Conference Paper

UML collaboration diagram syntax: an empirical study of comprehension

Dept. of Comput. Sci., Glasgow Univ.
DOI: 10.1109/VISSOF.2002.1019790 Conference: Visualizing Software for Understanding and Analysis, 2002. Proceedings. First International Workshop on
Source: DBLP

ABSTRACT The UML syntactic notation used in texts, papers, documentation and CASE tools is often different, despite UML being considered a software engineering standard. Our initial empirical study considered variations in the notation used for UML class diagrams; the experiment reported concentrates on UML collaboration diagrams. The decision as to which of the semantically equivalent notational variations within the UML standard to use appears to be according to the personal preference of the author or publisher, rather than based on any consideration of the ease with which the notation can be understood by human readers. This paper reports on an experiment that takes a human comprehension perspective on UML collaboration diagrams. Five notations were considered: for each, two semantically equivalent (yet syntactically or stylistically different), variations were chosen from published texts. Our experiment required subjects to indicate whether a supplied pseudo-code specification matched each of a set of experimental UML collaboration diagrams. The results reveal that our informal, personal intuitions (which were based on our view of the complexity of the notation) are validated with respect to confirming that a specification matches a diagram, but not when errors in a diagram are to be identified. The subjects' preferences are in favour of the more concise notational variants.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The Unified Modeling Language (UML) was created on the basis of expert opinion and has now become accepted as the ‘standard’ object-oriented modelling notation. Our objectives were to determine how widely the notations of the UML, and their usefulness, have been studied empirically, and to identify which aspects of it have been studied in most detail. We undertook a mapping study of the literature to identify relevant empirical studies and to classify them in terms of the aspects of the UML that they studied. We then conducted a systematic literature review, covering empirical studies published up to the end of 2008, based on the main categories identified. We identified 49 relevant publications, and report the aggregated results for those categories for which we had enough papers— metrics, comprehension, model quality, methods and tools and adoption. Despite indications that a number of problems exist with UML models, researchers tend to use the UML as a ‘given’ and seem reluctant to ask questions that might help to make it more effective. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
    Software Practice and Experience 04/2011; 41(4):363 - 392. DOI:10.1002/spe.1009 · 1.01 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Practical experience suggests that the use and understanding of UML diagrams is greatly affected by the quality of their layout. In previous work, we have presented evidence supporting this intuition. This contrasts with earlier experiments that yielded weak or inconclusive evidence only. In the current paper, we expand on our earlier experiments by varying both diagram types and populations studied. We find no difference in the beneficial evidence of good layout wrt. diagram types. We also find support for the hypothesis that experts benefit less than novices. While still lacking independent replication of our earlier results, these results add further evidence in support of our hypothesis.
    2012 IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing (VL/HCC); 09/2012
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Practical experience suggests that use and understanding of UML diagrams is greatly affected by the quality of their layout. However, existing experimental evidence for this effect is been weak and inconclusive. In this paper, we explore two explanations. Firstly, we observe that the visual qualities of diagrams are more prominent in earlier life cycle phases so that the impact of layout quality should be more apparent in models and diagram types used there, an aspect not studied in previous research. Secondly, in practice, good layouts use many different heuristics simultaneously whereas previous research considered them in isolation only. In this paper, we report the results of a series of controlled experiments using compound layouts on requirements analysis models. With very high significance, we find a notable impact of the layout quality measured by different aspects of cognitive load.
    Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing (VL/HCC), 2011 IEEE Symposium on; 01/2011

Full-text (2 Sources)

Available from
Aug 11, 2014