An Empirical Study of the Improved SPLD Framework using Expert Opinion Technique

(IJEACS) International Journal of Engineering and Applied Computer Science
Volume: 02, Issue: 03, March 2017
ISBN: 978-0-9957075-4-2
www.ijeacs.com
DOI: 10.24032/ijeacs/0203/03
98
An Empirical Study of the Improved SPLD
Framework using Expert Opinion Technique
Md. Mottahir Alam
(Ph.D. Scholar), Dept. of Computer
Science, Singhania University, Jhunjhunu
Rajasthan, India
Asif Irshad Khan
Department of Computer Science
FCIT, King Abdulaziz University
Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
Aasim Zafar
Dept. of Computer Science
Aligarh Muslim University
Aligarh, UP, India
Abstract—Due to the growing need for high-performance and
low-cost software applications and the increasing
competitiveness, the industry is under pressure to deliver
products with low development cost, reduced delivery time and
improved quality. To address these demands, researchers have
proposed several development methodologies and
frameworks. One of the latest methodologies is software product
line (SPL) which utilizes the concepts like reusability and
variability to deliver successful products with shorter time-to-
market, least development and minimum maintenance cost with a
high-quality product. This research paper is a validation of our
proposed framework, Improved Software Product Line (ISPL),
using Expert Opinion Technique. An extensive survey based on a
set of questionnaires on various aspects and sub-processes of the
ISPLD Framework was carried. Analysis of the empirical data
concludes that ISPL shows significant improvements on several
aspects of the contemporary SPL frameworks.
Keywords- Software Product Line; empirical study; software
reuse; feature coverage; variability; product line methods; feature
modeling.
I. INTRODUCTION
The constant demand for developing larger and complex
software applications in a limited time and optimal cost tries to
find an answer in software reusability. According to K Jordan
[1], software reusability is the approach in which software
products or applications are realized by implementing pre-
existing software assets in an organization. Assets include
specifications, library, design, framework, tools, software
program, component or some documentation. There are
numerous benefits of reusability [2, 3]:
1) Improve timeliness by delivering product in lesser
time to market;
2) Lesser maintenance cost;
3) Boost development efficiency
4) Improve consistency of the software design;
Traditionally, software reuse, in general, was not planned
and was focused on maintaining software components into a
repository in the anticipation that opportunities for future reuse
may happen. Nowadays, a number of optimized software reuse
approaches have been proposed by the researchers and
industries [3]. One such approach is software product line
engineering (SPLE) which supports reuse by building tailored
products meeting needs of particular market segments. Reuse
in SPL is planned in a systematic and efficient manner and is
performed for each artifact resulting from the development
process. These artifacts are organized and interrelated
collection of software components that can be reused across
applications.
SPLE manipulates commonalities and variabilities of a set
of similar products in an organized way so as to lower
development costs, improve quality, and minimize time-to-
market. Under this approach, software products are developed
around a set of some common components with specific
variabilities resulting in different product configurations [4, 5].
As per practical experiences, SPL helps companies to achieve
out of bound improvements in development cost, delivery time,
product quality, and adaptability [4].
SPLE is generally comprised of 2 main engineering stages:
domain engineering and application engineering [6,7]. During
domain engineering, the commonality and the variability in the
product line are described and implemented. In application
engineering, the different product applications are delivered by
reusing artifacts developed during domain engineering and
manipulating the product line variability. Product development
through SPLE is achieved by developing a flexible and
reusable product platform [7]. The basic idea of this
developmental approach is to separate common parts of a
product family from the differences between the products on
the basis of domain knowledge. These common features are
used to build a platform which is then used as a standard to
create a wide range of products in a product family. In the
software context, a platform is a set of reusable assets. It acts as
a technological base on which software products or
applications are built. The differences among these similar
products are captured through variability. Variability is the

Md. Mottahir Alam et al. (IJEACS) International Journal of Engineering and Applied Computer Science
ISBN: 978-0-9957075-4-2
www.ijeacs.com
DOI: 10.24032/ijeacs/0203/03
99
capability of software artifacts to vary and its smart
management and controlling helps in the realization of
successful SPL [8]. It is the flexibility of software artifacts to
vary and its smart management and controlling help in the
realization of successful SPL [9].
Manufacturing companies like Boeing and Ford have
already successfully adopted product line approach to have
control over budget and efficiency by taking benefit of
common features among similar products. Several other
companies like Hewlett-Packard, Motorola, Dell have also
been following SPL approach [10]. Although product line is
not a new idea for manufacturing companies, it is a
comparatively new approach for software companies.
However, studies have proved beyond doubt that companies
which have implemented product line approach have earned
tremendous benefits and achieved momentous improvements in
costs, delivery time, reliability, usability, portability and
maintenance, and customer satisfaction [6, 11].
Bosch in 2000 proposed that creation of a product line can
be categorized into three parts, namely, the vital reusable assets
of the product line, the management of the product line and the
life cycles of the reusable artifacts of the product line [12].
Researchers, of late, have proposed several approaches to
implementing software reuse by amalgamating component-
based software development (CBSD) and software product
lines (SPL) as it maximizes the software reusability.
This paper is planned as follows: Section II discusses
related work in software product line framework. Section III
discusses the overview of the improved SPL framework.
Section IV describes assessment using expert opinion
technique. Section V presents the research findings and section
VI provides concluding remarks and future work.
II. RELATED WORK
There are several approaches proposed by researchers to
manage software product line development.
Weiss et.al [13] put forward a model for SPLE, called as
FAST (Family-oriented abstraction, specification, and
translation). It is a feature-based model.
FAST Model supports a major share of common artifacts
among themselves when the range of similar products is
developed.
Common artifacts are analyzed to create a group of
products and that result in building of potential software
families with common feature like behavior, interfaces, or
code. This helps in making the software development more
robust by reusing the common artifacts, which in turn decreases
the development cost, and reduces the time-to-market as shown
in Figure 1.
The processes in this framework are divided into three sub-processes:
i. Domain qualification: In this phase cost benefit analysis is
done to study the economic feasibility of the potential
product line.
ii. Domain engineering: In this phase product line
infrastructure, core assets reusability and family definition
are analyzed for the potential product line.
iii. Application Engineering: In this phase reusable core assets
are used to build the product line family.
Figure 1. FAST Flow Process [13].
Kang proposed FODA-Feature-Oriented Domain Analysis
[14] to identify and model features. This model is based on
domain analysis process to identify distinct features within a
product line. This approach involves three basic processes,
namely,
i) Analysis of the domain of the SPL
ii) Analysis the features of the SPL
iii) Modeling the features of the SPL
Kim, J. et.al [15] in 2008 suggested a framework for
implementing both domain requirements as well as modeling
core architecture in SPL. It is presented in Fig. 2. The
framework uses processes, methods and support tools and
shows a mapping between product line requirements and
reference architecture. It involves concepts such as goal
oriented domain requirement analysis, analytical hierarchy
process (AHP), matrix technique and architecture styles.
It performs domain requirement analysis by classifying
requirements into four different stages: Business stage, service
stage, interaction stage, and internal stage. This helps in
identifying and building components.
The next step is to prioritize the components using matrix
techniques and analytical hierarchy process (AHP). Finally,
reference architecture is created based on the components and
their quality attributes.

ISBN: 978-0-9957075-4-2
www.ijeacs.com
DOI: 10.24032/ijeacs/0203/03
100
Figure 1. DRAMA process [15].
Tanhaei, M. et.al [16] in 2010 proposed an architecture-
based technique to select suitable components in an SPL. It is a
component-oriented technique to manage and control the
selection of components in an SPL, thereby reducing risks and
cost of software development. The components are carefully
selected on the basis of the reference architecture, product
family requirements, domain requirements, and concerns of
stakeholders. The architecture of this method is shown in Fig.3.
It starts with the selection of a component list from the
component lists on the basis of architecture variant point.
Figure 3. Architecture of method [16].
The components in the component list can be selected
either from COTS components or component repository. If the
component is not available, then it is developed. The selected
components are evaluated for approval. Once approved, these
components are passed through integrity test. Lastly, reference
architecture is obtained these selected and successfully tested
components. Mellado, D et.al [17] gave a framework which
emphasizes on security mechanisms for SPL as shown in Fig.4.
This framework categorizes activities into two main types:
application engineering and domain engineering. It implements
security by integrating domain security mechanism
PLSecDomReq and application security mechanism
PLSecAppReq.
Figure 4. Security requirements engineering framework for Software Product
Lines [17].
The reference architecture involves repositories,
traceability, and security mechanism. The various repositories
implemented in the framework are:
1) Software product line repository
2) Application repository
3) SPLSecurity Assets Repository
4) Application Security Asset Repository
5) The Security Standards Repository
III. OVERVIEW OF THE IMPROVED SPL FRAMEWORK
A security enabled framework for software product line
development is proposed with a high abstract level of software
product line (SPL) architecture as shown in Fig5. The model is
a mix of aspect-oriented and the feature-oriented approach. The
aspect-oriented approach addresses crosscutting concerns and
functional behaviors of SPL while the feature-oriented
approach is used to capture variability and commonality of
product lines. The detailed explanation of the proposed model
is as follows.
The model has two high-level processes: domain
engineering and application engineering. The main aim of
domain engineering is to identify and develop reusable artifacts
for reuse later in the application engineering phase. Application
engineering targets building of software products using the
identified reusable artifacts.

ISBN: 978-0-9957075-4-2
www.ijeacs.com
DOI: 10.24032/ijeacs/0203/03
101
Figure 5. Shows a high abstract level of Software Product Line (ISPL)
Architecture.
A. Domain Engineering Phase
Domain Engineering requires common and variable
requirements of the product line family as inputs and generates
reusable core assets such as components, framework, a library,
tools or a platform, etc. The core activities of the domain
engineering phase are described as follows:
 Business Feasibility Study
 Product Line Scoping
 Product Line Requirement Analysis
 Security Policy and Security Modeling
 Product line design and architecting
 Product line Implementation
 Product line Testing
B. Application Engineering Phase
Application engineering deals with requirements
specifications of individual products of the software product
line family are considered, and a customer-specific product is
developed by using the generic architecture and reusing the
core assets from domain engineering as much as possible.
Following are the major activities carried out to create
tailored products during application engineering:
 Application Requirement
 Application Design and Architecting
 Application Implementation
 Application Testing
 Delivery, Evolution, and Maintenance
For a detailed description, refer to [7].
IV. ASSESSMENT USING EXPERT OPINION
Expert opinion technique was utilized to assess and validate
different phases of the proposed SPL framework. This method
is very useful in evaluating certain system specific questions
linked to system behavior, usability and reusability as well as
system performance and uncertainties [18]. It also utilizes the
wide range of knowledge and expertise of the experts to
evaluate the product 19]. Many researchers have used this
technique and some scientific publications have emphasized
the reliability of using this tool. Authors have conducted expert
opinion surveys to validate their system process improvement
frameworks and have found this method very trustworthy [20].
Expert opinion technique to solicit the feedback of experts on a
process model is has been found to be very useful to validate
the framework informally [21].

ISBN: 978-0-9957075-4-2
www.ijeacs.com
DOI: 10.24032/ijeacs/0203/03
102
In this empirical research, the view was sought from
experts to evaluate different phases of proposed SPL
framework architecture based on the core aims of our research.
A questionnaire comprising of 10 items based on different
processes of the proposed framework was created. Experts
from software development companies, software vendors, and
academics were invited to participate in the research survey.
The following criteria were considered while inviting the
survey participants:
1) Currently working as a software architect or system
designer or software programmer with more than six
years of experience.
2) Should have expertise and skill in using state of the art
SPL framework and tools.
3) Should be willing to work as an unbiased evaluator.
4) Should be willing to commit time and effort to offer a
valuable opinion based on his working or research
experience.
The format of the questionnaire contains statements based
on each phase of the proposed SPL framework and respondents
were required to give their opinions about the statements in the
form of degree of their agreement/disagreement with the
statement. We employed the Likert scale which is invented by
psychologist Rensis Likert. It is a psychometric response scale
and has ratings 1 to 5. It is also called as rating scale and is
used by academicians and researchers in surveys to find
participants’ degree of agreement/disagreement with a specific
statement or group of statements. Table1 summarizes the Likert
scale employed in this survey.
TABLE 1
The results of our analysis were represented using bar
charts and frequency tables depicting the extent of analysis.
Selection of software experts to invite for the research survey is
the most important activity of the empirical research. The basic
goal of this empirical investigation and analysis is to validate
the proposed SPL framework that ensures a common core SPL
architecture achieving write one-time and reuse many- time
policy with no or slight variation, which results in reduced
development time, improved productivity, and quality product.
V. RESEARCH FINDING
The evaluation of our proposed framework is performed by
using a survey method involving software experts from
industry as well as academics to validate the different aspects
addressed in the given framework. The authors evaluate issues
by performing a cumulative evaluation of the various features
and concerns in the proposed framework. We sent a
questionnaire to 70 software experts in different software
companies and colleges around the world. A total of 52
responses was received out of the total 70 questionnaires sent.
The remaining 18 couldn’t send their responses until the time
of our analysis. Of the 52 responses received, six were not
included in our analysis as either they were incomplete or
didn’t meet our criteria for selection. Table 2- shows different
abbreviations used in our Analysis Tables and its description.
A. Evaluation of addressing Reusability in the product line
The software product line engineering is based on the
concept of software reusability. The proposed framework
improves the software reusability in every aspect of the product
family. Analysis of the survey concludes that 20% of the
responded strongly agreed and 62% agreed that the reusability
is addressed in a planned and systematic manner in the
framework. Also, approximately 11% of the respondents are
unsure of the reusability concern as addressed in the framework
while 7% of the respondents don’t agree on the reusability
concerns in the framework.
Figure Donut chart of respondent responds to the issue
addressed in the proposed framework. Overall, the majority of
the respondents gave a positive rating to the proposed
framework on this issue.
Figure shows of respondents’ responses to the issue
addressed in the proposed framework.

ISBN: 978-0-9957075-4-2
www.ijeacs.com
DOI: 10.24032/ijeacs/0203/03
103
B. Evaluation of Security, Data Protection, and configuration
issues
The framework addressed the cross-cutting concerns such
as security and data protection issues in a product line from the
early stages of the product line development as retrofitting
security in the later stages might break the product line
architecture.
Figure respondent responds to the issue addressed in the
proposed framework.
As per the survey, 13% strongly agreed while 76% agreed
that the proposed framework covers the cross-cutting concerns
of the product line in all the stages of domain and application
engineering.
Figure Bar chart of respondent responds to the issue
Overall, the framework voted positive rating on this issue.
Hence, the respondents considered that our framework
succeeded in addressing the cross-cutting concerns from the
early stages of the domain engineering till the application
engineering of the product family.
C. Evaluation of the commonality and variability aspects
Software product line is built around a set of common
software components with points of variability that allow a
wide range of products within a product family. We analyzed
the responses of the experts on this issue and found that
majority of the respondents gave the positive rating to the
proposed framework on this issue. As per survey data,
91% of the respondents either strongly agreed or agreed
that the proposed framework addresses the key concepts of
commonality and variability. Hence, it is concluded that the
commonality and variability aspects are also well addressed in
the proposed framework.
proposed framework.
D. Result of evaluation for the use of ADLs to support
variability
Architecture description languages (ADLs) provide support
for capturing variation points. It is recognized as an important
element in the description and analysis of software properties.
It allows describing of variable and dynamic features in the
SPL. However, not all ADLs provide support for capturing
variation points.

ISBN: 978-0-9957075-4-2
www.ijeacs.com
DOI: 10.24032/ijeacs/0203/03
104
The use of variability-supportive ADLs in the Product line
design and architecting phase of the proposed framework is
validated, and it is found that 26% of the respondents strongly
agreed while 52% agreed that ADLs used in the SPLE should
be supportive variability. Overall, 78% respondents agreed that
the use of variability-supportive ADLs as suggested in the
proposed framework is the best way to incorporate variability
in the SPLE. Also, approximately 20% of the respondents were
neutral on this matter.
E. Evaluation of Documentation, Tagging and Repository
aspects
Documentation is one of the reusable assets under the
concept of software reusability in the SPLE. In this proposed
framework, various aspects of a software product line
development such as business feasibility study, scope,
objectives, and evolution of the product line are recommended
to be documented. Besides, the product line requirements,
architecture design documents, test plan, test design, test cases,
etc. should also be developed and well documented. It should
also include component’s design, its documentation, its test
design and procedures, and any models to predict its behavior.
All these documents must be maintained so as to be used as
reusable assets throughout the lifetime of the product line.
The analysis of the data shows that proposed framework
through experts’ opinion and found that 26% of the
respondents strongly agreed while 50% agreed that reusable
artifacts present in the component catalog and repository
should be documented and maintained throughout the lifetime
of the software product line as mentioned in the proposed SPL
framework.
proposed framework.
Overall, 76% of the respondents gave a positive rating to
the framework.
F. Evaluation of the configuration management aspect in the
proposed framework
In a software product line, individual products are built,
using selections and configurations of the reusable components
as well as the implementation of product-specific features. The
configuration comprises of the selection of possible variants for
a specific application.
The products are abstracted by configuring the architecture
and tailoring components available in the component catalog. It
picks and configures the compulsory parts of the reference
architecture and adds in product specific variations to yield
unique products of a software product family.
proposed framework.
As per the survey data, the majority of the respondents
agreed that the configuration aspect is well managed in the
proposed framework. 27% of the respondents strongly agreed
while 54% agreed that the configuration management is
covered in the proposed SPL frame. Also, around 4.5% didn’t
agree while around 13% didn’t have any opinion on this issue.
Hence, the empirical study positively validates the proposed
framework on this aspect.
G. Result of evaluation to validate whether the proposed
framework addresses the testing concerns

ISBN: 978-0-9957075-4-2
www.ijeacs.com
DOI: 10.24032/ijeacs/0203/03
105
In an SPL, every product of a product family is based on a
unique set of features. Since SPLE technology is applied to
increasingly complex domains, the need for an efficient
product testing approach becomes more critical. Furthermore, a
product line grows over time to meet new demands of the
market, some enhancements or corrective modifications. To
make sure that these changes in are in conformance with the
product line core architecture, do not bring unforeseen errors,
and the new features work as expected, rigorous testing needs
to be performed. As per the survey data, the majority of the
respondents agreed that the testing aspect is well covered in the
proposed framework. 11% of the respondents strongly agreed
while 68% agreed that the configuration management is
covered in the proposed SPL frame. Also, around 2.2% didn’t
agree while around 15.5% didn’t have any opinion on this
issue. Hence, the empirical study positively validates the
proposed framework on the testing aspect.
proposed framework.
H. Overall Evaluation Results for the ISPL Framework
Overall, most of the evaluation criteria for the ISPL
Framework got positive ratings, and hence, it is concluded that
the experts found significant improvement in our ISPLD
framework.
Clearly, the framework thrives to achieve improvement in
almost every phase of the software product line development,
i.e. from business feasibility, study and product line scoping to
application implementation and testing.
VI. CONCLUSION
The proposed framework, ISPLD, has been empirically
studied and analyzed in this paper using expert opinion
technique.
We conducted an extensive survey based on a set of
questionnaires on various aspects and sub-processes of the
ISPLD Framework. The participants were chosen from
software product development firms, software vendors, and
academicians. Survey result shows that majority of the expert
give positive feedback on the ISPL Framework. The result of
analysis concluded that ISPLD framework brings significant
improvements.
REFERENCES
[1] Kimberly Jordan. Software Reuse, Term Paper for the MJY Team
Software Risk Management WWW Site, 21 April 1997. Accessed:
February 2010, www.baz.com/kjordan/swse625/docs/tp-kj.doc.
[2] Bertrand Meyer. Object-Oriented Software Construction. Prentice Hall
PTR, 2nd edition, 2000.
[3] Alam, M.M, Khan, A.I, Zafar, A., “A Comprehensive Study of
Software Product Line Frameworks”, International Journal of Computer
Applications (0975 – 8887) Volume 151 – No.3, October 2016.
[4] Clements, P., Northrop, L.: Software Product Lines: Practices and
Patterns. Addison-Wesley (2001)
[5] Van der Linden, F., et al.: Software Product Lines in Action: The Best
Industrial Practice in Product Line Engineering. Springer (2007)
[6] K. Pohl, G. B¨ockle, and F. J. v. d. Linden, Software Product Line
Engineering: Foundations, Principles, and Techniques.Secaucus, NJ,
USA: Springer-Verlag New York, Inc., 2005.
[7] Alam, M.M, Khan, A.I, Zafar, A. Md. Mottahir Alam, Asif Irshad Khan,
and Aasim Zafar. A Secure Framework for Software Product Line
Development. International Journal of Computer
Applications 159(4):33-40, February 2017.
[8] M. Svahnberg, J. van Gurp, and J. Bosch. A taxonomy of variability
realization techniques. Softw., Pract. Exper., 35(8):705–754, 2005.
[9] Khan, A.I., Alam, M.M., Jedaibi, W.A., January 2015. "Variability
Management in Software Development using FeatureIDE: A Case
Study." International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research,
Volume 6, Issue 1, 584 ISSN 2229-5518
[10] SPL Hall of Fame, http://splc.net/fame.html
[11] K. Mohan, B. Ramesh, and V. Sugumaran, “Integrating software product
line engineering and agile development,”Software, IEEE, vol. 27, no. 3,
pp. 48–55, 2010.
[12] Bosch, J. (2000). Design & Use of Software Architectures, Addison-
Wesley
[13] Weiss, D., Software Synthesis: The FAST Process, Proc. Computing in
High Energy Physics 95, September 1995
[14] K. Kang, S. Cohen, J. Hess, W. Nowak, and S. Peterson. Feature
Oriented Domain Analysis (FODA) Feasibility Study. Technical Report
CMU/SEI-90-TR-21, Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie
MellonUniversity, Pittsburgh, PA, USA, November 1990.
[15] Kim, J., Park, S., Sugumaran, V.,2008. "DRAMA: A framework for
domain requirements analysis and modeling architectures in software
product lines." Journal of Systems and Software, 81(1), 37-55.
[16] Tanhaei, M., Moaven, S., Habibi, J., 2010. "Toward an architecture-
based method for selecting composer components to make software
product line." Proceedings of the 2010 Seventh International Conference
on Information Technology: New Generations (ITNG) (pp. 1233-1236).
[17] Mellado, D., Fernández, M. E., Piattini, M., 2010. "Security
requirements engineering framework for software product lines."
Information and Software Technology, 52(10), 1094-1117.
[18] Ali B M, Kitchenham B, Assessment of a Framework for Comparing
Software Architecture Analysis Methods. Proceedings of 11th
International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software
Engineering, BCS, 2007.
[19] Matthias R, Tools & Techniques Expert Opinion, Online available
http://www.idemployee.id.tue.nl/g.w.m.rauterberg/lecturenotes/UFTexp
ertopinion.pdf
[20] Sajid R., Moving Towards Component Based Software Engineering in
Train Control Applications, Final thesis, Linköpings universitet, 2012,
Sweden.

ISBN: 978-0-9957075-4-2
www.ijeacs.com
DOI: 10.24032/ijeacs/0203/03
106
[21] Kitchenham B, et al., An empirical study of maintenance and
development estimation accuracy. Journal of Systems and Software,
2002, 64 (1), 57-77.
AUTHOR PROFILE
Mr. Md Mottahir Alam is a Ph.D. scholar in the Computer Science &
Engineering in Singhania University, India. He has six years of experience as
Software Engineer (quality) for leading software multinationals, where he
worked on projects for companies like Pearson and Reader's Digest. He is
ISTQB Certified Software Tester. He has received his Bachelor's degree in
Electronics & Communication and Masters in Nanotechnology from Jamia
Millia Islamia University, New Delhi, India. Mr. Alam research interest
includes Software Engineering esp. Software Product Line Engineering,
Software Reusability, Component-based and Agent-based Software
Engineering.
Dr. Asif Irshad Khan is working as a faculty member in the Department of
Computer Science, FCIT, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.
He has thirteen years of experience as a professional academician and
researcher. Dr. Khan received Ph.D. in Computer Science and Engineering
from Singhania University, Rajasthan, India, and Master & Bachelor degrees
in Computer Science from the Aligarh Muslim University (A.M.U), Aligarh,
India. He has published several research articles in leading journals and
conferences. He is a member of the editorial boards of international journals,
and his current research interest includes Software Engineering with a focus
on Component Based and Software Product Line Engineering.
Dr. Aasim Zafar is working as an Associate Professor in the Computer
Science Department, AMU, Aligarh. His current research interest includes e-
learning, mobile learning, virtual learning environments and mobile ad hoc
networks. He received his Ph.D. degree in Computer Science from the Aligarh
Muslim University, India. He has a number of research papers to his credits.
Dr. Zafar is a member of Internet Society (ISOC). He is a member of several
editorial boards and a regular reviewer for reputed journals.
© 2017 by the author(s); licensee Empirical Research Press Ltd. United Kingdom. This is an open access article
distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons by Attribution (CC-BY) license.
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

An Empirical Study of the Improved SPLD Framework using Expert Opinion Technique

More Related Content

What's hot (16)

Similar to An Empirical Study of the Improved SPLD Framework using Expert Opinion Technique (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

An Empirical Study of the Improved SPLD Framework using Expert Opinion Technique