Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Yalemisew M. Abgaz

dblp:47/7514 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
9ranked-venue papers
2as first author
3since 2021 · last 2024
0000-0002-3887-5342ORCID · verified

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Applied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 4 · 1 first-authorSoftware engineering, systems software and programming languages · 3 · 1 first-author · 2 since 2021Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 2 · 1 since 2021Databases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 2 · 1 since 2021

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
1 paper
Services computing and microservices · 75% Software maintenance and evolution · 25%

Topics — the 4 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Services computing and microservices
microservice architecture
0.712023
Decomposition of Monolith Applications Into Microservices Architectures: A Systematic Review · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 2023
Services computing and microservices › microservice architecture
monolith decomposition
0.712023
Decomposition of Monolith Applications Into Microservices Architectures: A Systematic Review · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 2023
Services computing and microservices › microservice architecture
monolith-to-microservice decomposition
0.712023
Decomposition of Monolith Applications Into Microservices Architectures: A Systematic Review · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 2023
Software maintenance and evolution › software reengineering
software modernization
0.712023
Decomposition of Monolith Applications Into Microservices Architectures: A Systematic Review · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 2023

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

systematic literature review · 0.7snowballing · 0.7
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2024 Evaluation of Gender Bias in Amharic Word Embedding Model
Beimnet Zenebe, Solomon Gizaw, Yalemisew M. Abgaz
NLDB (2)3
2023 Decomposition of Monolith Applications Into Microservices Architectures: A Systematic Review
abstract
Microservices architecture has gained significant traction, in part owing to its potential to deliver scalable, robust, agile, and failure-resilient software products. Consequently, many companies that use large and complex software systems are actively looking for automated solutions to decompose their monolith applications into microservices. This paper rigorously examines 35 research papers selected from well-known databases using a Systematic Literature Review (SLR) protocol and snowballing method, extracting data to answer the research questions, and presents the following four contributions. First, the Monolith to Microservices Decomposition Framework (M2MDF) which identifies the major phases and key elements of decomposition. Second, a detailed analysis of existing decomposition approaches, tools and methods. Third, we identify the metrics and datasets used to evaluate and validate monolith to microservice decomposition processes. Fourth, we propose areas for future research. Overall, the findings suggest that monolith decomposition into microservices remains at an early stage and there is an absence of methods for combining static, dynamic, and evolutionary data. Insufficient tool support is also in evidence. Furthermore, standardised metrics, datasets, and baselines have yet to be established. These findings can assist practitioners seeking to understand the various dimensions of monolith decomposition and the community's current capabilities in that endeavour. The findings are also of value to researchers looking to identify areas to further extend research in the monolith decomposition space.
Yalemisew M. Abgaz, Andrew McCarren, Peter Elger, David Solan, Neil Lapuz, Marin Bivol, Glenn Jackson, Murat Yilmaz 0001, Jim Buckley, Paul M. Clarke
IEEE Trans. Software Eng.1
2021 Digital Transformation and the Role of Dynamic Tooling in Extracting Microservices from Existing Software Systems
Neil Lapuz, Paul M. Clarke, Yalemisew M. Abgaz
EuroSPI3
2020 A Multivocal Literature Review of Function-as-a-Service (FaaS) Infrastructures and Implications for Software Developers
Jake Grogan, Connor Mulready, James McDermott, Martynas Urbanavicius, Murat Yilmaz 0001, Yalemisew M. Abgaz, Andrew McCarren, Silvana Togneri MacMahon, Vahid Garousi, Peter Elger, Paul M. Clarke
EuroSPI6
2017 Characteristics of Pro-c Analogies and Blends between Research Publications
Yalemisew M. Abgaz, Diarmuid P. O'Donoghue, Donny Hurley, Ehtzaz Chaudhry, Jian J. Zhang 0001
ICCC1
2015 Stimulating and Simulating Creativity with Dr Inventor
Diarmuid P. O'Donoghue, Yalemisew M. Abgaz, Donny Hurley, Francesco Ronzano, Horacio Saggion
ICCC2
2014 Can a Computationally Creative System Create Itself? Creative Artefacts and Creative Processes
Diarmuid P. O'Donoghue, James F. Power, Sian O'Briain, Aidan Mooney, Donny Hurley, Yalemisew M. Abgaz, Charles Markham
ICCC7
2014 Towards Dr Inventor: A Tool for Promoting Scientific Creativity
Diarmuid P. O'Donoghue, Horacio Saggion, Donny Hurley, Yalemisew M. Abgaz, Óscar Corcho, Jian J. Zhang 0001, J. M. Careil, Babak Mahdian
ICCC5
2011 Towards Implicit Knowledge Discovery from Ontology Change Log Data
Muhammad Javed 0002, Yalemisew M. Abgaz, Claus Pahl
KSEM2