4.6 Article

Quality Evaluation of Structural Design in Software Reverse Engineering: A Focus On Cohesion

Journal

IEEE ACCESS
Volume 9, Issue -, Pages 109569-109583

Publisher

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3102295

Keywords

Software; Unified modeling language; Ontologies; Particle measurements; Java; Atmospheric measurements; Tools; Cohesion; design quality; UML structural design ontology; software reverse engineering

Funding

  1. Taiwan Ministry of Science and Technology [106-2221-E-008-062]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This paper introduces an online knowledge-based ontological SRE system, OntRECoh, for evaluating the quality of converted UML structural models, which includes a domain-specific knowledge base and a rule-based inference engine to comprehensively evaluate system cohesion levels and provide improvement recommendations.
Software reverse engineering (SRE) plays a crucial role in contemporary software environments. Software developers may implement a system first then use SRE tools to generate design content such as the Unified Modeling Language (UML) diagrams. In the literature of SRE, studies majorly focus on how precisely the conversion can reflect the system; there is, however, little or no research that further looks into the quality of the converted results. Therefore, this paper presents an online knowledge-based ontological SRE system, OntRECoh, for quality evaluation of converted UML structural models. OntRECoh features a domain-specific knowledge base that focuses on cohesion design and a rule-based inference engine for computing the cohesion scores of Java-based implemented systems and providing improvement recommendations through its Web-based interface. Furthermore, OntRECoh includes both static and dynamic cohesion measures from both the design and the implementation aspects, for the evaluation to be more comprehensive and synthetic in the SRE context.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available