Name
Abstract | ||
|---|---|---|
Tool evaluation forms an essential part of tool development. Unfortunately, there are only a few solutions for this activity. As part of the AMES project, tool evaluation was implemented as part of a more comprehensive framework, used with the development and application of several AMES tools for application maintenance, These included an application understanding tool-set, a disabbreviation tool, a reverse-engineering tool and an impact analysis tool-set. In addition, the requirement for applicability both to on-board space software and to tool software has directed our approach in setting requirements for tools evaluation. The central element of the evaluation process was an AMES-developed framework including evaluation criteria and the use of a goal/question/metrics (GQM) based approach. The criteria have produced detailed information about each tool, The final result can be regarded as a combination of the score for each criterion and explicit metrics data. In addition, descriptive information about applications was used in tool evaluation. (C) 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. |
Year | DOI | Venue |
|---|---|---|
1998 | 3.3.CO;2-S" target="_self" class="small-link-text"10.1002/(SICI)1096-908X(199805/06)10:33.3.CO;2-S | Journal of Software Maintenance |
Keywords | Field | DocType |
software maintenance,application management,gqm | Application lifecycle management,GQM,Systems engineering,Engineering management,Computer science,Software maintenance | Journal |
Volume | Issue | ISSN |
10 | 3 | 1040-550X |
Citations | PageRank | References |
2 | 0.36 | 0 |
Authors | ||
5 | ||
Name | Order | Citations | PageRank |
|---|---|---|---|
| Matias Vierimaa | 1 | 82 | 8.39 |
| Jorma Taramaa | 2 | 30 | 5.15 |
| Heli Puustinen | 3 | 2 | 0.36 |
| Kati Suominen | 4 | 2 | 0.36 |
| Tommi Ketola | 5 | 2 | 0.36 |