Determining the effectiveness of three software evaluation techniques through informal aggregation

An accepted fact in software engineering is that software must undergo verification and validation process during development to ascertain and improve its quality level. But there are too many techniques than a single developer could master, yet, it is impossible to be certain that software is free of defects. So, it is crucial for developers to be able to choose from available evaluation techniques, the one most suitable and likely to yield optimum quality results for different products. Though, some knowledge is available on the strengths and weaknesses of the available software quality assurance techniques but not much is known yet on the relationship between different techniques and contextual behavior of the techniques. Objective: This research investigates the effectiveness of two testing techniques ? equivalence class partitioning and decision coverage and one review technique ? code review by abstraction, in terms of their fault detection capability. This will be used to strengthen the practical knowledge available on these techniques

Exploring the Software Verification and Validation Process with Focus on Efficient Fault Detection

Quality is an aspect of high importance in software development projects. The software organizations have to ensure that the quality of their developed products is what the customers expect. Thus, the organizations have to verify that the product is functioning as expected and validate that the product is what the customers expect. Empirical studies have shown that in many software development projects as much as half of the projected schedule is spent on the verification and validation activities. The research in this thesis focuses on exploring the state of practice of the verification and validation process and investigating methods for achieving efficient fault detection during the software development. The thesis aims at increasing the understanding of the activities conducted to verify and validate the software products, by the means of empirical research in the software engineering domain. A survey of eleven Swedish software development organizations investigates the current state of practice of the verification and validation activities, and how these activities are managed today. The need for communicating and visualising the verification and validation process was expressed during the survey. Therefore the usefulness of process simulations was evaluated in the thesis. The simulations increased the understanding of the relationships between different activities among the involved participants. In addition, an experiment was conducted to compare the performance of the two verification and validation activities, inspection and testing. In the future work, empirical research, including experiment results, will be used for calibration and validation of simulation models, with focus on using simulation as a method for decision support in the verification and validation process

Incremental Lifecycle Validation Of Knowledge-based Systems Through Commonkads

This dissertation introduces a novel validation method for knowledge-based systems (KBS). Validation is an essential phase in the development lifecycle of knowledge-based systems. Validation ensures that the system is valid, reliable and that it reflects the knowledge of the expert and meets the specifications. Although many validation methods have been introduced for knowledge-based systems, there is still a need for an incremental validation method based on a lifecycle model. Lifecycle models provide a general framework for the developer and a mapping technique from the system into the validation process. They support reusability, modularity and offer guidelines for knowledge engineers to achieve high quality systems. CommonKADS is a set of models that helps to represent and analyze knowledge-based systems. It offers a de facto standard for building knowledge-based systems. Additionally, CommonKADS is a knowledge representation-independent model. It has powerful models that can represent many domains. Defining an incremental validation method based on a conceptual lifecycle model (such as CommonKADS) has a number of advantages such as reducing time and effort, ease of implementation when having a template to follow, well-structured design, and better tracking of errors when they occur. Moreover, the validation method introduced in this dissertation is based on case testing and selecting an appropriate set of test cases to validate the system. The validation method defined makes use of results of prior test cases in an incremental validation procedure. This facilitates defining a minimal set of test cases that provides complete and effective system coverage. CommonKADS doesn’t define validation, verification or testing in any of its models. This research seeks to establish a direct relation between validation and lifecycle models, and introduces a validation method for KBS embedded into CommonKAD

An experimental evaluation of inspection and testing for detection of design faults

The two most common strategies for verification and validation, inspection and testing, are in a controlled experiment evaluated in terms of their fault detection capabilities. These two techniques are in the previous work compared applied to code. In order to compare the efficiency and effectiveness of these techniques on a higher abstraction level than code, this experiment investigates inspection of design documents and testing of the corresponding program, to detect faults originating from the design document. Usage-based reading (UBR) and usage-based testing (UBT) were chosen for inspections and testing, respectively. These techniques provide similar aid to the reviewers as to the testers. The purpose of both fault detection techniques is to focus the inspection and testing from a user's viewpoint. The experiment was conducted with 51 Master's students in a two-factor blocked design; each student applied each technique once, each application on different versions of the same program. The two versions contained different sets of faults, including 13 and 14 faults, respectively. The general results from this study show that when the two groups of subjects are combined, the efficiency and effectiveness are significantly higher for usage-based reading and that testing tends to require more learning. Rework is not taken into account, thus the experiment indicates strong support for design inspection over testin