Stefan Biffl

SE
h-index47
3papers
103citations
Novelty18%
AI Score18

3 Papers

SEMay 20, 2024
Naming the Pain in Machine Learning-Enabled Systems Engineering

Marcos Kalinowski, Daniel Mendez, Görkem Giray et al.

Context: Machine learning (ML)-enabled systems are being increasingly adopted by companies aiming to enhance their products and operational processes. Objective: This paper aims to deliver a comprehensive overview of the current status quo of engineering ML-enabled systems and lay the foundation to steer practically relevant and problem-driven academic research. Method: We conducted an international survey to collect insights from practitioners on the current practices and problems in engineering ML-enabled systems. We received 188 complete responses from 25 countries. We conducted quantitative statistical analyses on contemporary practices using bootstrapping with confidence intervals and qualitative analyses on the reported problems using open and axial coding procedures. Results: Our survey results reinforce and extend existing empirical evidence on engineering ML-enabled systems, providing additional insights into typical ML-enabled systems project contexts, the perceived relevance and complexity of ML life cycle phases, and current practices related to problem understanding, model deployment, and model monitoring. Furthermore, the qualitative analysis provides a detailed map of the problems practitioners face within each ML life cycle phase and the problems causing overall project failure. Conclusions: The results contribute to a better understanding of the status quo and problems in practical environments. We advocate for the further adaptation and dissemination of software engineering practices to enhance the engineering of ML-enabled systems.

SESep 23, 2021
What Makes Agile Software Development Agile?

Marco Kuhrmann, Paolo Tell, Regina Hebig et al.

Together with many success stories, promises such as the increase in production speed and the improvement in stakeholders' collaboration have contributed to making agile a transformation in the software industry in which many companies want to take part. However, driven either by a natural and expected evolution or by contextual factors that challenge the adoption of agile methods as prescribed by their creator(s), software processes in practice mutate into hybrids over time. Are these still agile? In this article, we investigate the question: what makes a software development method agile? We present an empirical study grounded in a large-scale international survey that aims to identify software development methods and practices that improve or tame agility. Based on 556 data points, we analyze the perceived degree of agility in the implementation of standard project disciplines and its relation to used development methods and practices. Our findings suggest that only a small number of participants operate their projects in a purely traditional or agile manner (under 15%). That said, most project disciplines and most practices show a clear trend towards increasing degrees of agility. Compared to the methods used to develop software, the selection of practices has a stronger effect on the degree of agility of a given discipline. Finally, there are no methods or practices that explicitly guarantee or prevent agility. We conclude that agility cannot be defined solely at the process level. Additional factors need to be taken into account when trying to implement or improve agility in a software company. Finally, we discuss the field of software process-related research in the light of our findings and present a roadmap for future research.

SEMay 31, 2019
Technical Debt in Data-Intensive Software Systems

Harald Foidl, Michael Felderer, Stefan Biffl

The ever-increasing amount, variety as well as generation and processing speed of today's data pose a variety of new challenges for developing Data-Intensive Software Systems (DISS). As with developing other kinds of software systems, developing DISS is often done under severe pressure and strict schedules. Thus, developers of DISS often have to make technical compromises to meet business concerns. This position paper proposes a conceptual model that outlines where Technical Debt (TD) can emerge and proliferate within such data-centric systems by separating a DISS into three parts (Software Systems, Data Storage Systems and Data). Further, the paper illustrates the proliferation of Database Schema Smells as TD items within a relational database-centric software system based on two examples.