Annals of Software Engineering

, Volume 10, Issue 1–4, pp 177–205 | Cite as

Software development cost estimation approaches — A survey

  • Barry Boehm
  • Chris Abts
  • Sunita Chulani


This paper summarizes several classes of software cost estimation models and techniques: parametric models, expertise‐based techniques, learning‐oriented techniques, dynamics‐based models, regression‐based models, and composite‐Bayesian techniques for integrating expertise‐based and regression‐based models. Experience to date indicates that neural‐net and dynamics‐based techniques are less mature than the other classes of techniques, but that all classes of techniques are challenged by the rapid pace of change in software technology. The primary conclusion is that no single technique is best for all situations, and that a careful comparison of the results of several approaches is most likely to produce realistic estimates.


Software Project Ordinary Little Square Method Work Breakdown Structure Effort Multiplier Ordinary Little Square Approach 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Abdel-Hamid, T. (1989a), "The Dynamics of Software Project Staffing: A System Dynamics-based Simulation Approach," IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, February.Google Scholar
  2. Abdel-Hamid, T. (1989b), "Lessons Learned from Modeling the Dynamics of Software Development," Communications of the ACM, December.Google Scholar
  3. Abdel-Hamid, T. and S. Madnick (1991), Software Project Dynamics, Prentice-Hall, 1991.Google Scholar
  4. Abdel-Hamid, T. (1993), "Adapting, Correcting, and Perfecting Software Estimates: A Maintenance Metaphor," IEEE Computer, March.Google Scholar
  5. Abdel-Hamid, T. and S. Madnick (1993), "Modeling the Dynamics of Software Reuse: An Integrating System Dynamics Perspective," Presentation to the 6th Annual Workshop on Reuse, Owego, NY, November.Google Scholar
  6. Abts, C. (1997), "COTS Software Integration Modeling Study," Report prepared for USAF Electronics System Center, Contract No. F30602–94-C-1095, University of Southern California.Google Scholar
  7. Abts, C., B. Bailey, and B. Boehm (1998), "COCOTS Software Integration Cost Model: An Overview," In Proceedings of the California Software Symposium, 1998.Google Scholar
  8. Albrecht, A. (1979), "Measuring Application Development Productivity," In Proceedings of the Joint SHARE/GUIDE/IBM Application Development Symposium, October, pp. 83–92.Google Scholar
  9. Baird, B. (1989), Managerial Decisions Under Uncertainty, Wiley, New York, 1989.Google Scholar
  10. Banker, R., R. Kauffman, and R. Kumar (1994), "An Empirical Test of Object-Based Output Measurement Metrics in a Computer Aided Software Engineering (CASE) Environment," Journal of Management Information System.Google Scholar
  11. Boehm, B. (1981), Software Engineering Economics, Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  12. Boehm, B., B. Clark, E. Horowitz, C. Westland, R. Madachy, and R. Selby (1995), "Cost Models for Future Software Life-cycle Processes: COCOMO 2.0," Annals of Software Engineering 1, Special Volume on Software Process and Product Measurement, J.D. Arthur and S.M. Henry, Eds., 45–60.Google Scholar
  13. Box, G. and G. Tiao, (1973), Bayesian Inference in Statistical Analysis, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.Google Scholar
  14. Briand, L., V. Basili, and W. Thomas (1992), "A Pattern Recognition Approach for Software Engineering Data Analysis," IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 18, 11, November.Google Scholar
  15. Brooks, F. (1975), The Mythical Man-Month, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.Google Scholar
  16. Cash, J. (1979), "Dallas Tire Case," Harvard Business School.Google Scholar
  17. Chidamber, S. and C. Kemerer (1994), "A Metrics Suite for Object Oriented Design," CISR WP No. 249 and Sloan WP No. 3524–93, Center for Information Systems Research, Sloan School of Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
  18. Chulani, S. (1997), "Modeling Defect Introduction," In California Software Symposium, November.Google Scholar
  19. Chulani, S. (1998), "Incorporating Bayesian Analysis to Improve the Accuracy of COCOMO II and Its Quality Model Extension," Ph.D. Qualifying Exam Report, University of Southern California, February.Google Scholar
  20. Chulani, S., B. Boehm, and B. Steece (1998), "Calibrating Software Cost Models Using Bayesian Analysis," Technical Report, USC-CSE–98–508, June. To appear in IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, Special Issue on Empirical Methods in Software Engineering.Google Scholar
  21. Clark, B., S. Chulani, and B. Boehm (1998), "Calibrating the COCOMO II Post Architecture Model," In International Conference on Software Engineering, April.Google Scholar
  22. Forrester, J. (1961), Industrial Dynamics, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  23. Gray, A. and S. MacDonell (1996), "A Comparison of Techniques for Developing Predictive Models of Software Metrics," Information and Software Technology 39, 1997.Google Scholar
  24. Helmer, O. (1966), Social Technology, Basic Books, NY.Google Scholar
  25. Henderson-Sellers, B. (1996), Object Oriented Metrics-Measures of Complexity, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.Google Scholar
  26. Jensen R. (1983),"An Improved Macrolevel Software Development Resource Estimation Model," In Proceedings of 5th ISPA Conference, April, pp. 88–92.Google Scholar
  27. Jones, C. (1997), Applied Software Measurement, McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
  28. Judge, G., W. Griffiths, and C. Hill (1993), Learning and Practicing Econometrics, Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
  29. Kauffman, R. and R. Kumar (1993), "Modeling Estimation Expertise in Object Based ICASE Environments," Stern School of Business Report, New York University, January.Google Scholar
  30. Khoshgoftaar, T., A. Pandya, and D. Lanning (1995), "Application of Neural Networks for Predicting Program Faults," Annals of Software Engineering 1.Google Scholar
  31. Leamer, E. (1978), Specification Searches, Ad hoc Inference with Nonexperimental Data, Wiley Series, Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
  32. Madachy, R. (1994), "A Software Project Dynamics Model for Process Cost, Schedule and Risk Assessment," Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Southern California.Google Scholar
  33. Madachy, R. (1999), CS577a class notes, University of Southern California, 1999.Google Scholar
  34. Minkiewicz, A. (1998), "Measuring Object Oriented Software with Predictive Object Points," PRICE Systems.Google Scholar
  35. Nelson, E. (1966), "Management Handbook for the Estimation of Computer Programming Costs," Systems Development Corporation, October.Google Scholar
  36. Park R. (1988), "The Central Equations of the PRICE Software Cost Model," In 4th COCOMO Users' Group Meeting, November.Google Scholar
  37. Putnam, L. and W. Myers (1992), Measures for Excellence, Yourdon Press Computing Series.Google Scholar
  38. Rubin, H. (1983), "ESTIMACS," IEEE, 1983.Google Scholar
  39. SELECT (1998), "Estimation for Component-based Development Using SELECT Estimator," SELECT Software Tools, website: Scholar
  40. Shepperd, M. and M. Schofield (1997), "Estimating Software Project Effort Using Analogies," IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 23, 12.Google Scholar
  41. Symons (1991), Software Sizing and Estimating-Mark II FPA, Wiley, UK.Google Scholar
  42. USC-CSE (1997), "COCOMO II Model Definition Manual," Center for Software Engineering, Computer Science Department, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, website: Scholar
  43. Weisberg, S. (1985), Applied Linear Regression, 2nd Edition, Wiley, New York, NY.Google Scholar
  44. Wittig, G (1995), "Estimating Software Development Effort with Connectionist Models," Working Paper Series 33/95, Monash University.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Barry Boehm
    • 1
  • Chris Abts
    • 1
  • Sunita Chulani
    • 2
  1. 1.University of Southern CaliforniaLos AngelesUSA
  2. 2.IBM ResearchSan JoseUSA E‐mail

Personalised recommendations