Anachronic Tertiary Studies in Software Engineering: An Exploratory Quaternary Study
Authors:
Valdemar Vicente Graciano Neto,
Célia Laís Rodrigues,
Fernando Kenji Kamei,
Juliano Lopes de Oliveira,
Eliomar Araújo de Lima,
Mohamad Kassab,
Roberto Oliveira
Abstract:
Systematic literature reviews tentativelydescribe the state of the art in a given research area. However, the continuous publication of new primary and secondary studies following the release of a tertiary study can make the communication of results not integrally representative in regards to the advances achieved by that time. Consequently, using such a study as a reference within specific bodies…
▽ More
Systematic literature reviews tentativelydescribe the state of the art in a given research area. However, the continuous publication of new primary and secondary studies following the release of a tertiary study can make the communication of results not integrally representative in regards to the advances achieved by that time. Consequently, using such a study as a reference within specific bodies of knowledge may introduce imprecision, both in terms of its subareas and with respect to new methodologies, languages, and tools. Thus, a review of tertiary studies (what could be understood as a quaternary study) could contribute to show the representativeness of the reported findings in comparison to the state of the art and also to compile a set of perceptions that could not be previously achieved. In that direction, the main contribution of this paper is presenting the findings from an analysis of 34 software engineering tertiary studies published between 2009 and 2021. The results indicate that over 60% of the studies demonstrate varying degrees of anachronism due to the publication of primary and secondary studies following the publication of the tertiary study or even due to a time elapse between its conduction and its publication.
△ Less
Submitted 31 October, 2023;
originally announced November 2023.
On Evaluation Validity in Music Autotagging
Authors:
Fabien Gouyon,
Bob L. Sturm,
Joao Lobato Oliveira,
Nuno Hespanhol,
Thibault Langlois
Abstract:
Music autotagging, an established problem in Music Information Retrieval, aims to alleviate the human cost required to manually annotate collections of recorded music with textual labels by automating the process. Many autotagging systems have been proposed and evaluated by procedures and datasets that are now standard (used in MIREX, for instance). Very little work, however, has been dedicated to…
▽ More
Music autotagging, an established problem in Music Information Retrieval, aims to alleviate the human cost required to manually annotate collections of recorded music with textual labels by automating the process. Many autotagging systems have been proposed and evaluated by procedures and datasets that are now standard (used in MIREX, for instance). Very little work, however, has been dedicated to determine what these evaluations really mean about an autotagging system, or the comparison of two systems, for the problem of annotating music in the real world. In this article, we are concerned with explaining the figure of merit of an autotagging system evaluated with a standard approach. Specifically, does the figure of merit, or a comparison of figures of merit, warrant a conclusion about how well autotagging systems have learned to describe music with a specific vocabulary? The main contributions of this paper are a formalization of the notion of validity in autotagging evaluation, and a method to test it in general. We demonstrate the practical use of our method in experiments with three specific state-of-the-art autotagging systems --all of which are reproducible using the linked code and data. Our experiments show for these specific systems in a simple and objective two-class task that the standard evaluation approach does not provide valid indicators of their performance.
△ Less
Submitted 30 September, 2014;
originally announced October 2014.
