An overview of metrics-based approaches to support software components reusability assessment <s> Insufficient validation of metrics-based approaches <s> Although experimentation is an accepted approach toward scientific validation in most scientific disciplines, it only recently has gained acceptance within the software development community. In this paper we discuss a 12-model classification scheme for performing experimentation within the software development domain. We evaluate over 600 published papers in the computer science literature and over one hundred papers from other scientific disciplines in order to determine: (1) how well the computer science community is succeeding at validating its theories, and (2) how computer science compares to other scientific disciplines. Published by Elsevier Science B.V. <s> BIB001 </s> An overview of metrics-based approaches to support software components reusability assessment <s> Insufficient validation of metrics-based approaches <s> Objective: Our objective is to describe how softwareengineering might benefit from an evidence-basedapproach and to identify the potential difficultiesassociated with the approach.Method: We compared the organisation and technicalinfrastructure supporting evidence-based medicine (EBM)with the situation in software engineering. We consideredthe impact that factors peculiar to software engineering(i.e. the skill factor and the lifecycle factor) would haveon our ability to practice evidence-based softwareengineering (EBSE).Results: EBSE promises a number of benefits byencouraging integration of research results with a view tosupporting the needs of many different stakeholdergroups. However, we do not currently have theinfrastructure needed for widespread adoption of EBSE.The skill factor means software engineering experimentsare vulnerable to subject and experimenter bias. Thelifecycle factor means it is difficult to determine howtechnologies will behave once deployed.Conclusions: Software engineering would benefit fromadopting what it can of the evidence approach providedthat it deals with the specific problems that arise from thenature of software engineering. <s> BIB002
This problem is not specific to component-based development. As pointed out in BIB002 , Experimental Software Engineering research, in general, tends to be fragmented and not properly integrated. This leads to the absence of a culture of replication of experiments and of systematic reviews of the existing approaches, like, for instance, is common practice for medical researchers  . This shortcoming of current Experimental Software Engineering practices has been identified in several surveys. A systematic review on controlled experiments conducted in software engineering  has reported that, out of 5453 scientific papers published in 12 leading software engineering journals and conferences from 1993 to 2002, only 103 (1.9%) of them reported controlled experiments in the realm of software engineering tasks. These included only 14 series of replications, where controlled experiment replications were performed. Only 6 of these series replications included replications performed independently (not by the original authors). While the above mentioned review focused on controlled experiments, its observations are consistent with those of other surveys concerning alternative forms of evidence-based validation of software engineering claims, ranging from controlled experiments to observational studies (e.g. BIB001  ). The lack of standard protocols 1 to conduct experimental work in software engineering is one of the problems undermining the availability of evidence to support decisions such as those that have to be made by component assemblers, although there are recent guidelines proposals aimed at mitigating this problem  .