Name: Anonymous 2010-01-05 14:55
Hey, /prog/.
Among usual spam from my university, I found an invitation to a guest lecture - "A Data Fusion Approach to design pattern detection and a common format for DPD tool outputs to facilitate fusion". Abstract:
Identification of design patterns can deliver important information to
designers. Therefore, automated design pattern detection (DPD) is highly
desirable when it comes to understanding unknown code. We present the
results of evaluating five existing DPD tools (Fujaba, PINOT, Ptidej,
DP-Miner and SSA) on various Java projects. These tools apply
different complementary pattern matching techniques. Given that each
tool designer is forced to make a choice of available techniques,
trading precision for recall or speed (or vice-versa), we argue that
instead of updating a concrete DPD tool it would be preferrable to
fuse the outputs of several different DPD tools.
Various output formats used by the tools make it difficult to compare
and fuse their results. In addition, all the output formats have been
shown to have several limitations in both their forms and contents.
Consequently, we develop DPDX, a rich common exchange format for DPD
tools, to overcome previous limitations. DPDX provides the basis for
an open federation of tools that perform comparison, fusion,
visualisation, and–or validation of DPD results.
What do you think, /prog/, should I attend it? Is it ENTERPRISE QUALITY enough?
Among usual spam from my university, I found an invitation to a guest lecture - "A Data Fusion Approach to design pattern detection and a common format for DPD tool outputs to facilitate fusion". Abstract:
Identification of design patterns can deliver important information to
designers. Therefore, automated design pattern detection (DPD) is highly
desirable when it comes to understanding unknown code. We present the
results of evaluating five existing DPD tools (Fujaba, PINOT, Ptidej,
DP-Miner and SSA) on various Java projects. These tools apply
different complementary pattern matching techniques. Given that each
tool designer is forced to make a choice of available techniques,
trading precision for recall or speed (or vice-versa), we argue that
instead of updating a concrete DPD tool it would be preferrable to
fuse the outputs of several different DPD tools.
Various output formats used by the tools make it difficult to compare
and fuse their results. In addition, all the output formats have been
shown to have several limitations in both their forms and contents.
Consequently, we develop DPDX, a rich common exchange format for DPD
tools, to overcome previous limitations. DPDX provides the basis for
an open federation of tools that perform comparison, fusion,
visualisation, and–or validation of DPD results.
What do you think, /prog/, should I attend it? Is it ENTERPRISE QUALITY enough?