Total views : 154
Metrics to Develop High Quality Software
Objectives: The ultimate goal of the proposed metrics is to develop a quality software product, which is possible only when the product is certified at the end of each phase, so that there will be no place for errors and faults. Methods/Statistical Analysis: Project A and B are “School Management Software” in C++ language. The project A is developed using the “Software quality and productivity enhancement model” procedure and verified by metrics at every phase of development and maintenance whereas project B is developed in general procedure by another group. Both the software projects are observed for six months under similar work and conditions. Metrics are applied on observations from time to time and compared. Findings: Results from proposed metrics certify that undefined (hidden) task in product SRS or design phase constitute the major risks associated (product failure, quality, productivity etc.) with the product. Poor requirement identification and management laid greater role in product failure. It is certified in this paper that increase in the value of product failure % decrease the quality and productivity of product. The product whose failure rate is greater than 1% is risky to use, this value varies as per the product use and its working environment. Product effectiveness curve help the user in decision making regarding the working process of the software process, if it moves downward continue the use, but if it moves upward after a time period then the product should be abort or replaced. In this paper the application of proposed metrics on small project in different phases of its development, prerelease stage and in maintenance of the product enhance the quality and productivity of the product. Application/Improvements: The proposed metrics are applied on small projects; they can also be applied on large, complex software products. The application of the proposed metrics reduces the risk associated with the product that enhances the product quality
Development Phases, Productivity, Software Development, Software Metrics, Quality.
- Jethani K. Software quality- Getting right metrics, getting metrics right. Tata Consultancy Services Limited; 2008. p.1–11.
- Jose G, Joseph J. Test metrics and KPI’s. UST Global; 2014.
- What is more important: Software quality or productivity, Iron Triangle, Scott Ambler. Available from: http://www.ambysoft.com/essays/brokenTriangle.html
- Kumar S. Metrics to determine the quality and productivity during software development. IJCSSE. 2016; 5(8):175–82.
- Rajesh S, Chandrasekar A. An efficient object oriented design model: By measuring and prioritizing the design metrics of UML class diagram with preeminent quality attributes. Indian Journal of Science and Technology. 2016 Jun; 9(21). DOI: 10.17485/ijst/2016/v9i21/95147.
- Bhatia MPS, Kumar A, Beniwal R. Ontologies for software engineering: past, present and future. Indian Journal of Science and Technology. 2016 Mar; 9(9). DOI: 10.17485/ ijst/2016/v9i9/71384.
- Stephen H, Kan K. Pearson’s software quality metrics overview metrics and models in software quality engineering USA; 2002.
- Rawat MS. Survey on impact of software metrics on software quality. IJACSA. 2012; 3(1):137.
- Vijayalakshmi P, Luv PK, Soni AK. Rainwater runoff estimation using empirical formulae computed in c programming software for Puriliya District of West Bengal. Indian Journal of Science and Technology. 2016 Jan; 9(4).DOI: 10.17485/ijst/2016/v9i4/55229.
- Singh G. A study of software metrics. IJCEM. 2011; 11:1–6.
- Kaur S. Software metrics and metric tools-a review. International Journal on Recent and Innovation Trends in Computing and Communication. 2015; 3(4):2076–9.
- Pusala R. Operational excellence through efficient software testing metrics. Infosys View Point; 2006 Aug.
- Daskalantonakis MK. A practical view of software measurement and implementation experiences within Motorola. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering.1992; 18(11):998–1010.
- Basili VR, Weiss DM. A methodology for collecting valid software engineering data. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering. 1984; 10(1):728–38.
- Wankhede HS, Kiwelekar AW. Qualitative assessment of software engineering examination questions with bloom’s taxonomy. Indian Journal of Science and Technology. 2016 Feb; 9(6). DOI: 10.17485/ijst/2016/v9i6/85012.
- Kumar S, et.al. Software quality and productivity enhancement model. IJERD. 2016 Nov; 12.
- Priyadharshini V, Malathi A. Analysis of process mining model for software reliability dataset using HMM. Indian Journal of Science and Technology. 2016 Jan; 9(4). DOI: 10.17485/ijst/2016/v9i4/52931.
- Sanjay Kumar et.al. Spiral Increment Reuse (SIR) Software Model, International Journal of Computer Science and Software Engineering (IJCSSE), Volume 5, Issue 1, 2016 January ISSN (Online): 2409-4285 www.IJCSSE.org Page: 5-10
- Chamoli S, Tenne G, Bhatia S. Analysing software metrics for accurate dynamic defect prediction models. Indian Journal of Science and Technology. 2015 Jan; 8(S4):96–100.
- Rashid E, Patnayak S, Bhattacherjee V. Estimation and evaluation of change in software quality at a particular stage of software development. Indian Journal of Science and Technology. 2013 Oct; 6(10).
- There are currently no refbacks.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.