Advertisement

Using PSU for Early Prediction of COSMIC Size of Functional and Non-functional Requirements

  • Luigi Buglione
  • Olga Ormandjieva
  • Maya Daneva
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5338)

Abstract

The project effort calculation with a functional size measurement method such as COSMIC can only be properly performed after the “Requirements Analysis” phase in a Project Life Cycle. The goal of this research is to investigate an early and project-level tuned prediction of the product size with the intent to reduce the effect of the ‘cone of uncertainty’ phenomenon. The lack of size measurement methods which take into account the effect of the product non-functional requirements (NFR) on size also contributes to the above phenomenon. We propose to use the Project Size Unit (PSU) technique for predicting the product (FUR and NFR) size measured in COSMIC functional size units. Such early prediction will lower the cost of size counting the project and minimize the estimation error in the requirements phase. Furthermore, the PSU calculation procedure can be automated, which would further reduce the cost of size counting. The expected advantage of jointly using PSU and COSMIC is the ability to get early estimates of the whole project effort.

Keywords

Project Size Prediction COSMIC Project Size Unit (PSU) Functional User Requirements (FUR) Non-Functional Requirements (NFR) 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Albrecht, A.J.: Measuring Application Development Productivity. In: Proc. Joint SHARE/GUIDE/IBM Application Development Symposium, pp. 83–92 (1979)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    IEEE Std 830-1998: IEEE Recommended Practice for Software Requirements Specifications, Software Engineering Standards Committee of the IEEE Computer Society (1998)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Abran, A., Desharnais, J.-M., Oligny, S., St-Pierre, D., Symons, C.: COSMIC FFP – Measurement Manual (COSMIC implementation guide to ISO/IEC 19761:2003). École de technologie supérieure – Université du Québec, Montréal (2003), http://www.cosmicon.com
  4. 4.
    ISO/IEC 19761. Software Engineering – COSMIC-FFP – A Functional Size Measurement Method. International Organization for Standardization – ISO, Geneva (2003)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Albrecht, A.J., Gaffney, J.E.: Software Function, Source Lines of Code, and Development Effort Prediction: A Software Science Validation. IEEE Trans. Software Eng. SE-9(6), 639–648 (1983), http://www.bfpug.com.br/Artigos/Albrecht/Albrecht_Gaffney.pdf CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kassab, M., Ormandjieva, O., Daneva, M., Abran, A.: Non-Functional Requirements: Size Measurement and Testing with COSMIC-FFP. In: Cuadrado-Gallego, J.J., Braungarten, R., Dumke, R.R., Abran, A. (eds.) IWSM-Mensura 2007. LNCS, vol. 4895, pp. 168–182. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kassab, M., Ormandjieva, O., Daneva, M., Abran, A.: Towards a Scope Management of Non-Functional Requirements in Requirements Engineering. In: Proceedings of MeReP: Workshop on Measuring Requirements for Project and Product Success, Palma de Majorca, Spain, November 6, 2007, pp. 88–99. University of Heidelberg Press (2007), http://www-swe.informatik.uni-heidelberg.de/home/events/MeRePDocs/ ISBN: 978-3-00-02-3-615
  8. 8.
    Buglione, L.: Project Size Unit (PSU) - Measurement Manual, version 1 (November 2007), http://www.geocities.com/lbu_measure/psu/psu-mm-121e.pdf
  9. 9.
    Buglione, L.: Some Thoughts on Productivity in ICT projects, WP-2008-01, White Paper, version 1 (March 2008), http://www.geocities.com/lbu_measure/fpa/fsm-prod-120e.pdf
  10. 10.
    Buglione, L.: Improving Estimation by Effort Type Proportions. Software Measurement News 13(1), 55–64 (2008), http://ivs.cs.uni-magdeburg.de/sw-eng/us/giak/SMN-08-1.htm Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fenton, N., Pfleeger, S.L.: Software Metrics: A Rigorous and Practical Approach, 2nd edn. International Thompson Computer Press (1997) ISBN 0-534-95425-1 Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Daneva, M.: Approaching the ERP Project Cost Estimation Problem: an Experiment. In: 1st International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement, p. 500. IEEE Press, New York (2007)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Buglione, L., Abran, A.: ICEBERG: A Different Look at Software Project Management, IWSM 2002 in Software Measurement and Estimation. In: Proceedings of the 12th International Workshop on Software Measurement (IWSM 2002), Magdeburg, Germany, October 7-9, 2002, pp. 153–167. Shaker Verlag (2008) (2008-05-23), www.lrgl.uqam.ca/publications/pdf/757.pdf
  14. 14.
    CMMI Product Team, CMMI for Development, Version 1.2, CMMI-DEV v1.2, CMU/SEI-2006-TR-008, Technical Report, Software Engineering Institute (August 2006) (2008-05-23), www.sei.cmu.edu/publications/documents/06.reports/06tr008.html
  15. 15.
    IEEE, Software & Systems Engineering Vocabulary (SEVOCAB), IEEE Computer Society & ISO/IEC JTC1/SC7 (2008-05-23), http://pascal.computer.org/sev_display/index.action
  16. 16.
    Paulk, M.C., Weber, C.V., Garcia, S.M., Chrissis, M.B., Bush, M.: Key Practices of the Capability Maturity Model Version 1.1, Software Engineering Institute, CMU/SEI-93-TR-025 (February 1993) (2008-05-23), www.sei.cmu.edu/pub/documents/93.reports/pdf/tr25.93.pdf
  17. 17.
    ISBSG, Glossary of Terms, version 5.9.1, International Software Benchmarking Standards Group (28/06/2006) (2008-05-23), www.isbsg.org/html/Glossary_of_Terms.doc
  18. 18.
    Buglione, L.: Project Size Unit (PSU) – Calculation feature in Project Management tools - Requirements, v1.0, PSU-AU-1.00e (December 2006) (2008-05-23), www.geocities.com/lbu_measure/psu/psu.htm
  19. 19.
    IFPUG, Function Points Counting Practices Manual (release 4.2), International Function Point User Group (January 2004) (2008-05-23) , http://www.ifpug.org
  20. 20.
    ISO/IEC, International Standard 14143-1 - Information Technology - Software Measurement - Functional Size Measurement - Part 1: Definition of Concepts (February 2007)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Boehm, B.: Software Engineering Economics. Prentice-Hall Inc., Englewood Cliffs (1981)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Project Management Institute, A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge, 3rd edition, ANSI/PMI 99-001-2004, ISBN 1-930699-45-X (2004)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Victoria Government, SouthernScope (2007) (2008-05-23), www.egov.vic.gov.au/index.php
  24. 24.
    FISMA, NorthernScope (2007) (2008-05-23), www.fisma.fi/in-english/scope-management
  25. 25.
    Buglione, L., Cuadrado-Gallego, J.J., Gutiérrez de Mesa, J.A.: Project Sizing and Estimating: A Case Study using PSU, IFPUG and COSMIC. In: Proceedings of IWSM/Metrikon/Mensura 2008, Munich, Germany, November 18-19, 2008. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Biagiotti, C.: Migliorare gli aspetti di stima e pianificazione di un progetto attraverso la customizzazione di un tool OpenSource di Project Management, University of Perugia, Tesi di Laurea, Perugia, Italy (July 2007)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    McDonald, P., Giles, S., Strickland, D.: Extensions of Auto-Generated Code and NOSTROMO Methodologies. In: Proc. of 19th Int. Forum on COCOMO, Los Angeles, CA (2001)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Luigi Buglione
    • 1
  • Olga Ormandjieva
    • 2
  • Maya Daneva
    • 3
  1. 1.École de Technologie Supérieure (ETS) / Engineering.itCanada
  2. 2.Computer Science & Software Dept.Concordia UniversityCanada
  3. 3.Information Systems GroupUniversity of TwenteNetherlands

Personalised recommendations