Skip to content

First Systematic Literature Search: Focusing on Existing Reviews

Table of Contents

  1. General Information
  2. Searched Libraries
    1. Individual Libraries
      1. ACM
      2. IEEE
      3. SpringerLink
    2. Joined Results
  3. Selection of Suitable Literature
    1. Title-Based Selection
    2. Abstract-Based Selection
    3. Full-Text Scan
    4. Snowballing

1. General Information

The following search strings were used to retrieve literature dealing with the desired topics.

Search string 1: 

(Abstract:(((modeling OR modelling) AND (language OR languages))) AND
Abstract:(cloud OR "service-oriented") AND
(Title:(review OR survey) OR Abstract:(review OR survey)))

Search string 2: 

(Abstract:((("domain-specific" OR "domain specific") AND
(language OR languages))) AND Abstract:(cloud OR "service-oriented") AND
(Title:(review OR survey) OR Abstract:(review OR survey)))

Search string 3: 

(Abstract:(("description language") OR ("description languages")) AND
Abstract:(cloud OR "service-oriented") AND
(Title:(review OR survey) OR Abstract:(review OR survey)))


Overview First Literature Search

Short summary of the overall procedure for the review search

📆 Search date: 2022-01-24 until 2022-01-26

2. Searched Libraries

2.1 Individual Libraries

ACM

"query": { Abstract:(((modeling OR modelling) AND (language OR languages))) AND
Abstract:(cloud OR "service-oriented") AND
(Title:(review OR survey) OR Abstract:(review OR survey)) }
"filter": { ACM Content: DL }
🔍 Results: 18
ACM_Modeling_language_raw_results

"query": { Abstract:((("domain-specific" OR "domain specific") AND
(language OR languages))) AND Abstract:(cloud OR "service-oriented") AND
(Title:(review OR survey) OR Abstract:(review OR survey)) }
"filter": { ACM Content: DL }
🔍 Results: 1
ACM_Domain-specific_language_raw_results

"query": { Abstract:(("description language") OR ("description languages")) AND
Abstract:(cloud OR "service-oriented") AND
(Title:(review OR survey) OR Abstract:(review OR survey)) }
"filter": { ACM Content: DL }
🔍 Results: 2
ACM_Description_language_raw_results

Merged search results:
ACM_merged_raw_results

Result after removing duplicates: 🔍 19
     ACM_merged_removed_duplicates

IEEE

(("Abstract": modeling OR "Abstract": modelling) AND
("Abstract": language OR "Abstract": languages)) AND
("Abstract": cloud OR "Abstract": "service-oriented") AND
(("Abstract": review OR "Abstract": survey) OR
("Document Title":review OR  "Document Title":survey))

🔍 Results: 31
IEEE_Modeling_language_raw_results

(("Abstract": domain-specific OR "Abstract": domain specific) AND
("Abstract": language OR "Abstract": languages)) AND
("Abstract": cloud OR "Abstract": "service-oriented") AND
(("Abstract": review OR "Abstract": survey) OR
("Document Title":review OR "Document Title":survey))

🔍 Results: 4
IEEE_Domain-specific_language_raw_results

("Abstract": "description language" OR "Abstract": "description languages") AND
("Abstract": cloud OR "Abstract": "service-oriented") AND
(("Abstract": review OR "Abstract": survey) OR
("Document Title":review OR "Document Title":survey))

🔍 Results: 3
IEEE_Description_language_raw_results

Merged search results:
IEEE_merged_raw_results

Result after removing duplicates: 🔍 33
     IEEE_merged_removed_duplicates

The search terms are more specific than the ACM and IEEE searches because SpringerLink allows only a full-text search. However, the found literature remained too large to be analyzed despite the more specific search terms. Therefore, it was decided to provide further restrictions for the title. The idea was that reviews concerning modeling languages for the cloud have most likely either “survey“ or “review“ in their title. This was also considered in the searches on ACM and IEEE but as an option between abstract or title. In order to restrict the search not too much, the title restriction for SpringerLink was extended by another option for the title: “cloud“ in combination with “language“. Thus, the terms "cloud" NEAR "language" and "language" NEAR "cloud" were also specified for the title restriction. Using the NEAR-operator (e.g. "cloud" NEAR "language") returns results where the search term on the left (in the example: "cloud") is within ten words of the word to the right (for the example: "language")1.

Furthermore, SpringerLink only provides the option to export the search results as .csv-file. Therefore, this .csv-file had to be transformed into a .bib-file. For this, an R-Script was used to retrieve the DOIs from the .csv-files and save them in a .txt-file:

Retrieve DOIs from CSV-file
FoundLiterature <- read.csv("searchResults.csv", encoding = "UTF-8");
DOIs <- FoundLiterature["Item.DOI"]

write.table(DOIs,file="DOIs.txt", row.names = FALSE, quote=FALSE)
The R-Script can also be found in the following file: Retrieve_DOIs_From_CSV

The received DOIs were then used with the tool Zotero to create a .bib-file with the respective literature.

Conducting the advanced search using the following restriction...
("modeling language" OR "modelling language" OR
"modeling languages" OR "modelling languages") AND
("cloud computing" OR "cloud-native" OR "cloud native" OR
"service-oriented architecture")
Files for .csv to .bib
  1. Export from SpringerLink: CSV-Modeling_language_review_raw_results
  2. Retrieved DOIs: DOIs_Modeling_language_review
  3. Result: Bib-Modeling_language_review_raw_results

🔍 Results: 69

("modeling language" OR "modelling language" OR
"modeling languages" OR "modelling languages") AND
("cloud computing" OR "cloud-native" OR "cloud native" OR
"service-oriented architecture")
Files for .csv to .bib
  1. Export from SpringerLink: CSV-Modeling_language_survey_raw_results
  2. Retrieved DOIs: DOIs_Modeling_language_survey
  3. Result: Bib-Modeling_language_survey_raw_results

🔍 Results: 43

("modeling language" OR "modelling language" OR
"modeling languages" OR "modelling languages") AND
("cloud computing" OR "cloud-native" OR "cloud native" OR
"service-oriented architecture")
Files for .csv to .bib
  1. Export from SpringerLink: CSV-Modeling_language_cloud-near-language_raw_results
  2. Retrieved DOIs: DOIs_Modeling_language_cloud-near-language
  3. Result: Bib-Modeling_language_cloud-near-language_raw_results

🔍 Results: 2

("modeling language" OR "modelling language" OR
"modeling languages" OR "modelling languages") AND
("cloud computing" OR "cloud-native" OR "cloud native" OR
"service-oriented architecture")
Files for .csv to .bib
  1. Export from SpringerLink: CSV-Modeling_language_language-near-cloud_raw_results
  2. Retrieved DOIs: DOIs_Modeling_language_language-near-cloud
  3. Result: Bib-Modeling_language_language-near-cloud_raw_results

🔍 Results: 3

Conducting the advanced search using the following restriction...
("domain-specific language" OR "domain specific language" OR
"domain-specific languages" OR "domain specific languages") AND
("cloud computing" OR "cloud-native" OR "cloud native" OR
"service-oriented architecture")
Files for .csv to .bib
  1. Export from SpringerLink: CSV-Domain-specific_language_review_raw_results
  2. Retrieved DOIs: DOIs_Domain-specific_language_review
  3. Result: Bib-Domain-specific_language_review_raw_results

🔍 Results: 17

("domain-specific language" OR "domain specific language" OR
"domain-specific languages" OR "domain specific languages") AND
("cloud computing" OR "cloud-native" OR "cloud native" OR
"service-oriented architecture")
Files for .csv to .bib
  1. Export from SpringerLink: CSV-Domain-specific_language_survey_raw_results
  2. Retrieved DOIs: DOIs_Domain-specific_language_survey
  3. Result: Bib_Domain-specific_language_survey_raw_results

🔍 Results: 22

("domain-specific language" OR "domain specific language" OR
"domain-specific languages" OR "domain specific languages") AND
("cloud computing" OR "cloud-native" OR "cloud native" OR
"service-oriented architecture")

🔍 Results: 0

("domain-specific language" OR "domain specific language" OR
"domain-specific languages" OR "domain specific languages") AND
("cloud computing" OR "cloud-native" OR "cloud native" OR
"service-oriented architecture")

🔍 Results: 0

Conducting the advanced search using the following restriction...
(" description language" OR "description languages") AND
("cloud computing" OR "cloud-native" OR "cloud native" OR
"service-oriented architecture")
Files for .csv to .bib
  1. Export from SpringerLink: CSV-Description_language_review_raw_results
  2. Retrieved DOIs: DOIs_Description_language_review
  3. Result: Bib-Description_language_review_raw_results

🔍 Results: 31

("description language" OR "description languages") AND
("cloud computing" OR "cloud-native" OR "cloud native" OR
"service-oriented architecture")
Files for .csv to .bib
  1. Export from SpringerLink: CSV-Description_language_survey_raw_results
  2. Retrieved DOIs: DOIs_Description_language_survey
  3. Result: Bib-Description_language_survey_raw_results

🔍 Results: 37

(" description language" OR "description languages") AND
("cloud computing" OR "cloud-native" OR "cloud native" OR
"service-oriented architecture")
Files for .csv to .bib
  1. Export from SpringerLink: CSV-Description_language_cloud-near-language_raw_results
  2. Retrieved DOIs: DOIs_Description_language_cloud-near-language
  3. Result: Bib-Description_language_cloud-near-language_raw_results

🔍 Results: 1

(" description language" OR "description languages") AND
("cloud computing" OR "cloud-native" OR "cloud native" OR
"service-oriented architecture")

🔍 Results: 0

Merged search results:
SpringerLink_merged_raw_results

Result after removing duplicates: 🔍 176
     SpringerLink_merged_removed_duplicates

2.2 Joined Results

The search results from all three libraries were merged and existing duplicates removed. However, no duplicates were found in this merge.

Merged search results: 🔍 228
     Total_search-results_merged

3. Selection of Suitable Literature

In order to find suitable literature to determine which ADLs are worth evaluating, the following steps were conducted. For this, the focus lies on existing reviews of modeling languages (preferably in the cloud or service-oriented domain) to select the ones worth evaluating.

3.1 Title-Based Selection

❌ Exclusion Criteria:

  • Meta entries for conference proceedings
  • Keynotes and invited-talks
  • Surveys or Reviews not related to modeling languages, for example regarding service discovery, virtual reality or machine learning
  • Unrelated topics, for instance regarding NLP, security, smart home/village or artificial intelligence-related topics like neural networks
  • The terms "model" or "modeling" appear in a different and unrelated context, such as a review model, data model or trust modeling

✔ Inclusion criteria:

  • Reference to a model, to modeling or modeling language(s)
    exceptions see above
  • Paper topic not evident from the title, for example "Literature review"
  • Reference to specific modeling languages
  • General reference to software architecture, too general to be excluded

The result after filtering based on the title: 🔍 54
     1_Title_Filtering_results

3.2 Abstract-Based Selection

❌ Exclusion Criteria:

  • Only focusing on one modeling language and not reviewing others in addition

  • The term "model" refers to a different and not relevant context such as deployment metamodel or quality models

  • Type of modeling does not refer to architecture, for example lifecycle modeling, modeling transformation or (business) process modeling

  • Dealing with a different, unrelated context

  • Focus too narrow or specific, for example manufacturing process, machine learning or security aspects

✔ Inclusion Criteria:

  • Reference to reviewing several architecture languages
    synonyms like service description language or survey are also included
    synonyms like examine or analyze are also included
    ( preferably cloud or service-oriented context)
  • General reference to survey and software architecture, abstract still too general to be excluded
  • Reference to reviewing modeling languages in cloud context

The result after filtering based on the abstract: 🔍 11
     2_Abstract_Filtering_results

3.3 Full-Text Scan

❌ Exclusion Criteria:

  • No actual review of modeling languages, for example simply a listing of existing ones
  • Review criteria and area too specific to be included or relevant

✔ Inclusion Criteria:

  • Actual review of several modeling languages regarding a range of different criteria
  • Considered area and criteria are relevant to cloud domain
Removal Reasoning per paper

Bibtex-Keys refer to the 2_Abstract_Filtering_results file.
The previous citationkeys have been adapted for standardization purposes but can be found in the comment field.

Bibtex-Key
Title
Removal Reason
Chen2010 A Ten-Year Survey of Software Architecture Analysis of the advances regarding software architectures. For this, the authors considered some ADLs, the design and evolution of software architecture design and a short presenation of the SOA.
  • Presentation and short comparison of five ADLs
    No consideration of cloud or service-related aspects
    Very few general aspects were considered like application scope or supporting tools
Liu2020 A Survey of Model-Driven Techniques and Tools for Cyber-Physical Systems Analyzation of state-of-the-art model-driven approaches in the context of CPS. For this, model-based systems engineering techniques/ tools were considered and compared.
  • Focus lies on analyzing the different ADLs regarding CPS aspects like physical plant or controller as components
    Too specific aspects analyzed
  • Short general analysis
    Too few aspects with not enough detail to be considered
Mary2011 Survey and Comparison of Frameworks in Software Architecture Short description of several architectural frameworks and analyzing different aspects of them.
  • Focus lies on analyzing the different frameworks
    No actual or detailed review of modeling languages
Mohsin2018 A review and future directions of SOA-based software architecture modeling approaches for System of Systems Service-oriented architecture in the context of software architecture modeling for SoS. The review analyzes different modeling languages typical for software-oriented architecture.
  • Analyzation of SOA typical modeling languages
    Desired cloud relation is missing
  • Used analyzation aspects very general
    No cloud specific aspects considered
Teka2012 A Systematic Literature Review on Service Description Methods A systematic literature review regarding service description languages while analyzing their strengths and weaknesses.
  • Focus lies solely on service description aspects
    No review or analysis regarding architecture related aspects
  • Only statements regarding modeling of individual services
    Not considering the system as a whole
Zaafouri2021 Systematic Literature Review on Service Oriented Architecture Modeling A systematic literature review to identify typical modeling methods for SOA-based architectures.
  • Simply a literature review regarding the techniques that have been used to model a service-oriented architecture (SOA)
    No actual or detailed review of the modeling languages
  • Not focusing on modeling languages for solely architecture related specifics but also considering e.g. behavioural related
    Many are not relevant for the intended use case

The result after filtering based on full-text scan: 🔍 5
     3_Full-text_scan_results

3.4 Snowballing

As the last step, the Snowballing technique was chosen to obtain more relevant literature potentially. This approach also allows a certain quality to check whether most relevant papers have already been retrieved In order to achieve this, both backward snowballing as well as forward snowballing were carried out.

Backward Snowballing

For the backward approach, the references of all identified reviews from the Full-text Scan are checked. Especially, the literature mentioned in the respective related work section is considered in more detail. However, this analysis showed that already all relevant reviews were retrieved.

Forward Snowballing

On the other hand, the search engine Google Scholar2 was used for the forward approach. Google Scholar allows investigating papers that cited the searched paper. With this approach, two papers that cite the paper by [Bergmayr2014] could be identified as relevant:

  • Towards a Lightweight Multi-Cloud DSL for Elastic and Transferable Cloud-native Applications [Quint2018]

  • A Framework for Modeling Cloud Infrastructures and User Interactions [Bernal2019]

These two papers also include reviews concerning some architecture modeling languages for cloud applications while considering cloud-related aspects. However, these reviews are shorter or considering more specific aspects of the cloud.

The Bibtex-file that includes the final selection of relevant literature: 🔍 7
     4_Final_Selection

  1. taken from https://link.springer.com/searchhelp, last accessed: 2022-01-27 ↩

  2. https://scholar.google.com/, last accessed: 2022-01-31 ↩

Last update: 2022-08-31
Back to top