By Topic

Predicting Defect Content and Quality Assurance Effectiveness by Combining Expert Judgment and Defect Data - A Case Study

Sign In

Cookies must be enabled to login.After enabling cookies , please use refresh or reload or ctrl+f5 on the browser for the login options.

Formats Non-Member Member
$31 $13
Learn how you can qualify for the best price for this item!
Become an IEEE Member or Subscribe to
IEEE Xplore for exclusive pricing!
close button

puzzle piece

IEEE membership options for an individual and IEEE Xplore subscriptions for an organization offer the most affordable access to essential journal articles, conference papers, standards, eBooks, and eLearning courses.

Learn more about:

IEEE membership

IEEE Xplore subscriptions

4 Author(s)
Klas, M. ; Fraunhofer Inst. for Exp. Software Eng. ; Nakao, H. ; Elberzhager, F. ; Munch, J.

Planning quality assurance (QA) activities in a systematic way and controlling their execution are challenging tasks for companies that develop software or software-intensive systems. Both require estimation capabilities regarding the effectiveness of the applied QA techniques and the defect content of the checked artifacts. Existing approaches for these purposes need extensive measurement data from his-torical projects. Due to the fact that many companies do not collect enough data for applying these approaches (es-pecially for the early project lifecycle), they typically base their QA planning and controlling solely on expert opinion. This article presents a hybrid method that combines commonly available measurement data and context-specific expert knowledge. To evaluate the methodpsilas applicability and usefulness, we conducted a case study in the context of independent verification and validation activities for critical software in the space domain. A hybrid defect content and effectiveness model was developed for the software requirements analysis phase and evaluated with available legacy data. One major result is that the hybrid model provides improved estimation accuracy when compared to applicable models based solely on data. The mean magni-tude of relative error (MMRE) determined by cross-validation is 29.6% compared to 76.5% obtained by the most accurate data-based model.

Published in:

Software Reliability Engineering, 2008. ISSRE 2008. 19th International Symposium on

Date of Conference:

10-14 Nov. 2008