Response openAI

Given the document content provided, I cannot find specific details on the Title, Authors, and Abstract, but I can provide a general analysis based on the content given.

### Document Analysis

**Title**: Not specified in the content.

**Authors**: Prof. Fabio A. González O. Ph.D.

### Abstract Analysis
The document appears to discuss methodologies for systematic information searching and reference collection in academic settings. It outlines a process for gathering and filtering scholarly references to compile a comprehensive bibliography or state-of-the-art report.

### Relevance to Criteria

1. **Mutation Testing Strategy**: There is no mention of mutation testing strategies. The document focuses on general methodologies for information searching and systematic review rather than specific testing strategies or technical evaluations.

2. **Security Evaluation of Applications**: The document does not address security evaluations specifically. It is centered around academic research processes rather than application security contexts.

3. **Measurement of Mutation Testing Effectiveness**: The content does not indicate any measurement of mutation testing effectiveness. It focuses on broad academic search processes without delving into testing effectiveness measures.

### Inclusion Decision

**Decision**: Exclude from the systematic review.

### Justification

The document does not meet any of the inclusion criteria for the systematic review, which focus on mutation testing strategies, security evaluations of applications, and measurements of mutation testing effectiveness. The content is centered on systematic search methods for academic research and does not address the specific technical topics required for inclusion.

Based on the provided document content, it seems to describe annotated bibliography guidelines rather than a scientific paper focused on mutation testing or security evaluation. The content does not appear to include any specific study or research findings on mutation testing strategy, security evaluation of applications, or measurement of mutation testing effectiveness. Therefore, it does not seem relevant to the criteria outlined for consideration in a systematic review.

Since the document content does not provide specific information typical for such scientific research, including the Title, Authors, or Abstract of a relevant study, I'll have to base the analysis on the assumption that the provided information is the main content for evaluation.

### Analysis:

- **Title:** Not provided.
- **Authors:** Not provided.
- **Abstract:** Not explicitly provided, but content appears to focus on best practices for creating annotated bibliographies rather than mutation testing or application security.

### Relevance to Criteria:

1. **Mutation Testing Strategy:** No mention or analysis of mutation testing strategies is evident in the provided content.
2. **Security Evaluation of Applications:** No information pertaining to the security evaluation of applications is present in the text.
3. **Measurement of Mutation Testing Effectiveness:** The document does not discuss the effectiveness of mutation testing.

### Inclusion Decision:

- **Decision:** Exclude

### Justification:

The document content primarily focuses on guidelines for creating annotated bibliographies, which are unrelated to mutation testing or security evaluation topics required by the criteria. There is no evidence to suggest that the information relates to mutation testing strategies, security evaluations of applications, or measuring mutation testing effectiveness. As a result, this document would not contribute to the objectives of the systematic review based on the criteria provided.