A Process Model to Transform Evaluation from Human Review to Automatic Measurement

  • Thomas Grechenig
  • Stefan Biffl


Software quality assurance (QA) has been a serious issue for industrial developers for at least ten years now. Nevertheless quality assurance groups have never been provided with essential rights to interfere in actual development. The typical QA group is a team of rather learned people whose specific knowledge is not used to an appropriate extent, though. Only within a few conscious development environments at least software document reviewing has been established. The acceptance of QA methods in practice is at the lowest level concerning quantitative approaches: Software metrics
  • — could not provide the project information expected and

  • — therefore were scarcely applied.


Software Metrics Code Quality Code Metrics Quality Assurance Activity Software Quality Assurance 
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. [1]
    Adamov R., Baumann P., Literature review on SW-Metrics, Institut für Informatik der Universität Zürich, Okt. 1987Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    Albrecht A. J., Gaffney J. E., SW-Function, Source Lines of Code, and Development Effort Prediction: A SW-Science Validation, IEEE TSE, Vol. SE-9, No. 6, pp. 639–648, Nov 1983Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    Basili V., Tayloring the SW process to Project Goals and Environments, Proc. of the 9th Int. Conf. on SE, ACM, 1987Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    Berry, R. E., Meekings B.A.E., A Style Analysis of C Programs, CACM, Vol. 28, No. 1, pp. 80–88, Jan 1985CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    Binder L.H., Poore J.H., Field experiments with local software quality metrics, Software-Practice and Experience, Vol. 20(7), p.631–647, 1990CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. [6]
    Boehm B.W., Software engineering economics, IEEE TSE, Vol.SE-10, No.1, p.4–21 Jan. 1984Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    Boehm B.W., Understanding and controlling software costs, IEEE TSE, Vol.14, No.10, p.1462–77, Oct. 1988Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    Briand L.C., Basili V.R., Hetmanski C.J., Providing an empirical Basis for Optimizing the Verification and Testing Phases of SW Development, Proc. on Int. Symp. on SW Reliability Engineering, North Carolina, USA, Oct 1992Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    Conte, Dunsmore, Shen, “SW Engineering Metrics And Models”, Benjamin/Cummings, 1986Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    Cote V., Bourque P., Oligny S., Rivard N., Software metrics: an overview of recent results, J. Syst. Softw., Vol.8, No.2, March 1988, p.121–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    Gill G.K., Kemerer C.F., Cyclomatic Complexity Density and Software Maintenance Productivity, IEEE TSE, Vol. 17, No. 12, p.1284–1288, Dec. 1991Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    Grechenig T., Biffl S., Taylor your own metrics environment: AMATO-a tool for the metric-engineer, Proc. of Eurometrics 92, Brüssel, p. 287-300, Apr. 1992Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    Halstead, M.H., “Elements of SW-Science”, Elsevier North-Holland, 1977Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    Hausen H. L., Müllerburg M.,..., Über das Prüfen, Messen und Bewerten von SW. Methoden und Techniken der analytischen SW-Qualitätssicherung., Informatik-Spektrum, Band 10, 1987Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    Hon III S.E., Assuring SW Quality through Measurements: A Buyer’s Perspective, J. Systems SW, 1990, Vol. 13, p.117–130, 1990CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. [16]
    Höckel H., Itzfeld W.D., Qualitätsmaße für SW in der Praxis, ONLINE 9/86, Sept. 1986Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    Ince D., Measurement For Software Control and Assurance, in: “Software Metrics”, Editors: Kitchenham B.A., Littlewood B. London, UK: Elsevier Appl. Sci. Publishers 1989, p. 27–62, 1989Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    Kafura, D.; Reddy, G.R., The use of software complexity metrics in software maintenance, IEEE TSE, Vol.SE-13, No.13, p.335–43, March 1987Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    Kitchenham B. A., Monitoring software development using metrics, UK IT 88 Conference Publication; London, UK: Inf. Eng. Directorate 1988, p. 45-8 of xix+618, Conf.:Swansea, July 1988Google Scholar
  20. [20]
    Kitchenham B. A.; Walker J. G., A quantitative approach to monitoring software development, Software Engin. Journal, Vol.4, No.1, p.2–13., Jan.1989CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. [21]
    McCabe, T.J., A Complexity Measure, IEEE TSE, Vol. SE-2, No. 4, pp. 308–320., Dec 1976MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  22. [22]
    McGarry F.E. Using software metrics and measurements to improve software productivity and quality, Proc. of the Comp. Standards Conference 1988, Washington, DC: IEEE Comp. Soc. Press 1988, p. 105 of x+111., 1988CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. [23]
    Oman P.W., Cook C.R., Design and Code Traceability Using a PDL Metrics Tool, J. Systems SW, 1990, Vol. 12, p.189–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. [24]
    Page D.R., Static Code Analysis For COBOL Development: The Advantages of An Automated Programming Support Tool, Unisphere 8,12: 64–66, Mar 1989MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  25. [25]
    Dan Paulish, Best practices of software metrics, Tutorial 3, European conference on quantitative evaluation of software and systems, Proc. of Eurometrics 92, Brüssel, 1992Google Scholar
  26. [26]
    Prather, R.E., An Axiomatic Theory of SW Complexity Measure, Computer Journal, Vol. 27, No. 4, pp. 340–347, Nov 1984MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. [27]
    Rechenberg P., Ein neues Maß für die softwaretechnische Komplexität von Programmen, Informatik Forschung und Entwicklung 1; p. 26–57, 1986Google Scholar
  28. [28]
    Redmond J.A., Ah-Chuen R., Software Metrics-A User’s Perspective, J. Systems SW, 1990, Vol. 13, p.97–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. [29]
    Rombach H.D., SW-design metrics for maintenance, Proc. 9th Annu. SE Workshop, NASA Godard, pp. 100-134, Nov. 1984Google Scholar
  30. [30]
    Rombach H.D., Basili V.R., Quantitative SW-Qualitätssicherung. Eine Methode zur Definition und Nutzung geeigneter Maße., Informatik-Spektrum, Band 10, 1987Google Scholar
  31. [31]
    Rombach H.D., Ulery B. T., Establishing a Measurement Based Maintenance Improvement Program: Lessons Learned in the SEL, Proc. of Conf. on SW Maintenance 1989, Miami FL, p.50-57, October 1989Google Scholar
  32. [32]
    Samadzadeh M.H., Nandakumar K., A Study of Software Metrics, J. Systems Software, 16; p. 229–234, 1991CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. [33]
    Schneidewind N.F., Methodology For Validating Software Metrics, IEEE TSE, Vol. 18, No. 5, May 1992, p.410–422Google Scholar
  34. [34]
    Sherif, Y.S.; Ng, E.; Steinbacher, Computer software development: quality attributes, measurements, and metrics, J. Naval Research Logistics, Vol.35, No.3, p.425–36, June 1988CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. [35]
    Siegel Stan, Why we need checks and balances to assure quality, IEEE Software, Jan.1992Google Scholar
  36. [36]
    Whale G., SW Metrics and Plagiarism Detection, J. Systems SW, Vol. 13, p.131–138, 1990CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. [37]
    Zuse H., Bollmann P., Reply to: Erhard Konrad: Software Metrics, Measurement Theory, and Viewpoints-Critical Remarks on a New Approach, ACM SIGPLAN Notices, Vol. 26, No. 5, May 1991, p.27–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • Thomas Grechenig
    • 1
  • Stefan Biffl
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Software EngineeringTechnical University of ViennaViennaAustria

Personalised recommendations