Incremental Analysis of Legacy Applications Using Knowledge Graphs for Application Modernization
May 11, 2025 Β· Declared Dead Β· π arXiv.org
"No code URL or promise found in abstract"
Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner
Authors
Saravanan Krishnan, Amith Singhee, Keerthi Narayan Raghunath, Alex Mathai, Atul Kumar, David Wenk
arXiv ID
2505.06885
Category
cs.SE: Software Engineering
Cross-listed
cs.IR
Citations
0
Venue
arXiv.org
Last Checked
5 months ago
Abstract
Industries such as banking, telecom, and airlines - o6en have large so6ware systems that are several decades old. Many of these systems are written in old programming languages such as COBOL, PL/1, Assembler, etc. In many cases, the documentation is not updated, and those who developed/designed these systems are no longer around. Understanding these systems for either modernization or even regular maintenance has been a challenge. An extensive application may have natural boundaries based on its code dependencies and architecture. There are also other logical boundaries in an enterprise setting driven by business functions, data domains, etc. Due to these complications, the system architects generally plan their modernization across these logical boundaries in parts, thereby adopting an incremental approach for the modernization journey of the entire system. In this work, we present a so6ware system analysis tool that allows a subject ma=er expert (SME) or system architect to analyze a large so6ware system incrementally. We analyze the source code and other artifacts (such as data schema) to create a knowledge graph using a customizable ontology/schema. Entities and relations in our ontology can be defined for any combination of programming languages and platforms. Using this knowledge graph, the analyst can then define logical boundaries around dependent Entities (e.g. Programs, Transactions, Database Tables etc.). Our tool then presents different views showcasing the dependencies from the newly defined boundary to/from the other logical groups of the system. This exercise is repeated interactively to 1) Identify the Entities and groupings of interest for a modernization task and 2) Understand how a change in one part of the system may affect the other parts. To validate the efficacy of our tool, we provide an initial study of our system on two client applications.
Community Contributions
Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!
π Similar Papers
In the same crypt β Software Engineering
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Microservices: yesterday, today, and tomorrow
π
π
The Cartographer
A Survey of Machine Learning for Big Code and Naturalness
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
An Overview on Smart Contracts: Challenges, Advances and Platforms
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Slither: A Static Analysis Framework For Smart Contracts
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
ContractFuzzer: Fuzzing Smart Contracts for Vulnerability Detection
Died the same way β π» Ghosted
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Federated Learning: Strategies for Improving Communication Efficiency
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
In-Datacenter Performance Analysis of a Tensor Processing Unit
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Deep Convolutional Neural Networks for Computer-Aided Detection: CNN Architectures, Dataset Characteristics and Transfer Learning
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted