Background: Systematic literature reviews (SLRs) require robust search strategies to ensure comprehensive coverage. Although database searches have traditionally been the primary method, snowballing has emerged as an effective alternative strategy in software engineering research. However, the success of snowballing heavily depends on the initial seed set's composition, particularly regarding diversity across authors, publication years, and venues. Objective: This study investigates how different diversity characteristics in seed set creation influence snowballing performance and effectiveness in identifying relevant literature. Method: We conducted replication studies of two existing SLRs, comparing their conventional seed set creation approaches with our diversity-driven methodology, where we systematically incorporated diversity characteristics into constructing the seed sets. Results: Our diversity-based approach demonstrated substantial improvements, with a precision of 0.019 (compared to 0.006 in the original), a relative recall of 0.97 (versus 0.921), and an F-measure of 0.0372 (improving from 0.0119). Conclusions: The empirical evidence suggests that incorporating diversity criteria in seed set creation enhances snowballing efficacy while maintaining comprehensive coverage of relevant literature. This approach offers a systematic and effective method for conducting snowballbased literature reviews in software engineering research.

Context: New scientific evidence continuously arises with advances in Software Engineering (SE) research. Conventionally, Systematic Literature Reviews (SLRs) are not updated or updated intermittently, leaving gaps between updates, during which time the SLR may be missing crucial new evidence. Goal: We propose and evaluate a concept and process called Continuous Systematic Literature Review (CSLR) in SE. Method: To elaborate on the CSLR concept and process, we performed a synthesis of evidence by conducting a meta-ethnography, addressing knowledge from varied research areas. Furthermore, we conducted a case study to evaluate the CSLR process. Results: We describe the resulting CSLR process in BPMN format. The case study results provide indications on the importance and preliminary feasibility of applying CSLR in practice to continuously update SLR evidence in SE. Conclusion: The CSLR concept and process provide a feasible and systematic way to continuously incorporate new evidence into SLRs, supporting trustworthy and up-to-date evidence for SLRs in SE.

Context: There are several initiatives to semi-automate the initial selection of studies task for Systematic Literature Reviews (SLR) to reduce effort and potential bias. Objective: We propose a strategy called SCAS-AI to semi-automate the initial selection task. This strategy improves the original SCAS strategy with Artificial Intelligence (AI) resources (fuzzy logic and genetic algorithm) for studies selection. Method: We evaluated the SCAS-AI strategy through a quasi-experiment with SLRs in Software Engineering (SE). Results: In general, the SCAS-AI strategy improved the results achieved using the original SCAS strategy in reducing the effort of the initial selection task. The effort reduction applying SCAS-AI was 39.1%. In addition, the errors percentage was 0.3% for studies automatically excluded (false negative – loss of evidence) and 3.3% for studies automatically included (false positive – evidence later excluded during the full-text reading). Conclusion: The results show the potential of the investigated AI techniques to support the initial selection task for SLRs in SE.

Context: A tertiary study can be performed to identify related reviews on a topic of interest. However, the elaboration of an appropriate and effective search string to detect secondary studies is challenging for Software Engineering (SE) researchers. Objective: The main goal of this study is to propose a suitable search string to detect secondary studies in SE, addressing issues such as the quantity of applied terms, relevance, recall and precision. Method: We analyzed seven tertiary studies under two perspectives: (1) structure – strings’ terms to detect secondary studies; and (2) field: where searching – titles alone or abstracts alone or titles and abstracts together, among others. We validate our string by performing a twostep validation process. Firstly, we evaluated the capability to retrieve secondary studies over a set of 1537 secondary studies included in 24 tertiary studies in SE. Secondly, we evaluated the general capacity of retrieving secondary studies over an automated search using the Scopus digital library. Results: Our string was capable to retrieve an optimum value of over 90% of the included secondary studies (recall) with a high general precision of almost 60%. Conclusion: The suitable search string for finding secondary studies in SE contains the terms “systematic review”, “literature review”, “systematic mapping”, “mapping study” and “systematic map”.

Context: Searching and selecting relevant evidence is crucial to answer research questions from secondary studies in Software Engineering (SE). The activities of search and selection of studies are labour-intensive, time-consuming and demand automation support. Objective: Our goal is to identify and summarize the state-of-the-art on automation support for searching and selecting evidence for secondary studies in SE. Method: We performed a systematic mapping on existing automating support to search and select evidence for secondary studies in SE, expanding our investigation in a cross-domain study addressing advancements from the medical field. Results: Our results show that the SE field has a variety of tools and Text Classification (TC) approaches to automate the search and selection activities. However, medicine has more well-established tools with a larger adoption than SE. Cross-validation and experiment are the most adopted methods to assess TC approaches. Furthermore, recall and precision are the most adopted assessment metrics. Conclusion: Automated approaches for searching and selecting studies in SE have not been applied in practice by SE researchers. Integrated and easy-to-use automated approaches addressing consolidated TC techniques can bring relevant advantages on workload and time saving for SE researchers who conduct secondary studies.

Open Source Software (OSS) has been recognized by the software development community as an effective way to deliver software. Unlike traditional software development, OSS development is driven by collaboration among developers spread geographically and motivated by common goals and interests. Besides this fact, it is recognized by the OSS community the need to understand OSS development process and its activities. Our goal is to investigate the state-of-art about OSS process through conducting a systematic literature review providing an overview of how the OSS community has been investigating OSS process over past years. We identified and summarized OSS process activities and their characteristics and translated them into an OSS macro process using BPMN notation. As a result, we systematically analyzed 33 studies presenting an overview of the OSS process research and a generalized OSS development macro process represented by BPMN notation with a detailed description of each OSS process activity and roles in OSS environment. We conclude that OSS process can be in practice further investigated by researchers. In addition, the presented OSS process can be used as a guide for OSS projects and be adapted according to each OSS project reality. It provides insights to managers and developers who want to improve their development process even in OSS and traditional environments. Finally, recommendations for OSS community regarding OSS process activities are provided.

Context: Systematic Literature Reviews (SLRs) are important instruments for both Software Engineering (SE) practitioners and scientific community. Their value directly depends on their quality and up-to-date results. However, most of the SLRs are outdated and the current scenario on how SLRs are documented does not favor their updating process. Goal: In this scenario, the main goal of this paper is to present an experience report on how to transfer the know-how of SLRs to facilitate their updates. Method: To address this issue, we used a Knowledge Management (KM) model, known as Nonaka-Takeuchi model, and described how we instantiated the Model for SLR update. We use two SLRs updates conducted by us to illustrate some of the knowledge sharing issues. Results: Our examples showed that the introduction of the concept of KM in the SLR update is in fact valuable, especially for sharing tacit knowledge (decisions) taken throughout the review process. Conclusions: We conclude that KM principles can be applied to manage the knowledge generated during the update of SLR.

Background: Several researchers have reported their experiences in applying secondary studies in Software Engineering (SE), however, there is a lack of studies discussing the distinction between Systematic Mappings (SMs) and Systematic Literature Reviews (SLRs).Aims: The objective of this paper is to present the results of a tertiary study conducted to collect and evaluate evidence to better understand similarities and differences between SLRs and SMs related to four aspects: research question, search string, search strategy and quality assessment.Method: We identified 170 secondary studies that were reviewed to answer a set of Research Questions (RQ) related to the practical conduction of secondary studies in SE.Results: Results show that both SLRs and SMs have generic RQs, broad search strings, and adopt automatic search as search strategy.However, quality assessment has been more widely adopted in SLRs.Conclusions: In practice, only the quality assessment is conducted differently in SLRs and SMs.