Cross versus Within-Company Cost Estimation Studies: A Systematic Review

By Barbara A. Kitchenham, Emilia Mendes, Guilherme Horta Travassos. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 2007

416 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Information Systems, Software

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/a44b99cd5395e38f824fddd4552d809e70eb25ea

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Information Systems

In Software

Citations in the corpus

Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Careers and Human Resource Development (2015, background): “, 2004), allowing a researcher to map, categorize, and make sense of an entire body of research on a particular topic, research question, or phenomenon (Kitchenham et al., 2007).”
Evaluating prediction systems in software project estimation (2012, background): “• Kitchenham et al. [21] found seven relevant empirical studies for the question is it better to predict using local, as opposed to cross-company, data.”
Cross-project defect prediction: a large scale experiment on data vs. domain vs. process (2009, methodology): “In effort estimation when no or little data is available, engineers often use data from other projects or companies [ 16 ].”
Using mapping studies as the basis for further research - A participant-observer case study (2011, methodology): “Finally, in order to further illustrate the difference between mapping studies and SLRs, in Table 2, we compare Jørgensen and Shepperd's mapping study with Kitchenham et al.'s SLR [30], using on the criteria adopted in Table 1 plus an additional criterion ''Recommendations''.”
Empirical Studies of Pair Programming for CS/SE Teaching in Higher Education: A Systematic Literature Review (2011, background): “reach an absolute consensus on the sample used [36].”
Variability management in software product lines: a systematic review (2009, methodology): “• Check the keywords in all relevant papers researchers already knew for example [4, 7, 9] and initial searches on the relevant databases;”
A systematic review on regression test selection techniques (2010, methodology): “This guideline has been followed and evaluated [5][30][57] and updated accordingly in 2007 [29].”
On the relative value of cross-company and within-company data for defect prediction (2009, methodology): “[59] argue that organizations use crosscompany data since within-company data can be so hard to collect:”
Systematic literature review of machine learning based software development effort estimation models (2012, methodology): “Search terms The following steps were used to construct the search terms [30]:”
Systematic Mapping Studies in Software Engineering (2008, background): “However, a general trend toward more evidence based software engineering (Kitchenham et al. 2004) has lead to an increased focus on new, empirical and systematic research methods.”
A systematic review of search-based testing for non-functional system properties (2009, neutral): “In order to assess the results of the search process, we compared the results with a small sample of primary studies we already knew about [10–12], to ensure that the search process was able to find the sample (as described in [13]).”