Model for Quantative Defect Removal

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

Chapter 24 Quality Management.

Advertisements

INTEGRATING QA IN PROJECT LIFE CYCLE. Software Development Methodologies  A Project Manager is the one who thinks 9 women can deliver a baby in 1 month.

INFO 631 Prof. Glenn Booker Week 1 – Defect Analysis and Removal 1INFO631 Week 1.

OHT 2.1 Galin, SQA from theory to implementation © Pearson Education Limited 2004 Software Quality assurance (SQA) SWE 333 Dr Khalid Alnafjan

These slides are designed to accompany Software Engineering: A Practitioner’s Approach, 6/e (McGraw-Hill 2005). Slides copyright 2005 by Roger Pressman.1.

2/13/07(c) USC-CSSE1 An Analytical Comparison between Pair Development and Software Development with Inspection By: Monvorath (Molly) Phongpaibul

OHT 7.1 Galin, SQA from theory to implementation © Pearson Education Limited 2004 Software development methodologies: - The software development life cycle.

OHT 3.1 Galin, SQA from theory to implementation © Pearson Education Limited The need for comprehensive software quality requirements Classification.

OHT 3.1 Galin, SQA from theory to implementation © Pearson Education Limited 2004 The need for comprehensive software quality requirements Classification.

OHT 1.1 Galin, SQA from theory to implementation © Pearson Education Limited 2004 The uniqueness of software quality assurance The environments for which.

OHT 7.1 Galin, SQA from theory to implementation © Pearson Education Limited 2004 Software development methodologies: - The software development life cycle.

OHT 13.1 Galin, SQA from theory to implementation © Pearson Education Limited 2004 What is a CASE tool? The contribution of CASE tools to software product.

 QUALITY ASSURANCE:  QA is defined as a procedure or set of procedures intended to ensure that a product or service under development (before work is.

OHT 2.1 Galin, SQA from theory to implementation © Pearson Education Limited 2004 Software Quality - continued So let’s move on to ‘exactly’ what we mean.

Design Reviews Peer Reviews. Agenda Peer Reviews Participants of Peer Review Preparation for a Peer Review Session The Peer Review Session Post-peer Review.

OHT 4.1 Galin, SQA from theory to implementation © Pearson Education Limited 2004 Software Quality assurance (SQA) SWE 333 Dr Khalid Alnafjan

Prof. Mohamed Batouche Quality Control.

OHT 19.1 Galin, SQA from theory to implementation © Pearson Education Limited 2004 Controlled documents and quality records Definitions and objectives.

Ch.4: QA in Context  QA and the overall development context Defect handling/resolution How alternative QA activities fit in process Alternative perspectives:

S oftware Q uality A ssurance Part One Reviews and Inspections.

Validation Metrics. Metrics are Needed to Answer the Following Questions How much time is required to find bugs, fix them, and verify that they are fixed?

Software Quality Assurance Activities

Software Quality Applied throughout SW Engineering Process Encompasses ▫ Analysis, design, coding, testing, tools ▫ Formal tech reviews ▫ Multi-tiered.

SE513 Software Quality Control Lecture01: Introduction to Software Quality Assurance Galin, SQA from Theory to Education Limited.

OHT 7.1 Galin, SQA from theory to implementation © Pearson Education Limited 2004 Chapter 7.1.

Software Quality Assurance SE Software Quality Assurance What is “quality”?

What Do We Know about Defect Detection Methods P. Runeson et al.; "What Do We Know about Defect Detection Methods?", IEEE Software, May/June Page(s):

Quality Planning And Defect Estimation Presented by Basker George.

Viking Quality Report Team Assignment 9 Team 2-1.

Software Methods Mö/ slide 1 Methods and Techniques of Software Quality Management ICEL Quality Management Systems: Methods and Techniques of Software.

OHT 1.1 Galin, SQA from theory to implementation © Pearson Education Limited 2004 The uniqueness of software quality assurance The environments for which.

CHAPTER 4 Life-Cycle Components. 2 ESGD5125 SEM II 2009/2010 Dr. Samy Abu Naser 2 Learning Objectives: To discuss: Integrating quality activities in the.

Lecture Introduction to Software Development SW Engg. Development Process Instructor :Muhammad Janas khan Thursday, September.

Software Quality Assurance Lecture # 6 By: Faraz Ahmed.

OHT 7.1 Galin, SQA from theory to implementation © Pearson Education Limited 2004 Software development methodologies: - The software development life cycle.

THE SQA CHARTER Find defects so they can be REMOVED Anticipate defects so they can be PREVENTED.  Software Quality Assurance 

Anton Krbaťa Ján Budáč  Verification: "Are we building the product right ?„  Validation: "Are we building the right product ?"

SEN 460 Software Quality Assurance. Bahria University Karachi Campus Waseem Akhtar Mufti B.E(UIT), M.S(S.E) AAU Denmark Assistant Professor Department.

OHT 15.1 Galin, SQA from theory to implementation © Pearson Education Limited 2004 Templates The contribution of templates to software quality The organizational.

Advanced S/w Eng - s/w productivity issues 1 Software Productivity Issues Why do software projects fail? Advanced Software Engineering COM360 University.

Economic Justification. Good Enough Quality Time to market Time to market Time to profit Time to profit.

Lecture 17 Op Amp Filters Low Pass and High Pass

Software Engineering Lecture 8: Quality Assurance.

SE513 Software Quality Assurance Lecture02: Software Quality Factors SE513 Software Quality Assurance Lecture02: Software Quality Factors Galin, SQA from.

Chapter 1 Outline - The uniqueness of software quality assurance - The environments for which SQA methods are developed.

More SQA Reviews and Inspections. Types of Evaluations  Verification Unit Test, Integration Test, Usability Test, etc  Formal Reviews  aka "formal.

by: Er. Manu Bansal Deptt of IT Software Quality Assurance.

Chapter 7.2. Continuing:  Factors affecting intensity of SQA activities  Verification, validation and qualification  Development and quality plans.

OHT 15.1 Galin, SQA from theory to implementation © Pearson Education Limited 2004 Templates The contribution of templates to software quality The organizational.

Requirements Engineering Lecture 7

The Value of Managing the Review Process

Software Reviews Software reviews are the filter for the software engineering process Applied at various different points and serve to uncover errors that.

Software Verification and Validation

Software Verification and Validation

Personal Software Process Team Software Process

Software Project Management

Software Quality Assurance

Software Economics Phase Yield

Sequences and Infinite Series

Software Engineering Lecture #2

Roles and Responsibilities (1/3)

SQA for Individuals based on

11/29/2018 Department of Software Engineering and IT Engineering

SQA Role during Software Code and Unit Test Phase

30 A 30 B 30 C 30 D 30 E 77 TOTALS ORIGINAL COUNT CURRENT COUNT

Software Project Management

Chapter # 7 Software Quality Metrics

Integrating quality activities in

Testing, Inspection, Walkthrough

Software Quality Course 1 Introduction.

Presentation transcript:

Model for Quantative Defect Removal Source: Galin, D., ‘Software Quality Assurance’. Addison Wesley, 2004.

Analogie – Traitement des eaux usées Eau prélevée du St-Laurent ! Mesure Eau après premier traitement Mesure Mesure Eau après x traitements Filtres Mesure Eau potable Qualité connue et risque connu 7/24/2019

Defect removal effectiveness and cost Software development phase Average % of defects originating in phase Average relative defect removal cost Requirement specification Design Unit coding Integration coding Documentation System testing Operation 7/24/2019

Defect removal effectiveness and cost Software development phase Average % of defects originating in phase Average relative defect removal cost Requirement specification 15% Design 35% Unit coding 30% Integration coding 10% Documentation System testing 50% Operation 100% 7/24/2019

Defect removal effectiveness and cost Software development phase Average % of defects originating in phase Average relative defect removal cost Requirement specification 15% 1 Design 35% 2.5 Unit coding 30% 6.5 Integration coding 10% 16 Documentation 40 System testing 50% Operation 100% 110 Boehm 7/24/2019

Defect removal effectiveness Quality assurance activity Defects removal effectiveness Specification requirement review 50% Design inspection 70% Design review Code inspection Unit test Integration tests Documentation review System test 7/24/2019

Defect removal effectiveness and cost · POD = Phase Originated Defects · PD = Passed Defects (from former phase or former quality assurance activity) · % FE = % of Filtering Effectiveness (also termed % screening effectiveness) · RD = Removed Defects · CDR = Cost of Defect Removal · TRC = Total Removal Cost = RD x CDR. Note: Percentage of removed defect is less than % of detected defects since 10-17% of defect correction are inadequate. 7/24/2019

Defect removal effectiveness and cost · POD = Phase Originated Defects · PD = Passed Defects (from former phase or former quality assurance activity) · %FE = % of Filtering Effectiveness (also termed % screening effectiveness) · RD = Removed Defects · CDR = Cost of Defect Removal · TRC = Total Removal Cost. TRC = RD x CDR. 7/24/2019

Defect removal effectiveness and cost · POD = Phase Originated Defects · PD = Passed Defects · %FE = % of Filtering Effectiveness · RD = Removed Defects · CDR = Cost of Defect Removal · TRC = Total Removal Cost. = RD x CDR. 7/24/2019

Defect removal effectiveness and cost with inspection Quality assurance activity Defects removal effectiveness for standard SQA plan Defects removal effectiveness for comprehensive SQA plan Specification requirement review 50% 60% Design inspection ----- 70% Design review Code inspection Unit test 40% Integration tests Documentation review System test Operation phase detection 100% 7/24/2019

Defect removal effectiveness and cost with inspection System tests RD = 4 CDR = 40 2.6 TRC = 160 cu Operation POD = 0 PD = 2.6 % FE = 100 RD = 2.6 · POD = Phase Originated Defects · PD = Passed Defects · %FE = % of Filtering Effectiveness · RD = Removed Defects · CDR = Cost of Defect Removal · TRC = Total Removal Cost. = RD x CDR. CDR = 110 TRC = 286 cu 7/24/2019

Comparisons Less costly to maintain (296 instead of 759) Less defects when shipped for operation (2.6 vs. 6.9) Economy of 41% counting additional internal QA activities 7/24/2019