1 COQUALMO Working Group Presentation Presenter: John D. Powell.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Cost as a Business Driver 1 John Brown C Eng MIEE mr_ Software Cost Estimation.
Advertisements

COCOMO Suite Model Unification Tool Ray Madachy 23rd International Forum on COCOMO and Systems/Software Cost Modeling October 27, 2008.
COSYSMO 2.0 Workshop Summary (held Monday, March 17 th 2008) USC CSSE Annual Research Review March 18, 2008 Jared Fortune.
University of Southern California Center for Systems and Software Engineering ©USC-CSSE1 Ray Madachy, Ricardo Valerdi USC Center for Systems and Software.
Software Process and Problem Statements CSSE 371, Software Requirements and Specification Mark Ardis, Rose-Hulman Institute September 3, 2004.
March 2002 COSYSMO: COnstructive SYStems Engineering Cost MOdel Ricardo Valerdi USC Annual Research Review March 11, 2002.
University of Southern California Center for Software Engineering CSE USC COSYSMO: Constructive Systems Engineering Cost Model Barry Boehm, USC CSE Annual.
Software Testing and Quality Assurance
COSYSMO: Constructive Systems Engineering Cost Model Ricardo Valerdi USC CSE Workshop October 25, 2001.
Applying COCOMO II Effort Multipliers to Simulation Models 16th International Forum on COCOMO and Software Cost Modeling Jongmoon Baik and Nancy Eickelmann.
18 th International Forum on COCOMO and Software Cost Modeling October 2003 Use of Historical Data by High Maturity Organizations Rick Hefner, Ph.D.
1 Predictive Models to Achieve Business Results Place your image on top of this gray box. If no graphic i applicable, delete gray box and notch-out behind.
1 COSYSMO 3.0: Future Research Directions Jared Fortune University of Southern California 2009 COCOMO Forum Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Smi COCOMO II Calibration Status COCOMO Forum October 2004.
Affiliate Feedback and Discussion 1. Future Research: COSYSMO Updated data collection effort Quantifying the effect of schedule Harmonizing across software.
May 11, 2004CS WPI1 CS 562 Advanced SW Engineering Lecture #5 Tuesday, May 11, 2004.
10/25/2005USC-CSE1 Ye Yang, Barry Boehm USC-CSE COCOTS Risk Analyzer COCOMO II Forum, Oct. 25 th, 2005 Betsy Clark Software Metrics, Inc.
University of Southern California Center for Systems and Software Engineering ©USC-CSSE1 Ray Madachy, Barry Boehm USC Center for Systems and Software Engineering.
2/13/07(c) USC-CSSE1 An Empirical Study on MBASE and LeanMBASE Supannika Koolmanojwong Center for Systems and Software Engineering CSSE- Annual Research.
Introduction Wilson Rosa, AFCAA CSSE Annual Research Review March 8, 2010.
University of Southern California Center for Software Engineering CSE USC USC-CSE Annual Research Review COQUALMO Update John D. Powell March 11, 2002.
Copyright USC-CSSE 1 Quality Management – Lessons of COQUALMO (COnstructive QUALity MOdel) A Software Defect Density Prediction Model AWBrown.
© USC-CSE1 Determine How Much Dependability is Enough: A Value-Based Approach LiGuo Huang, Barry Boehm University of Southern California.
© USC-CSE Feb Keun Lee ( & Sunita Chulani COQUALMO and Orthogonal Defect.
CBS Process WG. Participants David Carney (chair) M. Al-Said (scribe) Tony Jordano Kyung Whan Lee Jeffrey Poulin David Klappholz Glenn Berg Jongmoon Baik.
1 Discussion on Reuse Framework Jared Fortune, USC Ricardo Valerdi, MIT COSYSMO COCOMO Forum 2008 Los Angeles, CA.
Expert COSYSMO Update Raymond Madachy USC-CSSE Annual Research Review March 17, 2009.
COCOMO II Database Brad Clark Center for Software Engineering Annual Research Review March 11, 2002.
Measuring Dollar Savings from Software Process Improvement with COCOMO II Betsy Clark Software Metrics Inc. October 25, 2001 Acknowledgment: This presentation.
University of Southern California Center for Systems and Software Engineering © 2009, USC-CSSE 1 An Analysis of Changes in Productivity and COCOMO Cost.
Software causes many failures - significant mission risk Hard to quantify effects on system risk of: software defects software development practices software.
University of Southern California Center for Systems and Software Engineering Improving Affordability via Value-Based Testing 27th International Forum.
University of Southern California Center for Software Engineering CSE USC 10/8/00©USC-CSE1 Expediting Technology Transfer via Affiliate Programs and Focused.
Chapter 20: Defect Classification and Analysis  General Types of Defect Analyses.  ODC: Orthogonal Defect Classification.  Analysis of ODC Data.
Gender and the Forest Investment Program Stacy Alboher Linda Mossop-Rousseau FIP Pilot Countries Meeting Cape Town, June 22, 2011.
Week 5 – Special Topics. Risk Management Best Practices.
© 2015 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
Capability Maturity Models Software Engineering Institute (supported by DoD) The problems of software development are mainly caused by poor process management.
© USC-CSE 2001 Oct Constructive Quality Model – Orthogonal Defect Classification (COQUALMO-ODC) Model Keun Lee (
University of Southern California Center for Software Engineering C S E USC Using COCOMO for Software Decisions - from COCOMO II Book, Section 2.6 Barry.
Chapter 14: Maintenance Effort Models Omar Meqdadi SE 3860 Lecture 14 Department of Computer Science and Software Engineering University of Wisconsin-Platteville.
1 Fault-Based Analysis: Improving IV&V Through Requirements Risk Reduction '02 Jane Hayes Rama Bireddy D.N. American SAIC Department of Computer Science.
University of Southern California Center for Systems and Software Engineering Vu Nguyen, Barry Boehm USC-CSSE ARR, May 1, 2014 COCOMO II Cost Driver Trends.
Overview of COCOMO Reporter:Hui Zhang
1. What do you understand by software engineering? Discuss the role of engineering software development. 2. What do you understand by software requirement.
PMI is a registered trademark of the Project Management Institute Knowledge Exchange Forum October 28, 2003 Assessing Project Management in Your Organization.
Ch7: Software Production Process. 1 Waterfall models  Invented in the late 1950s for large air defense systems, popularized in the 1970s  Main characteristics:
System Maintenance Modifications or corrections made to an information system after it has been released to its customers Changing an information system.
Smi COCOMO II Calibration Status USC-CSE Annual Research Review March 2004.
RHET201 FALL 2011 Drafting a Research proposal. Functions of a Research Proposal The PRIMARY FUNCTIONS of your proposal are to clearly articulate your.
Toward A Framework for Implementing Systems Engineering Development for Complex Systems Karl L. Brunson, GWU Thomas A. Mazzuchi, D.Sc., GWU Shahram Sarhani,
COCOMO Software Cost Estimating Model Lab 4 Demonstrator : Bandar Al Khalil.
The Comprehensive Unit-Based Safety Program: How Will This Work?
Environment. Waterfall.
Lecture 0 Software Engineering Course Introduction
Outline. Adherence in the Age of HCV Antivirals: Lessons from HIV Adherence Interventions.
Cost Estimation with COCOMO II
Measuring Differences in the Quality of Professional Development
Costing Secure Systems Workshop Report
SLOC and Size Reporting
Phase Distribution of Software Development Effort
COSYSMO: Constructive Systems Engineering Cost Model
Introduction to Constructive COTS (COCOTS) Model and Tool
Cost Estimation with COCOMO II
Cost Estimation with COCOMO II
Cost Estimation with COCOMO II
Research Topics about Agile Methods
Peer Reviews A. Winsor Brown Jan. 13, 2010
Working Group Meeting Report
Center for Software and Systems Engineering,
Presentation transcript:

1 COQUALMO Working Group Presentation Presenter: John D. Powell

2 Participants Moderator: Sunita Chulani-IBM Scribes: John Powell-JPL & Keun Lee-USC Floating Participant: Barry Boehm-USC Participants Michael Crowley-Motorola Kimberly Dobson-Motorola Jongmoon Baik-Motorola Linda Brooks-TRW Barbara Hirsh-Motorola George Huling-LASPIN Jung-Won Park-USC-CSE John Serino-BAE Systems Dick Stutzke-SAIC Nancy Eickleman- Motorola

3 Outline Preliminary Presentation Brainstorming Session Identification of Research Issues Prioritization of Research Topics

4 Preliminary Presentations Presentation for those who were unfamiliar with –COQUALMO –Orthogonal Defect Classification (ODC)

5 The COQUALMO Model DI_Driver R,1 QAF =  DM R DR_Driver R,1 DR_Driver R,2 DR_Driver R,3 Rqts 10 Rqts 20 Rqts 30 Baseline Defect Intro Rates/Ksloc 10* DAF R 20* DAF D 30* DAF C COCOMO II Cost Drivers Analysis Tools Rating Peer Reviews Rating Test Thoroughness and Tool Rating

6 ODC Defect Classification, Trigger activities Signatures of defect rates Comparison between projects and historical signatures Take action based on these differences

7 Brainstorm ODC –Tailorable to different environments Modeling for Spiral V. Waterfall Lifecycle –Modeling for Spiral life cycle is harder Finding the Right Kind of Defect V Counting Defects –Implication for Risk Exposure Assessment

8 Brainstorm (cont’) Temporal information about defects may be needed –Account for timing of activities –Implication for cost Granularity of COQUALMO Calibration –Allow for USC to Collect Data in the form affiliates collect it and make use of it.

9 Brainstorming (cont’) Can we compress 8-9 defect categories into 3-4 categories? Build the capacity into the model to allow for changes in its classification scheme

10 Identifying Issues/Research Topics 1.Full ODC Categorization 2.Cost/Benefit Analysis 3.Tailorability to waterfall, incremental model 4.Tailorability to Non-ODC Categories 5.Eliminating obstacles to data contribution 6.Reliability/MTBF – Product Model 7.Process Model

11 Prioritizing Research Topics

12 1. Full ODC Categorization Difficulty Importance

13 2. Cost/Benefit Analysis Difficulty Importance

14 3. Tailorability to waterfall, incremental model Difficulty Importance

15 4. Tailorability to Non-ODC Categories Difficulty Importance

16 5. Eliminating obstacles to data contribution Difficulty Importance

17 6. Reliability/MTBF – Product Model Difficulty Importance

18 7. Process Model Difficulty Importance