ISBSG variables most frequently used for software effort estimation: a mapping review

Background: The International Software Benchmarking Standards Group (ISBSG) dataset makes it possible to estimate a project's size, effort, duration, and cost. Aim: The aim was to analyze the ISBSG variables that have been used by researchers for software effort estimation from 2000, when the first papers were published, until the end of 2013. Method: A systematic mapping review was applied to over 167 papers obtained after the filtering process. From these, it was found that 133 papers produce effort estimation and only 107 list the independent variables used in the effort estimation models. Results: Seventy-one out of 118 ISBSG variables have been used at least once. There is a group of 20 variables that appear in more than 50% of the papers and include Functional Size (62%), Development Type (58%), Language Type (53%), and Development Platform (52%) following ISBSG recommendations. Sizing and Size attributes altogether represent the most relevant group along with Project attributes that includes 24 technical features of the project and the development platform. All in all, variables that have more missing values are used less frequently. Conclusions: This work presents a snapshot of the existing usage of ISBSG variables in software development estimation. Moreover, some insights are provided to guide future studies.

[1]  Ioannis Stamelos,et al.  Combining probabilistic models for explanatory productivity estimation , 2008, Inf. Softw. Technol..

[2]  Emilia Mendes,et al.  Investigating the Use of Duration-Based Moving Windows to Improve Software Effort Prediction , 2012, 2012 19th Asia-Pacific Software Engineering Conference.

[3]  Stephen G. MacDonell,et al.  Maximizing data retention from the ISBSG repository , 2008, EASE.

[4]  Emilia Mendes,et al.  Investigating the use of chronological split for software effort estimation , 2009, IET Softw..

[5]  Siti Zaiton Mohd Hashim,et al.  A flexible method to estimate the software development effort based on the classification of projects and localization of comparisons , 2013, Empirical Software Engineering.

[6]  Fernando González-Ladrón-de-Guevara,et al.  Potential and limitations of the ISBSG dataset in enhancing software engineering research: A mapping review , 2014, Inf. Softw. Technol..

[7]  Barbara A. Kitchenham,et al.  Empirical studies of assumptions that underlie software cost-estimation models , 1992, Inf. Softw. Technol..

[8]  Frank Elberzhager,et al.  A systematic mapping study on the combination of static and dynamic quality assurance techniques , 2012, Inf. Softw. Technol..

[9]  Sun-Jen Huang,et al.  Optimization of analogy weights by genetic algorithm for software effort estimation , 2006, Inf. Softw. Technol..

[10]  José Javier Dolado,et al.  A Two-Stage Zone Regression Method for Global Characterization of a Project Database , 2009, Database Technologies: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools, and Applications.

[11]  John Moses,et al.  Assessing Variation in Development Effort Consistency Using a Data Source with Missing Data , 2004, Software Quality Journal.

[12]  Naoyasu Ubayashi,et al.  Revisiting software development effort estimation based on early phase development activities , 2013, 2013 10th Working Conference on Mining Software Repositories (MSR).

[13]  Craig Comstock,et al.  The Factors Significant to Software Development Productivity , 2007 .