribed SLR protocols (taken from [49]) to formulate a strategic plan for the present work. According to Kitchenham and others [25], [45], [51]- [54], the SLR process comprises three main stages: planning, conducting and reporting, we have identified 6 critical communication and coordination challenges (CCCC) and 75 practices from a sample of 164 papers.…”
Section: Stage-1: Identification Of Communication and Coordination Chmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In a recent literature review on recommendation systems for software engineering [11], the authors highlighted the gap that exists on the lack of decision support systems for software testing. Similarly, based on our limited search to nd relevant papers on visualization and decision support for software testing, many papers were found to be still at a stage of proposing and/or developing a theory.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%