Structural and Semantic Similarity Measurement of UML Use Case Diagram

Main Article Content

Mohammad Nazir Arifin Daniel Siahaan

Abstract

Reusing software has several benefits ranging from reducing cost and risk, accelerating development, and its primary purposes are improving software quality. In the early stage of software development, reusing existing software artifacts may increase the benefit of reusing software because it uses mature artifacts from previous artifacts. One of software artifacts is diagram, and in order to assist the reusing diagram is to find the level of similarity of diagrams. This paper proposes a method for measuring the similarity of the use case diagram using structural and semantic aspects. For structural similarity measurement, Graph Edit Distance is used by transforming each factor and use case into a graph, while for semantic similarity measurement, WordNet, WuPalmer,
and Levenshtein were used. The experimentation was conducted on ten datasets from various
projects. The results of the method were compared with the results of assessments from experts.
The measurement of agreement between experts and method was done by using Gwet’s AC1 and
Pearson correlation coefficient. Measurement results with Gwet’s AC1 diagram similarity are 0,60,
which were categorized as “moderate" agreement and the result of measurement with Pearson
is 0.506 which means there is a significant correlation between experts and methods. The result
showed that the proposed method can be used to find the similarity of the diagram, so finding and
reuse of the diagram as a software component can be optimized.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
ARIFIN, Mohammad Nazir; SIAHAAN, Daniel. Structural and Semantic Similarity Measurement of UML Use Case Diagram. Lontar Komputer : Jurnal Ilmiah Teknologi Informasi, [S.l.], v. 11, n. 2, p. 88-100, july 2020. ISSN 2541-5832. Available at: <https://ojs.unud.ac.id/index.php/lontar/article/view/59547>. Date accessed: 28 oct. 2020. doi: https://doi.org/10.24843/LKJITI.2020.v11.i02.p03.
Section
Articles

References

[1] H. Salami and M. Ahmed, “UML artifacts reuse: state of the art,” The International Journal
of Soft Computing and Software Engineering (JSCSE), vol. 3, no. February 2014, pp. 115 –
122, 2014.
[2] Z. Yuan, L. Yan, and Z. Ma, “Structural similarity measure between UML class diagrams
based on UCG,” Requirements Engineering, pp. 1–17, jun 2019. [Online]. Available:
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00766-019-00317-w
[3] L. Montalvillo and O. Díaz, “Requirement-driven evolution in software product lines: A systematic
mapping study,” Journal of Systems and Software, vol. 122, 2016.
[4] W. P. Hui and W. M. N. W. Zainon, “Software requirement reuse model based on levenshtein
distances,” Journal of Theoretical and Applied Information Technology, vol. 95, no. 12, 2017.
[5] A. Buccella, A. Cechich, M. Arias, M. Pol’la, M. d. S. Doldan, and E. Morsan, “Towards
systematic software reuse of GIS: Insights from a case study,” Computers and Geosciences,
vol. 54, pp. 9–20, apr 2013.
[6] J. Parsons and C. Saunders, “Cognitive heuristics in software engineering: Applying and
extending anchoring and adjustment to artifact reuse,” IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering,
vol. 30, no. 12, pp. 873–888, dec 2004.
[7] J. L. Barros-Justo, F. B. Benitti, and S. Matalonga, “Trends in software reuse research: A
tertiary study,” Computer Standards and Interfaces, vol. 66, 2019.
[8] R. Capilla, B. Gallina, and C. Cetina Englada, “The new era of software reuse,” pp. 1–2,
2019.
[9] M. Marques, J. Simmonds, P. O. Rossel, and M. C. Bastarrica, “Software product line evolution:
A systematic literature review,” 2019.
[10] M. Irshad, K. Petersen, and S. Poulding, “A systematic literature review of software requirements
reuse approaches,” 2018.
[11] M. Arias, A. Buccella, and A. Cechich, “A Framework for Managing Requirements of Software
Product Lines,” Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science, vol. 339, 2018.
[12] M. A. Saied, A. Ouni, H. Sahraoui, R. G. Kula, K. Inoue, and D. Lo, “Improving reusability of
software libraries through usage pattern mining,” Journal of Systems and Software, vol. 145,
2018.
[13] N. Ali, H. Daneth, and J. E. Hong, “A hybrid DevOps process supporting software reuse: A
pilot project,” Journal of Software: Evolution and Process, 2020.
[14] M. Song and E. Tilevich, “Reusing metadata across components, applications, and languages,”
Science of Computer Programming, vol. 98, 2015.
[15] M. Stephan and J. R. Cordy, “A Survey of Model Comparison Approaches and Applications,”
in Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Model-Driven Engineering and Software
Development - MODELSWARD 2013, 2013.
[16] R. Fauzan, D. Siahaan, S. Rochimah, and E. Triandini, “Use case diagram similarity measurement:
A new approach,” in 2019 12th International Conference on Information Communication
Technology and System (ICTS). IEEE, 2019, pp. 3–7.
[17] E. Triandini, R. Fauzan, D. O. Siahaan, and S. Rochimah, “Sequence Diagram Similarity
Measurement: A Different Approach,” in 2019 16th International Joint Conference on
Computer Science and Software Engineering (JCSSE). IEEE, jul 2019, pp. 348–351.
[Online]. Available: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8864207/
[18] J. Su and J. Bao, “Measuring UML Model Similarity,” Proceedings of the 7th International
Conference on Software Paradigm Trends, pp. 319–323, 2012.
[19] M. A.-R. M. Al-Khiaty and M. Ahmed, “Similarity assessment of UML class diagrams
using simulated annealing,” in 5th International Conference on Software Engineering and
Service Science. Beijing: IEEE Comput. Soc, 2014, pp. 19–23. [Online]. Available:
https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/6933505
[20] B. Bonilla-Morales, S. Crespo, and C. Clunie, “Reuse of Use Cases Diagrams: An Approach
based on Ontologies and Semantic Web Technologies,” vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 24–29, 2012.
[21] D. Siahaan, Y. Desnelita, Gustientiedina, and Sunarti, “Structural and semantic similarity
measurement of UML sequence diagrams,” in 11th International Conference on Information
& Communication Technology and System (ICTS). IEEE, oct 2017, pp. 227–234. [Online].
Available: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8265675/
[22] S. Bougleux, L. Brun, V. Carletti, P. Foggia, B. Gaüzère, and M. Vento, “Graph edit distance
as a quadratic assignment problem,” Pattern Recognition Letters, vol. 87, 2017.
[23] M. A.-R. Al-Khiaty and M. Ahmed, “UML Class Diagrams: Similarity Aspects and Matching,”
Lecture Notes on Software Engineering, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 41–47, 2016.
[24] C. Zhao and S. Sahni, “String correction using the Damerau-Levenshtein distance,” BMC
Bioinformatics, vol. 20, 2019.
[25] R. Fauzan, D. Siahaan, S. Rochimah, and E. Triandini, “Class diagram similarity measurement:
A different approach,” in 2018 3rd International Conference on Information Technology,
Information System and Electrical Engineering (ICITISEE). IEEE, 2018, pp. 215–219.