Software Development Process Simulation: Multi Agent-Based Simulation versus System Dynamics

  • Redha Cherif
  • Paul Davidsson
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5683)


We present one of the first actual applications of Multi Agent-Based Simulation (MABS) to the field of software process simulation modelling (SPSM). Although there are some recent attempts to do this, we argue that these fail to take full advantage of the agency paradigm. Our model of the software development process integrates individual-level performance, cognition and artefact quality models in a common simulation framework. In addition, this framework allows the implementation of both MABS and System Dynamics (SD) simulators using the same basic models. As SD is the dominating approach within SPSM, we are able to make relevant and unique comparisons between it and MABS. This enabled us to uncover quite interesting properties of these approaches, e.g., that MABS reflects the problem domain more realistically than SD.


MABS application Software Development Process System Dynamics 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Abdel-Hamid, T.: The Dynamics of Software Development Project Management: An Integrative System Dynamics Perspective. PhD diss., MIT (1984)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Abdel-Hamid, T.: The Dynamics of Software Project Staffing: A System Dynamics Based Simulation Approach. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 15(2), 109–120 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Abdel-Hamid, T., Madnick, S.: Software Project Dynamics. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1991)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Burke, S.: Radical Improvements Require Radical Actions: Simulating a High Maturity Software Organization. Technical Report, CMU/SEI-96-TR-024 ESC-TR-96-024, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania US (1997)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cherif, M.R.: Software Process Simulation Modelling: A Multi-Agent Based Simulation. MSc Thesis, MCS-2008: 5, Blekinge Institute of Technology, Sweden (2008)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Christie, A.M., Staley, J.M.: Organizational and Social Simulation of a Software Requirements Development Process. In: Proceedings of the Software Process Simulation Modeling Workshop (ProSim 1999), Silver Falls, Oregon (1999)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Forrester, J.: System Dynamics and the Lessons of 35 Years. In: Greene, K.B.D. (ed.) Systems-Based Approach to Policymaking. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (1993)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Glickman, S., Kopcho, J.: Bellcore’s Experiences Using Abdel-Hamid’s Systems Dynamics Model. In: 1995 COCOMO Conference, Pittsburgh, PA, USA (1995)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hanakawa, N., Morisaki, S., Matsumoto, K.: A Learning Curve Based Simulation Model for Software Development. In: Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Software Engineering, Kyoto, Japan, pp. 350–359. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hanakawa, N., Matsumoto, K., Torii, K.: Application of Learning Curve Based Simulation Model for Software Development to Industry. In: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Software Engineering and Knowledge, Kaiserslautern, Germany, pp. 283–289. World Scientific Publishing, Singapore (1999)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hanakawa, N., Matsumoto, K., Torii, K.: A Knowledge-Based Software Process Simulation Model. Annals of Software Engineering 14, 383–406 (2002)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Henesey, L., Notteboom, T., Davidsson, P.: Agent-based simulation of stakeholders relations: An approach to sustainable port and terminal management. In: Proceedings of the International Association of Maritime Economists Annual Conference, Busan, Korea (2003)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kellner, M.I., Madachy, R.J., Raffo, D.M.: Software process simulation modeling: Why? What? How? Journal of Systems and Software 46(2-3), 91–105 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Madachy, R.: Process Modeling with Systems Dynamics. In: 1996 SEPG Conference, Atlantic City, NJ. Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University (1996)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Myers, G.: Software Reliability: Principles and Practices. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester (1976)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Parunak, V.D., Savit, R., Riolo, R.: Agent-Based Modeling vs. Equation-Based Modeling: A Case Study and Users Guide. In: Sichman, J.S., Conte, R., Gilbert, N. (eds.) MABS 1998. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1534, pp. 10–25. Springer, Heidelberg (1998)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rasch, R.H., Tosi, H.: Factors affecting software developers’ performance: An integrated approach. MIS quarterly 16(3), 395 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Smith, N., Capiluppi, A., Fernández-Ramil, J.: Agent-Based Simulation of Open Source Evolution. Software Process: Improvement and Practice 11(4), 423–434 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wickenberg, T., Davidsson, P.: On Multi Agent Based Simulation of Software Development Process. In: Sichman, J.S., Bousquet, F., Davidsson, P. (eds.) MABS 2002. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2581, pp. 171–180. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Xiang, X., Kennedy, R., Madey, G.: Verification and Validation of Agent-based Scientific Simulation Models. In: Proceedings of the 2005 Agent-Directed Simulation Symposium (ADS 2005), San Diego, CA, pp. 47–55 (2005)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Yilmaz, L., Phillips, J.: The Impact of Turbulence on the Effectiveness and Efficiency of Software Development Teams in Small Organizations. Software Process: Improvement and Practice 12(3), 247–265 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Rotter, J.B.: Generalized expectancies of internal versus external control of reinforcements. Psychological Monographs 80(609) (1966)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Redha Cherif
    • 1
    • 2
  • Paul Davidsson
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.School of ComputingBlekinge Institute of TechnologyKarlskronaSweden
  2. 2.School of TechnologyMalmö UniversityMalmöSweden

Personalised recommendations