Journal of Systems Science and Complexity

, Volume 24, Issue 1, pp 51–60 | Cite as

A pair of coupling metrics for software networks

Article
First Online:
Received:
Revised:

Abstract

Complex networks are everywhere. A typical example is software network. How to measure and control coupling interactions of software components is a largely explored research problem in software network. In terms of graph theory and linear algebra, this paper investigates a pair of coupling metrics to evaluate coupling interactions between the classes of object-oriented systems. These metrics differ from the majority of existing metrics in three aspects: Taking into account the strength that one class depends on other ones, reflecting indirect coupling, and distinguishing various coupling interaction. An empirical comparison of the novel measures with one of the most widely used coupling metrics is described. Specifically, an experiment about the relationships of this pair metrics is conducted. The result shows that software complexity derived from coupling interaction could not be accurately reflected by one dimension of coupling metric for negative correlation.

Key words

Complex network coupling metric software network software system 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    S. H. Strogatz, Exploring complex networks, Nature, 2001, 410(6825): 268–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    R. Albert and A. L. Barabási, Statistical mechanics of complex networks, Reviews of Modern Physics, 2002, 74: 47–97.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    J. Lü, X. H. Yu, and G. Chen, Chaos synchronization of general complex dynamical networks, Physica A, 2004, 334(1–2): 281–302.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  4. [4]
    J. Zhou, J. Lu, and J. Lü, Adaptive synchronization of an uncertain complex dynamical network, IEEE Transactions Automatic Control, 2006, 51(4): 652–656.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    J. Lü and G. Chen, A time-varying complex dynamical network model and its controlled synchronization criteria, IEEE Transactions Automatic Control, 2005, 50(6): 841–846.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. [6]
    J. Lü, X. Yu, G. Chen, and D. Cheng, Characterizing the synchronizability of small-world dynamical networks, IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems I, 2004, 51(4): 787–796.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    J. Zhou, J. Lu, and J. Lü, Pinning adaptive synchronization of a general complex dynamical network, Automatica, 2008, 44(4): 996–1003.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  8. [8]
    H. Li, B. Huang, and J. Lü, Dynamical evolution analysis of the object-oriented software Systems, Proceedings of the 2008 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation (IEEE CEC 2008), 2008: 3035–3040Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    J. Liu, J. Lü, K. He, and B. Li, Characterizing the structural quality of general complex software networks, International Journal of Bifurcation and Chaos, 2008, 18(2): 605–613.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. [10]
    K. He, R. Peng, J. Liu, et al., Design methodology of networked software evolution growth based on software patterns, Journal of Systems Science and Complexity, 2006, 19(2): 157–181.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    S. L. Pfleeger and J. M. Atlee, Software Engineering: Theory and Practice, 3rd ed, Pearson Prentice Hall, 2006.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    G. Myers, Software Reliability: Principles and Practice, Wiley, 2003.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    V. R. Basili, L. C. Briand, and W. L. Melo, A validation of object-oriented design metrics as quality indicators, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 1996, 22(10): 751–761.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. [14]
    A. B. Binkley and S. R. Schach, Validation of the coupling dependency metric as a predictor of runtime failures and maintenance measures, Proceedings of 20th International Conference on Software Engineering, 1998: 452–455.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    K. E. Emam, S. Benlarbi, N. Goel, and S. N. Rai, The confounding effect of class size on the validity of Object-Oriented metrics, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 2001, 27(7): 630–650.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. [16]
    S. R. Chidamber and C. F. Kemerer, Towards a metrics suite for object oriented design, Proceedings of Sixth ACM Conference on Object Oriented Programming, Systems, Languages and Applications, 1991: 197–211.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    S. R. Chidamber, C. F. Kemerer, and C. Mit, A metrics suite for object oriented design, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 1994, 20(6): 476–493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. [18]
    W. Li and S. Henry, Object-Oriented metrics that predict maintainability, Journal of Systems and Software, 1993, 23(2): 111–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. [19]
    F. Abreu, M. Goulã, and R. Esteves, Toward the design quality evaluation of Object-Oriented software systems, Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Software Quality, 1995.Google Scholar
  20. [20]
    M. Hitz and B. Montazeri, Measuring coupling and cohesion in Object-Oriented systems, Proceedings of the International Symposium on Applied Corporate Computing, 1995.Google Scholar
  21. [21]
    L. C. Briand, J. W. Daly, and J. Wüst, A unified framework for coupling measurement in Object-Oriented systems, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 1999, 25(1): 91–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. [22]
    L. C. Briand, J. Wüst, and H. Lounis, Using coupling measurement for impact analysis in Object Oriented systems, Proceedings of 15th International Conference on Software Maintenance, 1999: 475–482Google Scholar
  23. [23]
    L. C. Briand, J. Wüst, J. W. Daly, and D. Porter, Exploring the relationships between design measures and software quality in Object-Oriented systems, Journal of Systems and Software, 2000, 51: 245–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. [24]
    J. Eder, G. Kappel, and M. Schrefl, Coupling and cohesion in Object-Oriented Systems, Technical Report, University of Klagenfurt, 1994.Google Scholar
  25. [25]
    K. Bryan and T. Leise, The $25,000,000,000 eigenvector: The linear algebra behind Google, Siam Review, 2006, 48(3): 569–581.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Institute of Systems Science, Academy of Mathematics and Systems Science, CAS and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Center of Modern Educational TechnologyShanghai University of Political Science and LawShanghaiChina
  2. 2.State Key Laboratory of Software EngineeringWuhan UniversityWuhanChina

Personalised recommendations