Although many tools have been presented in the research literature of software visualization, there is little evidence of their adoption. To choose a suitable visualization tool, practitioners need to analyze various characteristics of tools such as their supported software concerns and level of maturity. Indeed, some tools can be prototypes for which the lifespan is expected to be short, whereas others can be fairly mature products that are maintained for a longer time. Although such characteristics are often described in papers, we conjecture that practitioners willing to adopt software visualizations require additional support to discover suitable visualization tools. In this paper, we elaborate on our efforts to provide such support. To this end, we systematically analyzed research papers in the literature of software visualization and curated a catalog of 70 available tools that employ various visualization techniques to support the analysis of multiple software concerns. We further encapsulate these characteristics in an ontology. VISON, our software visualization ontology, captures these semantics as concepts and relationships. We report on early results of usage scenarios that demonstrate how the ontology can support (i) developers to find suitable tools for particular development concerns, and (ii) researchers who propose new software visualization tools to identify a baseline tool for a controlled experiment.
Some studies examine software visualization tools, in particular, to create guidelines for designing and evaluating software visualizations. For example, Storey al @cite_52 examine 12 software visualization tools and propose a framework to evaluate software visualizations based on intent, information, presentation, interaction, and effectiveness. Sensalire al @cite_59 @cite_6 classify the features users require in software visualization tools. To this end, they elaborate on lessons learned from evaluating 20 software visualization tools and identify dimensions that can help design an evaluation and then analyze the results. In our investigation, we do not attempt to provide a comprehensive catalog of software visualization tools, but we seek to provide a means to boost software visualization discoverability.
@cite_52 @cite_59 @cite_6
2067172306 2014707001 2147787175
This paper proposes a framework for describing, comparing and understanding visualization tools that provide awareness of human activities in software development. The framework has several purposes -- it can act as a formative evaluation mechanism for tool designers; as an assessment tool for potential tool users; and as a comparison tool so that tool researchers can compare and understand the differences between various tools and identify potential new research areas. We use this framework to structure a survey of visualization tools for activity awareness in software development. Based on this survey we suggest directions for future research. We provide an evaluation of 15 software visualization tools applicable to corrective maintenance. The tasks supported as well as the techniques used are presented and graded based on the support level. By analyzing user acceptation of current tools, we aim to help developers to select what to consider, avoid or improve in their next releases. Tool users can also recognize what to broadly expect (and what not) from such tools, thereby supporting an informed choice for the tools evaluated here and for similar tools. Many software visualization (SoftVis) tools are continuously being developed by both researchers as well as software development companies. In order to determine if the developed tools are effective in helping their target users, it is desirable that they are exposed to a proper evaluation. Despite this, there is still lack of a general guideline on how these evaluations should be carried out and many of the tool developers perform very limited or no evaluation of their tools. Each person that carries out one evaluation, however, has experiences which, if shared, can guide future evaluators. This paper presents the lessons learned from evaluating over 20 SoftVis tools with over 90 users in five different studies spread on a period of over two years. The lessons covered include the selection of the tools, tasks, as well as evaluation participants. Other discussed points are related to the duration of the evaluation experiment, its location, the procedure followed when carrying out the experiment, as well as motivation of the participants. Finally, an analysis of the lessons learned is shown with the hope that these lessons will be of some assistance to future SoftVis tool evaluators.