Researcher profile

Markku Oivo

Markku Oivo contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 17 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
4works
0followers
2topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

4 published item(s)

preprint2021arXiv

Kuksa*: Self-Adaptive Microservices in Automotive Systems

In pervasive dynamic environments, vehicles connect to other objects to send operational data and receive updates so that vehicular applications can provide services to users on demand. Automotive systems should be self-adaptive, thereby they can make real-time decisions based on changing operating conditions. Emerging modern solutions, such as microservices could improve self-adaptation capabilities and ensure higher levels of quality performance in many domains. We employed a real-world automotive platform called Eclipse Kuksa to propose a framework based on microservices architecture to enhance the self-adaptation capabilities of automotive systems for runtime data analysis. To evaluate the designed solution, we conducted an experiment in an automotive laboratory setting where our solution was implemented as a microservice-based adaptation engine and integrated with other Eclipse Kuksa components. The results of our study indicate the importance of design trade-offs for quality requirements' satisfaction levels of each microservices and the whole system for the optimal performance of an adaptive system at runtime.

preprint2020arXiv

A Procedure and Guidelines for Analyzing Groups of Software Engineering Replications

Context: Researchers from different groups and institutions are collaborating on building groups of experiments by means of replication (i.e., conducting groups of replications). Disparate aggregation techniques are being applied to analyze groups of replications. The application of unsuitable techniques to aggregate replication results may undermine the potential of groups of replications to provide in-depth insights from experiment results. Objectives: Provide an analysis procedure with a set of embedded guidelines to aggregate software engineering (SE) replication results. Method: We compare the characteristics of groups of replications for SE and other mature experimental disciplines such as medicine and pharmacology. In view of their differences, the limitations with regard to the joint data analysis of groups of SE replications and the guidelines provided in mature experimental disciplines to analyze groups of replications, we build an analysis procedure with a set of embedded guidelines specifically tailored to the analysis of groups of SE replications. We apply the proposed analysis procedure to a representative group of SE replications to illustrate its use. Results: All the information contained within the raw data should be leveraged during the aggregation of replication results. The analysis procedure that we propose encourages the use of stratified individual participant data and aggregated data in tandem to analyze groups of SE replications. Conclusion: The aggregation techniques used to analyze groups of replications should be justified in research articles. This will increase the reliability and transparency of joint results. The proposed guidelines should ease this endeavor.

preprint2020arXiv

Management of quality requirements in agile and rapid software development: A systematic mapping study

Context:Quality requirements (QRs) describe the desired quality of software, and they play an important role in the success of software projects. In agile software development (ASD), QRs are often ill-defined and not well addressed due to the focus on quickly delivering functionality. Rapid software development (RSD) approaches (e.g., continuous delivery and continuous deployment), which shorten delivery times, are more prone to neglect QRs. Despite the significance of QRs in both ASD and RSD, there is limited synthesized knowledge on their management in those approaches. Objective:This study aims to synthesize state-of-the-art knowledge about QR management in ASD and RSD, focusing on three aspects: bibliometric, strategies, and challenges. Research method:Using a systematic mapping study with a snowballing search strategy, we identified and structured the literature on QR management in ASD and RSD. Check the PDF file to see the full abstract and document.

preprint2020arXiv

Practical relevance of software engineering research: Synthesizing the community's voice

Software engineering (SE) research should be relevant to industrial practice. There have been regular discussions in the SE community on this issue since the 1980's, led by pioneers such as Robert Glass. As we recently passed the milestone of "50 years of software engineering", some recent positive efforts have been made in this direction, e.g., establishing "industrial" tracks in several SE conferences. However, many researchers and practitioners believe that we, as a community, are still struggling with research relevance and utility. The goal of this paper is to synthesize the evidence and experience-based opinions shared on this topic so far in the SE community, and to encourage the community to further reflect and act on the research relevance. For this purpose, we have conducted a Multi-vocal Literature Review (MLR) of 54 systematically-selected sources (papers and non peer-reviewed articles). Instead of relying on and considering the individual opinions on research relevance, mentioned in each of the sources, the MLR aims to synthesize and provide the "holistic" view on the topic. The highlights of our MLR findings are as follows. The top three root causes of low relevance, discussed in the community, are: (1) Researchers having simplistic views (or wrong assumptions) about SE in practice; (2) Lack of connection with industry; and (3) Wrong identification of research problems. The top three suggestions for improving research relevance are: (1) Using appropriate research approaches such as action-research; (2) Choosing relevant research problems; and (3) Collaborating with industry. By synthesizing all the discussions on this important topic so far, this paper aims to encourage further discussions and actions in the community to increase our collective efforts to improve the research relevance.