558,405 research outputs found

    Quality measurement in agile and rapid software development: A systematic mapping

    Get PDF
    Context: In despite of agile and rapid software development (ARSD) being researched and applied extensively, managing quality requirements (QRs) are still challenging. As ARSD processes produce a large amount of data, measurement has become a strategy to facilitate QR management. Objective: This study aims to survey the literature related to QR management through metrics in ARSD, focusing on: bibliometrics, QR metrics, and quality-related indicators used in quality management. Method: The study design includes the definition of research questions, selection criteria, and snowballing as search strategy. Results: We selected 61 primary studies (2001-2019). Despite a large body of knowledge and standards, there is no consensus regarding QR measurement. Terminology is varying as are the measuring models. However, seemingly different measurement models do contain similarities. Conclusion: The industrial relevance of the primary studies shows that practitioners have a need to improve quality measurement. Our collection of measures and data sources can serve as a starting point for practitioners to include quality measurement into their decision-making processes. Researchers could benefit from the identified similarities to start building a common framework for quality measurement. In addition, this could help researchers identify what quality aspects need more focus, e.g., security and usability with few metrics reported.This work has been funded by the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation program through the Q-Rapids project (grant no. 732253). This research was also partially supported by the Spanish Ministerio de Economía, Industria y Competitividad through the DOGO4ML project (grant PID2020-117191RB-I00). Silverio Martínez-Fernández worked in Fraunhofer IESE before January 2020.Peer ReviewedPostprint (published version

    A systematic review of quality attributes and measures for software product lines

    Full text link
    [EN] It is widely accepted that software measures provide an appropriate mechanism for understanding, monitoring, controlling, and predicting the quality of software development projects. In software product lines (SPL), quality is even more important than in a single software product since, owing to systematic reuse, a fault or an inadequate design decision could be propagated to several products in the family. Over the last few years, a great number of quality attributes and measures for assessing the quality of SPL have been reported in literature. However, no studies summarizing the current knowledge about them exist. This paper presents a systematic literature review with the objective of identifying and interpreting all the available studies from 1996 to 2010 that present quality attributes and/or measures for SPL. These attributes and measures have been classified using a set of criteria that includes the life cycle phase in which the measures are applied; the corresponding quality characteristics; their support for specific SPL characteristics (e. g., variability, compositionality); the procedure used to validate the measures, etc. We found 165 measures related to 97 different quality attributes. The results of the review indicated that 92% of the measures evaluate attributes that are related to maintainability. In addition, 67% of the measures are used during the design phase of Domain Engineering, and 56% are applied to evaluate the product line architecture. However, only 25% of them have been empirically validated. In conclusion, the results provide a global vision of the state of the research within this area in order to help researchers in detecting weaknesses, directing research efforts, and identifying new research lines. In particular, there is a need for new measures with which to evaluate both the quality of the artifacts produced during the entire SPL life cycle and other quality characteristics. There is also a need for more validation (both theoretical and empirical) of existing measures. In addition, our results may be useful as a reference guide for practitioners to assist them in the selection or the adaptation of existing measures for evaluating their software product lines. © 2011 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC.This research has been funded by the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation under the MULTIPLE (Multimodeling Approach For Quality-Aware Software Product Lines) project with ref. TIN2009-13838.Montagud Gregori, S.; Abrahao Gonzales, SM.; Insfrán Pelozo, CE. (2012). A systematic review of quality attributes and measures for software product lines. Software Quality Journal. 20(3-4):425-486. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11219-011-9146-7S425486203-4Abdelmoez, W., Nassar, D. M., Shereschevsky, M., Gradetsky, N., Gunnalan, R., Ammar, H. H., et al. (2004). Error propagation in software architectures. In 10th international symposium on software metrics (METRICS), Chicago, Illinois, USA.Ajila, S. A., & Dumitrescu, R. T. (2007). Experimental use of code delta, code churn, and rate of change to understand software product line evolution. Journal of Systems and Software, 80, 74–91.Aldekoa, G., Trujillo, S., Sagardui, G., & Díaz, O. (2006). Experience measuring maintainability in software product lines. In XV Jornadas de Ingeniería del Software y Bases de Datos (JISBD). Barcelona.Aldekoa, G., Trujillo, S., Sagardui, G., & Díaz, O. (2008). Quantifying maintanibility in feature oriented product lines, Athens, Greece, pp. 243–247.Alves de Oliveira Junior, E., Gimenes, I. M. S., & Maldonado, J. C. (2008). A metric suite to support software product line architecture evaluation. In XXXIV Conferencia Latinamericana de Informática (CLEI), Santa Fé, Argentina, pp. 489–498.Alves, V., Niu, N., Alves, C., & Valença, G. (2010). Requirements engineering for software product lines: A systematic literature review. Information & Software Technology, 52(8), 806–820.Bosch, J. (2000). Design and use of software architectures: Adopting and evolving a product line approach. USA: ACM Press/Addison-Wesley Publishing Co.Briand, L. C., Differing, C. M., & Rombach, D. (1996a). Practical guidelines for measurement-based process improvement. Software Process-Improvement and Practice, 2, 253–280.Briand, L. C., Morasca, S., & Basili, V. R. (1996b). Property based software engineering measurement. IEEE Transactions on Software Eng., 22(1), 68–86.Calero, C., Ruiz, J., & Piattini, M. (2005). Classifying web metrics using the web quality model. Online Information Review, 29(3): 227–248.Chen, L., Ali Babar, M., & Ali, N. (2009). Variability management in software product lines: A systematic review. In 13th international software product lines conferences (SPLC), San Francisco, USA.Clements, P., & Northrop, L. (2002). Software product lines. 2003. Software product lines practices and patterns. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley.Crnkovic, I., & Larsson, M. (2004). Classification of quality attributes for predictability in component-based systems. Journal of Econometrics, pp. 231–250.Conference Rankings of Computing Research and Education Association of Australasia (CORE). (2010). Available in http://core.edu.au/index.php/categories/conference%20rankings/1 .Davis, A., Dieste, Ó., Hickey, A., Juristo, N., & Moreno, A. M. (2006). Effectiveness of requirements elicitation techniques: Empirical results derived from a systematic review. In 14th IEEE international conference requirements engineering, pp. 179–188.de Souza Filho, E. D., de Oliveira Cavalcanti, R., Neiva, D. F. S., Oliveira, T. H. B., Barachisio Lisboa, L., de Almeida E. S., & de Lemos Meira, S. R. (2008). Evaluating domain design approaches using systematic review. In 2nd European conference on software architecture, Cyprus, pp. 50–65.Ejiogu, L. (1991). Software engineering with formal metrics. QED Publishing.Engström, E., & Runeson, P. (2011). Software product line testing—A systematic mapping study. Information & Software Technology, 53(1), 2–13.Etxeberria, L., Sagarui, G., & Belategi, L. (2008). Quality aware software product line engineering. Journal of the Brazilian Computer Society, 14(1), Campinas Mar.Ganesan, D., Knodel, J., Kolb, R., Haury, U., & Meier, G. (2007). Comparing costs and benefits of different test strategies for a software product line: A study from Testo AG. In 11th international software product line conference, Kyoto, Japan, pp. 74–83, September 2007.Gómez, O., Oktaba, H., Piattini, M., & García, F. (2006). A systematic review measurement in software engineering: State-of-the-art in measures. In First international conference on software and data technologies (ICSOFT), Setúbal, Portugal, pp. 11–14.IEEE standard for a software quality metrics methodology, IEEE Std 1061-1998, 1998.Inoki, M., & Fukazawa, Y. (2007). Software product line evolution method based on Kaizen approach. In 22nd annual ACM symposium on applied computing, Korea.Insfran, E., & Fernandez, A. (2008). A systematic review of usability evaluation in Web development. 2nd international workshop on web usability and accessibility (IWWUA’08), New Zealand, LNCS 5176, Springer, pp. 81–91.ISO/IEC 25010. (2008). Systems and software engineering. Systems and software Quality Requirements and Evaluation (SQuaRE). System and software quality models.ISO/IEC 9126. (2000). Software engineering. Product Quality.Johansson, E., & Höst, R. (2002). Tracking degradation in software product lines through measurement of design rule violations. In 14th International conference on software engineering and knowledge engineering, Ischia, Italy, pp. 249–254.Journal Citation Reports of Thomson Reuters. (2010). Available in http://thomsonreuters.com/products_services/science/science_products/a-z/journal_citation_reports/ .Khurum, M., & Gorschek, T. (2009). A systematic review of domain analysis solutions for product lines. The Journal of Systems and Software.Kim, T., Ko, I. Y., Kang, S. W., & Lee, D. H. (2008). Extending ATAM to assess product line architecture. In 8th IEEE international conference on computer and information technology, pp. 790–797.Kitchenham, B. (2007). Guidelines for performing systematic literature reviews in software engineering. Version 2.3, EBSE Technical Report, Keele University, UK.Kitchenham, B., Pfleeger, S., & Fenton, N. (1995). Towards a framework for software measurement validation. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 21(12).Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33, 159–174.Mendes, E. (2005). A systematic review of Web engineering research. International symposium on empirical software engineering. Noosa Heads, Australia.Meyer, M. H., & Dalal, D. (2002). Managing platform architectures and manufacturing processes for non assembled products. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 19(4), 277–293.Montagud, S., & Abrahão, S. (2009). Gathering Current knowledge about quality evaluation in software product lines. In 13th international software product lines conferences (SPLC), San Francisco, USA.Montagud, S., & Abrahão, S. (2009). A SQuaRE-bassed quality evaluation method for software product lines. Master’s thesis, December 2009 (in Spanish).Needham, D., & Jones, S. (2006). A software fault tree metric. In 22nd international conference on software maintenance (ICSM), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.Niemelä, E., & Immonen, A. (2007). Capturing quality requirements of product family architecture. Information and Software Technology, 49(11–12), 1107–1120.Odia, O. E. (2007). Testing in software product lines. Master Thesis Software Engineering of School of Engineering, Bleking Institute of Technology. Thesis no. MSE-2007:16, Sweden.Olumofin, F. G., & Mišić, V. B. (2007). A holistic architecture assessment method for software product lines. Information and Software Technology, 49, 309–323.Pérez Lamancha, B., Polo Usaola, M., & Piattini Velthius, M. (2009). Software product line testing—a systematic review. ICSOFT, (1), 23–30.Poels, G., & Dedene, G. (2000). Distance-based software measurement: necessary and sufficient properties for software measures. Information and Software Technology, 42(I), 35–46.Prehofer, C., van Gurp, J., & Bosch, J. (2008). Compositionality in software platforms. In Emerging methods, technologies and process management in software engineering. Wiley.Rahman, A. (2004). Metrics for the structural assessment of product line architecture. Master Thesis on Software Engineering, Thesis no. MSE-2004:24. School of Engineering, Blekinge Institute of Technology, Sweden.Sethi, K., Cai, Y., Wong, S., Garcia, A., & Sant’Anna, C. (2009). From retrospect to prospect: Assessing modularity and stability from software architecture. Joint working IEEE/IFIP conference on software architecture, 2009 & European conference on software architecture. WICSA/ECSA.Shaik, I., Abdelmoez, W,. Gunnalan, R., Shereshevsky, M., Zeid, A., Ammar, H. H., et al. (2005). Change propagation for assessing design quality of software architectures. 5th working IEEE/IFIP conference on software architecture (WICSA’05).Siegmund, N., Rosenmüller, M., Kuhlemann, M., Kästner, C., & Saake, G. (2008). Measuring non-functional properties in software product lines for product derivation. In 15th Asia-Pacific software engineering conference, Beijing, China.Sun Her, J., Hyeok Kim, J., Hun Oh, S., Yul Rhew, S., & Dong Kim, S. (2007). A framework for evaluating reusability of core asset in product line engineering. Information and Software Technology, 49, 740–760.Svahnberg, M., & Bosch, J. (2000). Evolution in software product lines. In 3rd international workshop on software architectures for products families (IWSAPF-3). Las Palmas de Gran Canaria.Van der Hoek, A., Dincel, E., & Medidović, N. (2003). Using services utilization metrics to assess the structure of product line architectures. In 9th international software metrics symposium (METRICS), Sydney, Australia.Van der Linden, F., Schmid, K., & Rommes, E. (2007). Software product lines in action. Springer.Whitmire, S. (1997). Object oriented design measurement. John Wiley & Sons.Wnuk, K., Regnell, B., & Karlsson, L. (2009). What happened to our features? Visualization and understanding of scope change dynamics in a large-scale industrial setting. In 17th IEEE international requirements engineering conference.Yoshimura, K., Ganesan, D., & Muthig, D. (2006). Assessing merge potential of existing engine control systems into a product line. In International workshop on software engineering for automative systems, Shangai, China, pp. 61–67.Zhang, T., Deng, L., Wu, J., Zhou, Q., & Ma, C. (2008). Some metrics for accessing quality of product line architecture. In International conference on computer science and software engineering (CSSE), Wuhan, China, pp. 500–503

    Linguistic Approaches for Early Measurement of Functional Size from Software Requirements

    Get PDF
    The importance of early effort estimation, resource allocation and overall quality control in a software project has led the industry to formulate several functional size measurement (FSM) methods that are based on the knowledge gathered from software requirements documents. The main objective of this research is to develop a comprehensive methodology to facilitate and automate early measurement of a software's functional size from its requirements document written in unrestricted natural language. For the purpose of this research, we have chosen to use the FSM method developed by the Common Software Measurement International Consortium (COSMIC) and adopted as an international standard by the International Standardization Organization (ISO). This thesis presents a methodology to measure the COSMIC size objectively from various textual forms of functional requirements and also builds conceptual measurement models to establish traceability links between the output measurements and the input requirements. Our research investigates the feasibility of automating every major phase of this methodology with natural language processing and machine learning approaches. The thesis provides a step-by-step validation and demonstration of the implementation of this innovative methodology. It describes the details of empirical experiments conducted to validate the methodology with practical samples of textual requirements collected from both the industry and academia. Analysis of the results show that each phase of our methodology can successfully be automated and, in most cases, leads to an accurate measurement of functional size

    Knowledge transfer measurement methodology for Software Requirements, a case study

    Get PDF
    The purpose of this work is to present a proposal methodology for knowledge transfer measurement in software requirements. To obtain results, a methodology composed of four stages was defined: i) review of the knowledge transfer background in software engineering, in order to identify existing efforts in knowledge transfer measurement, ii) characterization of the software requirements process from the knowledge transfer point of view, thus, finding common factors regarding variables and indicators suitable for measuring purposes, iii) define a proposal methodology based on variables and indicators found, data gathering methods, statistical tools and helping documentation, iv) testing the proposal in order to provide feedback, using a case study. Principal results are: seven groups of factors mapping software requirements process stages against knowledge transfer steps, resulting in 115 indicators and 24 variables; 2 variables definition for knowledge transfer initialization stage and software requirements elicitation step mapping, which didn’t had any variable or indicator. Likewise, it was identified that exists a correlation between knowledge transfer and software requirements, the better knowledge transfer the better software requirements. Furthermore, the feed back gathered indicates that motivation variable defined is the more influential variable in the software requirements process according 41.67% of respondents, over other variables as: abstraction, methodology and time access availability, each one with 16.67% of respondents, and understandability with 8.33% of respondents. Last, this work allows analyzing the influence of knowledge transfer indicators in software requirements quality attributes.Resumen. El propósito de este trabajo es presentar una propuesta metodológica para la medición de transferencia de conocimiento en los requisitos de software. Para obtener los resultados, una metodología compuesta de cuatro pasos fue definida: i) revisión de las bases teóricas de transferencia de conocimiento en ingeniería, para identificar esfuerzos existentes en medición de transferencia de conocimiento, ii) caracterización del proceso de requisitos de software desde el punto de vista de la transferencia de conocimiento, y de esta manera, encontrar factores comunes con respecto a variables e indicadores adecuados para los propósitos de medición, iii) definición de una propuesta metodológica con las variables e indicadores encontrados, métodos de captura de datos, herramientas estadísticas y documentación de ayuda, iv) prueba de la propuesta metodológica para proveer una retroalimentación, usando un estudio de caso. Los resultados principales son: siete grupos de factores mapeando las etapas del proceso de requisitos de software contra los pasos de transferencia de conocimiento, resultado en 115 indicadores y 24 variables; 2 variables definidas para el mapeo entre la etapa de inicialización en transferencia de conocimiento y la etapa de elicitación de requisitos de software, el cual no tenía ninguna variable o indicador definidos. Igualmente, fue identificada una correlación entre transferencia de conocimiento y requisitos de software, a mejor transferencia de conocimiento mejores requisitos de software. Además, la retroalimentación obtenida indica que la variable de motivación definida es la más influyente en el proceso de requisitos de software según el 41.67% de los encuestados, por encima de otras variables como: abstracción, metodología y disponibilidad de tiempo, cada una con 16.67% de los encuestados, y comprensibilidad con el 8.33% de los encuestados.Maestrí

    Development of a Coordinate Measuring Machine-Based Inspection Planning System for Industry 4.0

    Get PDF
    Industry 4.0 represents a new paradigm which creates new requirements in the area of manufacturing and manufacturing metrology such as to reduce the cost of product, flexibility, mass customization, quality of product, high level of digitalization, optimization, etc., all of which contribute to smart manufacturing and smart metrology systems. This paper presents a developed inspection planning system based on CMM as support of the smart metrology within Industry 4.0 or manufacturing metrology 4.0 (MM4.0). The system is based on the application of three AI techniques such as engineering ontology (EO), GA and ants colony optimization (ACO). The developed system consists of: the ontological knowledge base; the mathematical model for generating strategy of initial MP; the model of analysis and optimization of workpiece setups and probe configuration; the path simulation model in MatLab, PTC Creo and STEP-NC Machine software, and the model of optimization MP by applying ACO. The advantage of the model is its suitability for monitoring of the measurement process and digitalization of the measurement process planning, simulation carried out and measurement verification based on CMM, reduction of the preparatory measurement time as early as in the inspection planning phase and minimizing human involvement or human errors through intelligent planning, which directly influences increased production efficiency, competitiveness, and productivity of enterprises. The measuring experiment was performed using a machined prismatic workpiece (PW)

    Development of a Coordinate Measuring Machine-Based Inspection Planning System for Industry 4.0

    Get PDF
    Industry 4.0 represents a new paradigm which creates new requirements in the area of manufacturing and manufacturing metrology such as to reduce the cost of product, flexibility, mass customization, quality of product, high level of digitalization, optimization, etc., all of which contribute to smart manufacturing and smart metrology systems. This paper presents a developed inspection planning system based on CMM as support of the smart metrology within Industry 4.0 or manufacturing metrology 4.0 (MM4.0). The system is based on the application of three AI techniques such as engineering ontology (EO), GA and ants colony optimization (ACO). The developed system consists of: the ontological knowledge base; the mathematical model for generating strategy of initial MP; the model of analysis and optimization of workpiece setups and probe configuration; the path simulation model in MatLab, PTC Creo and STEP-NC Machine software, and the model of optimization MP by applying ACO. The advantage of the model is its suitability for monitoring of the measurement process and digitalization of the measurement process planning, simulation carried out and measurement verification based on CMM, reduction of the preparatory measurement time as early as in the inspection planning phase and minimizing human involvement or human errors through intelligent planning, which directly influences increased production efficiency, competitiveness, and productivity of enterprises. The measuring experiment was performed using a machined prismatic workpiece (PW)

    Non-functional requirements: size measurement and testing with COSMIC-FFP

    Get PDF
    The non-functional requirements (NFRs) of software systems are well known to add a degree of uncertainty to process of estimating the cost of any project. This paper contributes to the achievement of more precise project size measurement through incorporating NFRs into the functional size quantification process. We report on an initial solution proposed to deal with the problem of quantitatively assessing the NFR modeling process early in the project, and of generating test cases for NFR verification purposes. The NFR framework has been chosen for the integration of NFRs into the requirements modeling process and for their quantitative assessment. Our proposal is based on the functional size measurement method, COSMIC-FFP, adopted in 2003 as the ISO/IEC 19761 standard. Also in this paper, we extend the use of COSMIC-FFP for NFR testing purposes. This is an essential step for improving NFR development and testing effort estimates, and consequently for managing the scope of NFRs. We discuss the merits of the proposed approach and the open questions related to its design

    Early Quantitative Assessment of Non-Functional Requirements

    Get PDF
    Non-functional requirements (NFRs) of software systems are a well known source of uncertainty in effort estimation. Yet, quantitatively approaching NFR early in a project is hard. This paper makes a step towards reducing the impact of uncertainty due to NRF. It offers a solution that incorporates NFRs into the functional size quantification process. The merits of our solution are twofold: first, it lets us quantitatively assess the NFR modeling process early in the project, and second, it lets us generate test cases for NFR verification purposes. We chose the NFR framework as a vehicle to integrate NFRs into the requirements modeling process and to apply quantitative assessment procedures. Our solution proposal also rests on the functional size measurement method, COSMIC-FFP, adopted in 2003 as the ISO/IEC 19761 standard. We extend its use for NFR testing purposes, which is an essential step for improving NFR development and testing effort estimates, and consequently for managing the scope of NFRs. We discuss the advantages of our approach and the open questions related to its design as well
    • …
    corecore