Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “software measurements”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 37 records · Page 2
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1978

The determination of measures of software reliability

Measurement of software reliability was carried out during the development of data base software for a multi-sensor tracking system. The failure ratio and failure rate were found to be consistent measures. Trend lines could be established from these measurements that provide good visualization of the progress on the job as a whole as well as on individual modules. Over one-half of the observed failures were due to factors associated with the individual run submission rather than with the code proper. Possible application of these findings for line management, project managers, functional management, and regulatory agencies is discussed. Steps for simplifying the measurement process and for use of these data in predicting operational software reliability are outlined.

Maxwell, F. D.↗
NASA NTRS1977

Reliability measurement during software development

Measurement of software reliability was carried out during the development of data base software for a multi-sensor tracking system. Every run made during this project was scored as success or failure, and supporting data were collected on forms for further analysis. The failure ratio (number of failures per calendar interval divided by total number of runs) and failure rate (number of failures divided by CPU time for the interval) were found to be consistent measures, on a month-to-month basis as well as from module to module, and therefore considered valid indicators of reliability in this environment. Trend lines could be established from these measurements that provide good visualization of the progress on the job as a whole as well as on individual modules. Over one-half of the observed failures were due to factors associated with the specific run submission rather than with the code proper.

Hecht, H.↗
NASA NTRS1999

Panel: Practical Issues in Implementing Software Reliability Measurement

Many ways of estimating software systems' reliability, or reliability-related quantities, have been developed over the past several years. In this panel, we discuss practical issues to be addressed in implementing software reliabilty measurement techniques in a production development environment.

software reliability software measurement software↗
NASA NTRS1985

Measuring the software process and product: Lessons learned in the SEL

The software development process and product can and should be measured. The software measurement process at the Software Engineering Laboratory (SEL) has taught a major lesson: develop a goal-driven paradigm (also characterized as a goal/question/metric paradigm) for data collection. Project analysis under this paradigm leads to a design for evaluating and improving the methodology of software development and maintenance.

Basili, V. R.↗
NASA NTRS1995

Property-Based Software Engineering Measurement

Little theory exists in the field of software system measurement. Concepts such as complexity, coupling, cohesion or even size are very often subject to interpretation and appear to have inconsistent definitions in the literature. As a consequence, there is little guidance provided to the analyst attempting to define proper measures for specific problems. Many controversies in the literature are simply misunderstandings and stem from the fact that some people talk about different measurement concepts under the same label (complexity is the most common case). There is a need to define unambiguously the most important measurement concepts used in the measurement of software products. One way of doing so is to define precisely what mathematical properties characterize these concepts regardless of the specific software artifacts to which these concepts are applied. Such a mathematical framework could generate a consensus in the software engineering community and provide a means for better communication among researchers, better guidelines for analysis, and better evaluation methods for commercial static analyzers for practitioners. In this paper, we propose a mathematical framework which is generic, because it is not specific to any particular software artifact, and rigorous, because it is based on precise mathematical concepts. This framework defines several important measurement concepts (size, length, complexity, cohesion, coupling). It is not intended to be complete or fully objective; other frameworks could have been proposed and different choices could have been made. However, we believe that the formalism and properties we introduce are convenient and intuitive. In addition, we have reviewed the literature on this subject and compared it with our work. This framework contributes constructively to a firmer theoretical ground of software measurement.

Briand, Lionel↗
NASA NTRS1997

Property-Based Software Engineering Measurement

Little theory exists in the field of software system measurement. Concepts such as complexity, coupling, cohesion or even size are very often subject to interpretation and appear to have inconsistent definitions in the literature. As a consequence, there is little guidance provided to the analyst attempting to define proper measures for specific problems. Many controversies in the literature are simply misunderstandings and stem from the fact that some people talk about different measurement concepts under the same label (complexity is the most common case). There is a need to define unambiguously the most important measurement concepts used in the measurement of software products. One way of doing so is to define precisely what mathematical properties characterize these concepts, regardless of the specific software artifacts to which these concepts are applied. Such a mathematical framework could generate a consensus in the software engineering community and provide a means for better communication among researchers, better guidelines for analysts, and better evaluation methods for commercial static analyzers for practitioners. In this paper, we propose a mathematical framework which is generic, because it is not specific to any particular software artifact and rigorous, because it is based on precise mathematical concepts. We use this framework to propose definitions of several important measurement concepts (size, length, complexity, cohesion, coupling). It does not intend to be complete or fully objective; other frameworks could have been proposed and different choices could have been made. However, we believe that the formalisms and properties we introduce are convenient and intuitive. This framework contributes constructively to a firmer theoretical ground of software measurement.

Briand, Lionel C.↗
NASA NTRS1993

The (mis)use of subjective process measures in software engineering

A variety of measures are used in software engineering research to develop an understanding of the software process and product. These measures fall into three broad categories: quantitative, characteristics, and subjective. Quantitative measures are those to which a numerical value can be assigned, for example effort or lines of code (LOC). Characteristics describe the software process or product; they might include programming language or the type of application. While such factors do not provide a quantitative measurement of a process or product, they do help characterize them. Subjective measures (as defined in this study) are those that are based on the opinion or opinions of individuals; they are somewhat unique and difficult to quantify. Capturing of subjective measure data typically involves development of some type of scale. For example, 'team experience' is one of the subjective measures that were collected and studied by the Software Engineering Laboratory (SEL). Certainly, team experience could have an impact on the software process or product; actually measuring a team's experience, however, is not a strictly mathematical exercise. Simply adding up each team member's years of experience appears inadequate. In fact, most researchers would agree that 'years' do not directly translate into 'experience.' Team experience must be defined subjectively and then a scale must be developed e.g., high experience versus low experience; or high, medium, low experience; or a different or more granular scale. Using this type of scale, a particular team's overall experience can be compared with that of other teams in the development environment. Defining, collecting, and scaling subjective measures is difficult. First, precise definitions of the measures must be established. Next, choices must be made about whose opinions will be solicited to constitute the data. Finally, care must be given to defining the right scale and level of granularity for measurement.

Valett, Jon D.↗
NASA NTRS1991

A research review of quality assessment for software

Measures were recommended to assess the quality of software submitted to the AdaNet program. The quality factors that are important to software reuse are explored and methods of evaluating those factors are discussed. Quality factors important to software reuse are: correctness, reliability, verifiability, understandability, modifiability, and certifiability. Certifiability is included because the documentation of many factors about a software component such as its efficiency, portability, and development history, constitute a class for factors important to some users, not important at all to other, and impossible for AdaNet to distinguish between a priori. The quality factors may be assessed in different ways. There are a few quantitative measures which have been shown to indicate software quality. However, it is believed that there exists many factors that indicate quality and have not been empirically validated due to their subjective nature. These subjective factors are characterized by the way in which they support the software engineering principles of abstraction, information hiding, modularity, localization, confirmability, uniformity, and completeness.

Source record↗