A Practical Model for Dynamic Software Measurement

Usually, software measurement model is considered can not be used in practice; however, in this paper, we present a dynamic software measurement model, which performs very well in practice. In this model, the CPU utilization, memory occupied, threads and execution time are encapsulated into a multi-dimensional vector, viz. software state vector x; further, a state space method is incorporated to compute the software total complexity according to the relations between the state vector x and the program scale, difficulties, program structures, and development expenses. By such technique (feedback alike), the complexity of the developing software could be dynamically obtained and regulated, so that the software development life cycle and software reliability are affected by the regulated factors, recursively. A prototype has been implemented to demonstrate the feasibility of the proposed model through a funded software project. We also present the initial findings and results concerning the software project.

[1]  L. Lavazza,et al.  Automated support for process-aware definition and execution of measurement plans , 2005, Proceedings. 27th International Conference on Software Engineering, 2005. ICSE 2005..

[2]  Reiner R. Dumke,et al.  Research directions in verification & validation process improvement , 2007, SOEN.

[3]  Katsuro Inoue,et al.  Proposal of a Complete Life Cycle In-Process Measurement Model Based on Evaluation of an In-Process Measurement Experiment Using a Standardized Requirement Definition Process , 2007, ESEM 2007.

[4]  Jeffrey C. Carver,et al.  Combining self-reported and automatic data to improve programming effort measurement , 2005, ESEC/FSE-13.

[5]  L. Prechelt,et al.  On Understanding How to Introduce an Innovation to an Open Source Project , 2007, First International Workshop on Emerging Trends in FLOSS Research and Development (FLOSS'07: ICSE Workshops 2007).

[6]  Alain Abran,et al.  A framework for the design and verification of software measurement methods , 2008, J. Syst. Softw..

[7]  Alberto Sillitti,et al.  Managing non-invasive measurement tools , 2006, J. Syst. Archit..

[8]  Mario Piattini,et al.  Managing software process measurement: A metamodel-based approach , 2007, Inf. Sci..

[9]  Tim Menzies,et al.  Data Mining Static Code Attributes to Learn Defect Predictors , 2007, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering.

[10]  James M. Bieman,et al.  The FreeBSD project: a replication case study of open source development , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering.

[11]  Joachim Wegener,et al.  Evaluating evolutionary testability for structure-oriented testing with software measurements , 2008, Appl. Soft Comput..

[12]  Zaigham Mahmood,et al.  RETRACTED ARTICLE: Correlation between Amount-of-Reuse Metrics and Other Software Measures with Respect to Programming Code in C++ , 2004, Software Quality Journal.

[13]  Thomas Zimmermann,et al.  Building Software Cost Estimation Models using Homogenous Data , 2007, ESEM 2007.

[14]  Paulo Romero Martins Maciel,et al.  Software synthesis for hard real-time embedded systems with multiple processors , 2007, SOEN.

[15]  Yingxun Wang,et al.  Analysis on Open Control Platform , 2007, 2007 International Conference on Mechatronics and Automation.

[16]  Mario Piattini,et al.  FMESP: framework for the modeling and evaluation of software processes , 2004, QUTE-SWAP '04.

[17]  Z. Cataltepe,et al.  Clustering and dimensionality reduction to determine important software quality metrics , 2007, 2007 22nd international symposium on computer and information sciences.