Zuse Horst, A Framework of Software Measurement, Published by Walter de Gruyter, 1998  Home/Search   Document Not in Database   Summary   Related Articles   Check

....status of the field of software metrics and to suggest improvements along the classical path of the field of metrology. 1. Introduction Over recent decades, hundreds of software metrics have been proposed by researchers and practitioners for measuring software products and software processes [1,2,3,4,5,6,8,9]. Most of these metrics have been designed based on the intuition of the researchers or on an empirical basis, or both, and they have most often been characterised by the ease with which some entities of the development process can be counted. In their analysis of some of these metrics, ....

.... subset of the classical set of concepts of measurement; software metrics researchers, by focussing solely on measurement theory , have investigated mainly the representation conditions, the mathematical properties of the manipulation of numbers, and the proper conditions for such manipulations [8,9]. Our survey of the literature on software metrics has not, however, come up with references to the classical concepts of metrology in these investigations into the quality of the metrics proposed to the software engineering community. In the scientific fields, including engineering, as well as ....

Zuse, H. A Framework of Software Measurement. New York, 1997.

....unit of code, then the measures of size have to have the same relationship. Relationships can be reduced to five scale types: nominal, ordinal, interval, ratio and absolute. These scales are used in statistics to define what statistical operations can be done. Fenton and Pfleeger, 1999 and Zuse, 1998] 16 Operations that can be done increase from nominal to absolute. Scales are ordered from the most restrictive (nominal) to the most relaxed scale (absolute) Each later scale type allows all operations of the previous scale. We map attribute characteristics to a numerical value. We can then ....

Zuse, Horst, A Framework of Software Measurement. Walter de Gruyter 1998.

....flattened data yields interesting results and improves the power of classical measurements for interpretation. 1 Introduction The measurement of object oriented systems seems to be a powerful tool for the qualitative assessment (cf. 5] The availability of about 200 object oriented metrics [14] i.e. metrics which are defined on object oriented systems and many books that consider the measurement of object oriented software, confirm this assumption. In general, these metrics can be classified into coupling, cohesion and size metrics. Inheritance is covered as a separate concept ....

Zuse, H.: A framework of software measurement. de Gruyter, Berlin (1998)

....provides a very condensed quality based view on the whole system. 2 10 One kind of empirical proof for this hypothesis is the external validation of the used measurement program, i.e. the demonstration of a consistent relationship between some metrics and some available empirical data (cf. [Zuse98], p. 536) The following paper describes an external validation by applying a measurement based quality assessment on a large software system and by empirically evaluating its results. These two distinct tasks were done by two separate groups: The software system engineering group at the ....

Horst Zuse: "A Framework of Software Measurement", Walter de Gruyter, Berlin, 1998

....an (empirical) operational definition of this attribute must be given. This can easily be done for concrete attributes (such as size for a person, or size in lines of code for software) but will be more complicated for abstract attributes (this is what Zuse calls the intelligence barrier [6]) Substep 3: Design or selection of the metamodel Software is not a tangible product. However, it can be made visible through multiple representations (e.g. for a user, a group of reports, screens, etc. for a programmer, lines of code, etc. The set of characteristics selected to represent ....

H. Zuse, A Framework of Software Measurement. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1998.

....security, portability and performance. 18] Despite these difficulties with current metrics, it is essential that software engineering be placed on a sound basis through scientific measurement. Approaches to a formal theory for software metrics have been provided by a number of researchers [8, 9, 19, 20]] A framework to facilitate understanding of the complementary uses of the various types of metrics and how they relate to each other is now necessary. In particular, this paper focuses on the dynamic performance of metrics how their accuracy, precision and utility changes over the duration of ....

Zuse, H (1997) "A Framework of Software Measurement", Walter de Gruyter.

....in order to de ne some metrics for estimating the complexity of aspect oriented software, models that are appropriate for representing aspect oriented systems are needed. However, although a large body of research in software metrics has been focused on procedural or object oriented software [3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 11, 16] as well as software architectures [8, 13, 14] until now there is no software metric for aspectoriented software. Further, due to the speci c features of aspect oriented software, existing models and abstractions for procedural or object oriented software can not be applied to aspect oriented ....

H.Zuse, \A Framework of Software Measurement," Walter de Gruyter, 1997.

....is to spell out one s own intuition in mathematical, unambiguous terms, which can be used as a basis for discussion about the measures for an attribute and, eventually, to reach widespread consensus. 5. Representational Measurement Theory Representational Measurement Theory [5] see also [1, 6]) formalizes the intuitive, empirical knowledge about an attribute of a set of entities and the quantitative, numerical knowledge about the attribute. The intuitive knowledge is captured via the so called empirical relational system (described in Section 5.1) and the quantitative knowledge via ....

H. Zuse, A framework of software measurement(Walter de Gruyter, Berlin, 1998).

....validating a measure. As Van den Berg and Van den Broek [25] said a standard on theoretical validation issues in software measurement is urgently required. Work on validation theory has followed two paths which rather than alternative are complementary. 1) Measurement theory based approaches [26, 27, 28]: to check for a specific measure if the empirical relations between the elements of the real world established by the attribute being measured, are respected when measuring the attributes. Measurement theory gives clear definitions of terminology, a sound basis of software measures, criteria for ....

....We define the Redundant Relationship metric as the number of relationships that are redundant in the ERD. These metrics were theoretically validated following the property based approach proposed by Briand et al. [30] in [39] and following the measurement theory based framework proposed by Zuse [26] in [15] Genero et al. have carried out empirical validation of these metrics by means: A case study. In [40] it was demonstrated by means of a case study that some of the proposed metrics are heavily correlated with the time spent on the different phases of the development of the application ....

H. Zuse, A Framework of Software Measurement. Berlin, Walter de Gruyter, 1998.

....not attempt to cover all aspects of software measurement and software process improvement in this chapter. For a general overview of software measurement the reader is referred to Fenton and Pfleeger (1997) An in depth discussion of the history and theory of software measurement can be found in Zuse (1998). Thomson and Mayhew (1997) give an overview of software process improvement approaches. Zahran (1997) provides an extensive overview of maturity based process improvement methodologies. In the next section we discuss related work on measurement based process improvement and in section 2.2 we ....

Zuse, H. (1998), A Framework of Software Measurement, Walter de Gruyter.

.... for example the works of Poulin [19] Briand et al. 7] Price and Demurjian [20] Benlarbi [5] But less work has been done in the field of the specific O O properties; see for example the works of Moore [16] Bansiya ( 2] 3] 4] Benlarbi and Melo [6] Abreu and Carapua [1] and Zuse [26]. An additional problem is that many of the currently available metrics can be applied only when the product is finished or almost finished, since data is often taken from the implementation stage. This makes the quality weakness problems be detected too late. It is desirable to have a tool that ....

....in order for a measure to be valid these two conditions must be held: 1) the measure must not violate any necessary property of its elements; 2) each model used in the process must be valid. The structural framework of Kitchenham et at. 13] can be combined with the axiomatic framework of Zuse [26] to yield a wider conceptual framework (Olsina et al. 2000) Regarding the proposed conceptual framework in order to decide whether a metric is valid, it is necessary at least to check: Attribute validity, i.e. whether the attribute is actually exhibited by the entity being measured. For a ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Zuse, H., A Framework of Software Measurement, Walter de Gruyter, Berln-NY. 1998.

....must be given, that is, the concept must be characterized. This can be done easily for physical attributes (such as height and weight for a person) but will be more complicated for abstract attributes such as, for example, quality; Zuse refers to this difficulty as the intelligence barrier [17]. For these attributes, stating explicitly how the concept is decomposed into subconcepts can make this characterization. This decomposition describes which role each subconcept plays in the constitution of the concept measured and how these subconcepts are themselves defined. This ISO document ....

H. Zuse, "A Framework of Software Measurement", de Gruyter, Dec. 1997, 751 pages.

No context found.

Zuse Horst, A Framework of Software Measurement, Published by Walter de Gruyter, 1998

No context found.

Zuse, H. A Framework for Software Measurement, Walter de Gruyter: Berlin, New York, 1998.

No context found.

H. Zuse, A Framework of Software Measurement. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1998.

No context found.

Zuse, H., A Framework of Software Measurement, Walter de Gruyter, 1998.

No context found.

Zuse Horst, A Framework of Software Measurement, Published by Walter de Gruyter, 1998

No context found.

H. Zuse. A Framework of Software Measurement. Walter de Gruyter, 1998.

No context found.

Zuse, H., A Framework of Software Measurement, New York, 1997.

No context found.

H. Zuse, A Framework of Software Measurement, New York, 1997.

No context found.

Zuse H., A Framework for Software Measurement, Walter de Gruyter, Germany, Berlin, 1997.

No context found.

Zuse, H., A Framework of Software Measurement. Berlin, Walter de Gruyter, (1998).

Online articles have much greater impact   More about CiteSeer.IST   Add search form to your site   Submit documents   Feedback  

CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC