Cuckoo search based hybrid models for improving the accuracy of software effort estimation

  • Sweta Kumari
  • Shashank Pushkar
Technical Paper


This research proposes a new approach which is based on Cuckoo Search algorithm for the prediction of software development effort. It uses Cuckoo Search for discovering the best possible parameters of COCOMO II model and then further hybridizes with ANN for increasing the accuracy to better predict the software development effort. The proposed hybrid models have been tested on two standard datasets. During experimentation, it has been seen that the proposed hybrid models provide more accurate and effective results than other existing models. The result has been analyzed with MMRE and three different types of PRED 25, 30 and 40% that shows the efficiency and capability of the proposed hybrid models. A comparative study of computational complexity with other existing approach has also been done which shows the superiority of the proposed model over existing approaches.


  1. Alajlan M, Tagoug N (2016) Optimization of COCOMO II model for effort and development time estimation using genetic algorithms. In: Proceedings of the international conference on communications, computer science and information technologyGoogle Scholar
  2. Anish M, Kamal P, Harish M (2010) Software cost estimation using fuzzy logic. ACM SIGSOFT Softw Eng Notes 35(1):1–7Google Scholar
  3. Attarzadeh I, Mehranzadeh A, Barati A (2012) Proposing an enhanced artificial neural network prediction model to improve the accuracy in software effort estimation. In: Computational intelligence, communication systems and networks conference, pp 167–172Google Scholar
  4. Boehm B (1981) Software engineering economics. Prentice-Hall, Englewood CliffszbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. Boehm B, Abts C, Chulani S (2000) Software development cost estimation approaches—a survey. Ann Softw Eng 10:177–205CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. Chifu VR, Pop CB, Salomie I, Suia DS, Niculici AN (2012) Optimizing the semantic web service composition process using cuckoo search. Intell Distrib Comput V, Stud Comput Intell 382:93–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Choudhary K, Purohit GN (2011) A new testing approach using cuckoo search to achieve multi-objective genetic algorithm. J Comput 3(4):117–119Google Scholar
  8. Gandomi AH, Yang XS, Alavi AH (2013) Cuckoo search algorithm: a meteheuristic approach to solve structural optimization problems. Eng Comput 29(1):17–35. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Khoshgoftar TM, Allen B, Xu Z (2010) Predicting testability of program modules using a neural network. In: The 3rd IEEE symposium on application-specific systems and software engineering technology, pp 57–62Google Scholar
  10. Kumari S, Pushkar S (2013a) Comparison and analysis of different software cost estimation methods. Int J Adv Comput Sci Appl 4(1):153–157Google Scholar
  11. Kumari S, Pushkar S (2013b) Performance analysis of the software cost estimation methods: a review. Int J Adv Res Comput Sci Softw Eng 3:229–238Google Scholar
  12. Kumari S, Pushkar S (2014) A genetic algorithm approach for multi-criteria project selection for analogy-based software cost estimation. Int Conf Comput Intell Data Min 3:13–24Google Scholar
  13. Kumari S, Pushkar S (2016) A framework for analogy-based software cost estimation using multi-objective genetic algorithm. In: Proceedings of the world congress on engineering and computer Science, vol 1Google Scholar
  14. Kumari S, Ali M, Pushkar S (2015) Fuzzy clustering and optimization model for software cost estimation. Int J Eng Technol 6(6):2531–2545Google Scholar
  15. Langsari K, Sarno R (2017) Optimizing effort and time parameters of COCOMO II estimation using fuzzy multi-objective PSO. In: Proceeding of the 4th international conference on electrical engineering, computer science and informatics, Yogyakarta, Indonesia, 19–21 Sept 2017Google Scholar
  16. Madheswaran M, Sivakumar D (2014) Enhancement of prediction accuracy in COCOMO model for software projectusing neural network. In: International conference on computing, communication and networking technologies (ICCCNT)Google Scholar
  17. Prasad Reddy PVGD, Hari CHVMK (2011) Software effort estimation using particle swarm optimization with interia weight. Int J Softw Eng 2(4):87–96Google Scholar
  18. Sachan KR, Nigam A, Singh A, Singh S, Choudhary M, Tiwari A, Kushwaha SD (2016) Optimizing basic COCOMO model using simplified genetic algorithm. Procedia Comput Sci 89:492–498CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Sheta AF (2006) Estimation of the COCOMO model parameters using genetic algorithms for NASA software projects. J Comput Sci 2(2):118–123 (ISSN 1549-36362006) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Tadion N (2005) Neural network approach for software cost estimation. In: International conference on information technology: coding and computing, pp 128–134Google Scholar
  21. Venkatachalam AR (1993) Software cost estimation using artificial neural networks. In: Proceedings of the 1993 international joint conference on neural networks, pp 987–990Google Scholar
  22. Viswanathan GM, Buldyrev SV, Havlin S, da Luz MGE, Raposo EP, EugeneStanley H (1999) Optimizing the success of random searches. Lett Nat 401(October):911–914CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Witting G, Finnie G (1994) Using artificial neural networks and function points to estimate 4GL software development effort. J Inf Syst 1(2):87–94Google Scholar
  24. Yang XS, Deb S (2009) Cuckoo search via Lévy flights. Proceeings of World Congress on Nature and Biologically Inspired Computing, India, pp 210–214Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of CSEBITRanchiIndia

Personalised recommendations