mdh.sePublikasjoner
Endre søk
RefereraExporteraLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Referera
Referensformat
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Annet format
Fler format
Språk
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Annet språk
Fler språk
Utmatningsformat
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Software Test Process Improvement Approaches: A Systematic Literature Review and an Industrial Case Study
Mälardalens högskola, Akademin för innovation, design och teknik, Inbyggda system. Bahria University, Islamabad, Pakistan.ORCID-id: 0000-0003-0611-2655
Chalmers University of Technology, Sweden.
Chalmers University of Technology, Sweden.
Chalmers University of Technology, Sweden.
2016 (engelsk)Inngår i: Journal of Systems and Software JSS, ISSN 0164-1212, Vol. 111, s. 1-33Artikkel i tidsskrift (Fagfellevurdert) Published
Abstract [en]

Software test process improvement (STPI) approaches are frameworks that guide software development organizations to improve their software testing process. We have identified existing STPI approaches and their characteristics (such as completeness of development, availability of information and assessment instruments, and domain limitations of the approaches) using a systematic literature review (SLR). Furthermore, two selected approaches (TPI NEXT and TMMi) are evaluated with respect to their content and assessment results in industry. As a result of this study, we have identified 18 STPI approaches and their characteristics. A detailed comparison of the content of TPI NEXT and TMMi is done. We found that many of the STPI approaches do not provide sufficient information or the approaches do not include assessment instruments. This makes it difficult to apply many approaches in industry. Greater similarities were found between TPI NEXT and TMMi and fewer differences. We conclude that numerous STPI approaches are available but not all are generally applicable for industry. One major difference between available approaches is their model representation. Even though the applied approaches generally show strong similarities, differences in the assessment results arise due to their different model representations.

sted, utgiver, år, opplag, sider
2016. Vol. 111, s. 1-33
HSV kategori
Identifikatorer
URN: urn:nbn:se:mdh:diva-30006DOI: 10.1016/j.jss.2015.08.048ISI: 000370462800001Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-84949796965OAI: oai:DiVA.org:mdh-30006DiVA, id: diva2:885803
Tilgjengelig fra: 2015-12-21 Laget: 2015-12-18 Sist oppdatert: 2016-03-17bibliografisk kontrollert

Open Access i DiVA

Fulltekst mangler i DiVA

Andre lenker

Forlagets fulltekstScopus

Personposter BETA

Afzal, Wasif

Søk i DiVA

Av forfatter/redaktør
Afzal, Wasif
Av organisasjonen

Søk utenfor DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric

doi
urn-nbn
Totalt: 1208 treff
RefereraExporteraLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Referera
Referensformat
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Annet format
Fler format
Språk
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Annet språk
Fler språk
Utmatningsformat
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf