FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W1979214159> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W1979214159 abstract "BACKGROUND: Software engineering researchers have carried out many empirical studies on open source software (OSS) projects to understand the OSS phenomenon, and to develop better software engineering techniques. Many of these studies typically use only a few successful projects as study subjects. Recently, these studies have received criticisms and challenges on their representativeness on OSS projects. AIM: First, we aim to examine to what extent data extracted from successful projects are different from data extracted from the majority. If data extracted from successful projects are quite different from data extracted from the majority, approaches that are effective on successful projects may not be effective in general. Second, we aim to examine whether successful OSS projects are representative to the whole population of OSS. If they are not, conclusions that are drawn from only successful projects may reflect the OSS phenomenon partially. METHODOLOGY: We analyzed 11, 684 OSS projects that are hosted on Source Forge. When researchers select subjects, they typically select successful projects that are attractive to both users and developers. Considering this preference, we clustered these projects into four categories based their attractiveness to users and developers. Here, we use the K-means clustering technique to produce combined result. Furthermore, we selected eight indicators that are used in many existing studies (e.g., team sizes), and compared indicators that are extracted from different categories to investigate to what degree they are different. RESULT: For the first research aim, the result shows that 66.1% projects are under developing projects, 14.7% projects are user-preference projects, 14.2% projects are developer-preference projects, and only 5.0% projects are considered successful. For the second research aim, the result shows that all the eight analyzed indicators are highly unbalanced with the gamma distribution. Furthermore, the result reveals that users and developers of Source Forge have different perceptions on the development status defined by Source Forge. CONCLUSION: We conclude that successful projects are not representative to the whole population of OSS, and data extracted from successful projects are quite different from data extracted from the majority. The result implies that conclusions drawn from only a few successful projects may be challenged. This work is important to allow researchers to refine conclusions of existing studies, and to better understand and to carefully select OSS project subjects for their future empirical experiments." @default.
• W1979214159 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W1979214159 creator A5002503342 @default.
• W1979214159 creator A5051403641 @default.
• W1979214159 creator A5076972729 @default.
• W1979214159 date "2012-12-01" @default.
• W1979214159 modified "2023-09-27" @default.
• W1979214159 title "Assessing the Representativeness of Open Source Projects in Empirical Software Engineering Studies" @default.
• W1979214159 cites W1974655094 @default.
• W1979214159 cites W1993514628 @default.
• W1979214159 cites W2006624349 @default.
• W1979214159 cites W2012611390 @default.
• W1979214159 cites W2017950530 @default.
• W1979214159 cites W2027791867 @default.
• W1979214159 cites W2028889016 @default.
• W1979214159 cites W2031447141 @default.
• W1979214159 cites W2048926275 @default.
• W1979214159 cites W2099141193 @default.
• W1979214159 cites W2100406974 @default.
• W1979214159 cites W2103802754 @default.
• W1979214159 cites W2107294940 @default.
• W1979214159 cites W2109596254 @default.
• W1979214159 cites W2116242639 @default.
• W1979214159 cites W2116537371 @default.
• W1979214159 cites W2128666163 @default.
• W1979214159 cites W2129164226 @default.
• W1979214159 cites W2130743551 @default.
• W1979214159 cites W2131265794 @default.
• W1979214159 cites W2143960295 @default.
• W1979214159 cites W2149231960 @default.
• W1979214159 cites W2149783794 @default.
• W1979214159 cites W2151187574 @default.
• W1979214159 cites W2153286352 @default.
• W1979214159 cites W2153545048 @default.
• W1979214159 cites W2166271660 @default.
• W1979214159 cites W2170304315 @default.
• W1979214159 cites W4248173958 @default.
• W1979214159 doi "https://doi.org/10.1109/apsec.2012.36" @default.
• W1979214159 hasPublicationYear "2012" @default.
• W1979214159 type Work @default.
• W1979214159 sameAs 1979214159 @default.
• W1979214159 citedByCount "3" @default.
• W1979214159 countsByYear W19792141592014 @default.
• W1979214159 countsByYear W19792141592016 @default.
• W1979214159 countsByYear W19792141592023 @default.
• W1979214159 crossrefType "proceedings-article" @default.
• W1979214159 hasAuthorship W1979214159A5002503342 @default.
• W1979214159 hasAuthorship W1979214159A5051403641 @default.
• W1979214159 hasAuthorship W1979214159A5076972729 @default.
• W1979214159 hasConcept C111472728 @default.
• W1979214159 hasConcept C11171543 @default.
• W1979214159 hasConcept C120936955 @default.
• W1979214159 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
• W1979214159 hasConcept C154945302 @default.
• W1979214159 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W1979214159 hasConcept C162324750 @default.
• W1979214159 hasConcept C175444787 @default.
• W1979214159 hasConcept C199360897 @default.
• W1979214159 hasConcept C2522767166 @default.
• W1979214159 hasConcept C2777904410 @default.
• W1979214159 hasConcept C2781249084 @default.
• W1979214159 hasConcept C2988343187 @default.
• W1979214159 hasConcept C31173074 @default.
• W1979214159 hasConcept C37381756 @default.
• W1979214159 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W1979214159 hasConcept C56739046 @default.
• W1979214159 hasConcept C73555534 @default.
• W1979214159 hasConcept C77805123 @default.
• W1979214159 hasConceptScore W1979214159C111472728 @default.
• W1979214159 hasConceptScore W1979214159C11171543 @default.
• W1979214159 hasConceptScore W1979214159C120936955 @default.
• W1979214159 hasConceptScore W1979214159C138885662 @default.
• W1979214159 hasConceptScore W1979214159C154945302 @default.
• W1979214159 hasConceptScore W1979214159C15744967 @default.
• W1979214159 hasConceptScore W1979214159C162324750 @default.
• W1979214159 hasConceptScore W1979214159C175444787 @default.
• W1979214159 hasConceptScore W1979214159C199360897 @default.
• W1979214159 hasConceptScore W1979214159C2522767166 @default.
• W1979214159 hasConceptScore W1979214159C2777904410 @default.
• W1979214159 hasConceptScore W1979214159C2781249084 @default.
• W1979214159 hasConceptScore W1979214159C2988343187 @default.
• W1979214159 hasConceptScore W1979214159C31173074 @default.
• W1979214159 hasConceptScore W1979214159C37381756 @default.
• W1979214159 hasConceptScore W1979214159C41008148 @default.
• W1979214159 hasConceptScore W1979214159C56739046 @default.
• W1979214159 hasConceptScore W1979214159C73555534 @default.
• W1979214159 hasConceptScore W1979214159C77805123 @default.
• W1979214159 hasLocation W19792141591 @default.
• W1979214159 hasOpenAccess W1979214159 @default.
• W1979214159 hasPrimaryLocation W19792141591 @default.
• W1979214159 hasRelatedWork W1999627569 @default.
• W1979214159 hasRelatedWork W2057030111 @default.
• W1979214159 hasRelatedWork W2068621780 @default.
• W1979214159 hasRelatedWork W2136159088 @default.
• W1979214159 hasRelatedWork W2378900195 @default.
• W1979214159 hasRelatedWork W2927620580 @default.
• W1979214159 hasRelatedWork W3123574725 @default.
• W1979214159 hasRelatedWork W572072398 @default.
• W1979214159 hasRelatedWork W763609066 @default.
• W1979214159 hasRelatedWork W2528029824 @default.

• next