Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Complexity measure based on program slicing and its validation

  • Computer Science
  • Published:
Wuhan University Journal of Natural Sciences

Abstract

The popular single-factor complexity measure cannot comprehensively reflect program complexity and the existing hybrid complexity measure cannot express the interactive behaviors of programs. To treat these problems, in this paper, we propose a complexity measure based on program slicing (CMBPS). CMPBS not only can evaluate factors which affect program complexity such as the length of the program, control flow, data flow and data types of output variables, but also can give expression of the interactive relation between programs. And we also prove that CMBPS satisfies all of Weyuker properties. Compared with the popular complexity measures, CMBPS is a well-structured complexity measure.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Oman P, Hagemeister J. Construction and testing of polynomials predicting software maintainability [J]. Journal of System and Software, 1994, 24(3): 251–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Kanellopoulos Y, Heitlager I, Tjortjis C, et al. Interpretation of source codes clusters in terms of the ISO/IEC-9126 maintainability characteristics [C]// Proceedings of 12th European Conference on Software Maintenance and Reengineering. Athens: IEEE Press, 2008: 63–72.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Sommerville, I. Software Engineering (6th ed) [M]. New York: Addison-Wesley Publisher, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Harrison W, Magel K, Kluczny R, et al. Applying software complexity metrics to program maintenance [J]. IEEE Computer, 1982, 15(9): 65–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Halstead M. Elements of Software Science [M]. New York: Elsevier Publisher, 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  6. McCabe T J. A complexity measure [J]. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 1976, SE-2(4): 308–320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Oviedo E I. Control flow, data flow and program complexity [C]// Proceedings of COMPSAC 80. Chicago: IEEE Press, 1980: 146–152.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Basili V R, Turner A J. Iterative enhancement: A practical technique for software development [J]. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 1975, SE-1(4): 390–396.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Henry S, Kafura D. Software structure metrics based on information flow [J]. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 1981, SE-7(5): 510–518.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Misra S. A complexity measure based on cognitive weights [J]. International Journal of Theoretical and Applied Computer Sciences, 2006, 1(1): 1–7.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Hanser W J. Measurement of program complexity by the pair (cyclomatic number, operator count) [J]. ACM SIGPLAN Notices, 1978, 13(3): 29–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Weyuker E. Evaluating software complexity measure [J]. IEEE Transaction on Software Complexity Measure, 1988, 14(9): 1357–1365.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Kushwaha D S, Misra A K. Robustness analysis of cognitive information complexity measure using Weyuker properties [J]. ACM Sigsoft Software Engineering Notes, 2006, 31(1): 1–6.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Misra S, Misra A K. Evaluating cognitive complexity measure with Weyuker properties [C]// Proceedings of the 3rd IEEE International Conference on Cognitive Informatics (ICCI’04). Victoria: IEEE Press, 2004: 1–6.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Chiemeke S C, Oladipupo A O. Theoretical approaches in software complexity metrics [J]. African Journal of Science and Technology (AJST ) Science and Engineering Series, 2001, 2(2): 101–107.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Sharma A, Kushwaha D S. Complexity measure based on requirement engineering document and its validation [C]// Proceedings of Int’l Conference on Computer & Communication Technology_ICCCT’10. Allahabad: IEEE Press, 2010: 608–615.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Korel B, Rilling J. Program slicing in understanding of large programs [C]// Proceedings of 6th International Workshop on Program Comprehension. Ischia: IEEE Press, 1998: 145–152.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Tao H W, Chen Y X. A quantitative relation model between trustworthy attributes [C]// Proceedings of Quantitative Logic and Soft Computing. Xi’an: World Scientific Press, 2012: 197–204.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Weiser M. Program slicing [J]. IEEE Transaction on Software Engineering, 1984, 10(4): 352–357.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Munson J C. Software Engineering Measurement [M]. Boca Raton: Auerbach Publisher, 2003.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Computer and Communication Engineering, Zhengzhou University of Light Industry, Zhengzhou, 450002, Henan, China

    Hongwei Tao

  2. MoE Engineering Research Center for Software/Hardware Co-design Technology and Application, East China Normal University, Shanghai, 200062, China

    Yixiang Chen

Authors
  1. Hongwei Tao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yixiang Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hongwei Tao.

Additional information

Foundation item: Supported by the National High Technology Research and Development Program of China (863 Program) (2009AA01220) and the National Natural Science Foundation of China (91118007)

Biography: TAO Hongwei, male, Lecturer, research direction: software trustworthiness measurement and cryptography.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tao, H., Chen, Y. Complexity measure based on program slicing and its validation. Wuhan Univ. J. Nat. Sci. 19, 512–518 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11859-014-1046-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11859-014-1046-9

Key words

CLC number

Search

Navigation