You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
A review method for UML requirements analysis model employing system-side prototyping
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
SpringerPlus, March 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/2193-1801-2-134 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Shinpei Ogata, Saeko Matsuura |
| Abstract |
User interface prototyping is an effective method for users to validate the requirements defined by analysts at an early stage of a software development. However, a user interface prototype system offers weak support for the analysts to verify the consistency of the specifications about internal aspects of a system such as business logic. As the result, the inconsistency causes a lot of rework costs because the inconsistency often makes the developers impossible to actualize the system based on the specifications. For verifying such consistency, functional prototyping is an effective method for the analysts, but it needs a lot of costs and more detailed specifications. In this paper, we propose a review method so that analysts can verify the consistency among several different kinds of diagrams in UML efficiently by employing system-side prototyping without the detailed model. The system-side prototype system does not have any functions to achieve business logic, but visualizes the results of the integration among the diagrams in UML as Web pages. The usefulness of our proposal was evaluated by applying our proposal into a development of Library Management System (LMS) for a laboratory. This development was conducted by a group. As the result, our proposal was useful for discovering the serious inconsistency caused by the misunderstanding among the members of the group. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 20 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 14% |
| Lecturer | 2 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 10% |
| Other | 2 | 10% |
| Unknown | 5 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Computer Science | 9 | 43% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 5% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 2 | 10% |
| Unknown | 6 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 March 2013.
All research outputs
#20,185,720
of 22,701,287 outputs
Outputs from SpringerPlus
#1,461
of 1,852 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#172,928
of 197,767 outputs
Outputs of similar age from SpringerPlus
#71
of 137 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,701,287 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,852 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 197,767 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 137 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.