A Systematic Literature Review on the Quality of UML Models
AbstractThe quality of conceptual models directly affects the quality of the understanding of the application domain and the quality of the final software products that are ultimately based upon them. The field of research into conceptual modelling research is still young and is still evolving. This paper describes a systematic literature review (SLR) of peer-reviewed conference and journal articles published between 1997 and 2007 on this topic so that we may understand the state-of-the-art and then identify any gaps in current research. Six digital libraries were searched, and 193 papers dealing with the quality of UML models were identified and classified into five dimensions: type of model quality, type of evidence, type of research result, type of diagram and research goal. The results indicate that the field is indeed still young and evolving with a great deal of research dedicated to semantic consistency and to improving the understandability of UML diagrams. However, much more empirical research is needed to develop a theoretical understanding of conceptual model quality. The classification scheme developed in this paper can serve as a guide for both researchers and practitioners.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration in its series Working Papers of Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Belgium with number 09/605.
Length: 2 pages
Date of creation: Aug 2009
Date of revision:
UML; conceptual model quality; systematic literature review;
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-ALL-2009-12-19 (All new papers)
You can help add them by filling out this form.
reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.Access and download statistics
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Nathalie Verhaeghe).
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.