1. Group Members: Ayush Newatia, Barry Foye, Billy Felton, Kevin Anderson, Shahnaz Begum and Adam Jasinski Constructive Cost Model is a technique used to estimate effort and cost of a project using linear functions.

2.  Developed by Barry W Boehm.  There are three types of COCOMO : 1.Basic CoCoMo 2.Intermediate CoCoMo 3.Detailed CoCoMo SMALL Projects: EFFORT = a * Size + b LARGE Projects: EFFORT = a * Size b

3.  Depending on the type of the project will determine the values for the parameters “a” and “b”. There are three types of projects: 1.Organic 2.Semi Detached 3.Embedded (Source: http://www.cs.unc.edu/~stotts/145/cocomo4.gif)http://www.cs.unc.edu/~stotts/145/cocomo4.gif (Source: Wikipedia) Basic CoCoMo abcd Organic2. 4 1.052.50.38 Semi- Detached 3. 0 1.122.50.35 Embedde d 3. 6 1.202.50.32 Basic COCOMO Uses the equations: Effort = a * Size b Dev Time = c(Effort) d People = Effort/Dev Time

4.  Intermediate COCOMO uses a similar equation to basic COCOMO  Takes into consideration aspects such as hardware attributes and personnel attributes.  Effort = EAF * a * Size b Reference Table C: http://www.cs.unc.edu/~stotts/145/cocomo5.gif Table D: http://www.cs.unc.edu/~stotts/145/cocomo6.gif Intermed. COCOMO ab Organic3.21.05 Semi- Detached 3.01.12 Embedded2.81.20 EAFlownominalhigh Computer attributes Main storage constraints 1.001.06 Personnel Programing capability 1.171.000.86 C D

5.  Incorporates all the characteristics of Intermediate CoCoMo but applies it to each step of the software engineering process.  The 5 steps in the software engineering process for detailed CoCoMo are: 1.Plan and Requirement 2.System Design 3.Detailed Design 4.Module Code and Test 5.Integration and Test (Source: Wikipedia)

6. Designed to take into account the wider range of development approaches that are used today compared to the 1970s and is a extension to COCOMO. Uses Function Points –Estimate effort used to build system based on observable features of the product. Estimates are produced at different stages of the development lifecycle:  Application Composition  Early design  Past-architecture Key Drivers considered in COCOMO II Innovation Flexibility Scope Team Dynamics Capability Maturity Model COCOMO Elapsed Time: 2.5 x ( Estimated effort in months) 0.33

7. COCOMOCOCOMO II Approaches Waterfall model as norm approach Take in account wider range of development approaches Development Models Waterfall Lifecycle Initial phase of planning only Application Composition Early Design Post-Architecture Types of software projects Organic (small, simple software projects) Semi Detached Mode (intermediate software project) Embedded Mode (software project must be developed within set of tight hardware) Consideration of project driving factors None Innovation Flexibility Scope Team Dynamics Capability Maturity Model Estimation approaches KDSI (Thousand Delivered Source Instructions) Function Point Reference: http://csse.usc.edu/csse/research/COCOMOII/cocomo_main.html