ArticleHeliyon2024
LPMSAEF: Lightweight process mining-based software architecture evaluation framework for security and performance analysis.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The article discusses the need for a lightweight software architecture evaluation framework that can address practitioners' concerns. Specifically, the proposed framework uses process mining and Petri nets to analyze security and performance in software development's early and late stages. Moreover, the framework has been implemented in six case studies, and the results show that it is a feasible and effective solution that can detect security and performance issues in complex and heterogeneous architecture with less time and effort. Furthermore, the article provides a detailed explanation of the framework's features, factors, and evaluation criteria. Additionally, this article discusses the challenges associated with traditional software architecture documentation methods using Unified Modeling Language diagrams and the limitations of code alone for creating comprehensive Software Architecture models. Various methods have been developed to extract implicit Software Architecture from code artifacts, but they tend to produce code-oriented diagrams instead of Software Architecture diagrams. Therefore, to bridge the model-code gap, the article proposes a framework that considers existing Software Architecture in the source code as architectural components and focuses on Software Architecture behaviors for analyzing performance and security. The proposed framework also suggests comparing Software Architecture extracted by different Process Mining algorithms to achieve consensus on architecture descriptions, using visualizations to understand differences and similarities. Finally, the article suggests that analyzing the previous version of a system's Software Architecture can lead to improvements and deviations from planned Software Architecture can be detected using traceability approaches to aid software architects in detecting inconsistencies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.