Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Can Software Metrics Be Unified?

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Computational Science and Its Applications – ICCSA 2019 (ICCSA 2019)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNTCS,volume 11622))

Included in the following conference series:

  • 1661 Accesses

Abstract

Software metrics produce discrete values as output from input source code as an indication of software quality. Many software have automated software metrics with different tools that are producing varying result. Measurement of software metrics cannot be said to be precise, repeatable and reproducible. This is consequent of varying definitions, design and implementation of the same software metrics, varying result, assessment and analysis of the same metrics from relative and personalized approaches to varying benchmarks, non-uniform definition of implementation contexts, software measurement terminologies and lack of standard reference and calibration with respect to the measure of “level of confidence” in software measurement. Several studies have proposed the unification of software metrics without necessarily looking at the underlying causes of these widely observed inconsistencies across existing metrics and their automated tools. This work identified pitfalls ways to minimize variances in the implementation of software measurements across contexts. From this stage of an ongoing research, we are determining the possibility of objectively unifying software metrics by closing the gap in observed sources of expressed variance and adoption of metrological approaches to software measurement.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    http://www.locmetrics.com/index.html.

  2. 2.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Source_lines_of_code.

References

  1. Fenton, N.E., Neil, M.: Software metrics: roadmap. In: Proceedings of the Conference on the Future of Software Engineering, pp. 357–370 (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  2. de AG Saraiva, J., De França, M.S., Soares, S.C., Fernando Filho, J., de Souza, R.M.: Classifying metrics for assessing object-oriented software maintainability: a family of metrics’ catalogs. J. Syst. Softw. 103, 85–101 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Mshelia, Y.U., Apeh, S.T., Edoghogho, O.: A comparative assessment of software metrics tools. In: 2017 International Conference on Computing Networking and Informatics (ICCNI), pp. 1–9 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Olaye, E.: Benchmarking software quality using traditional software metrics on web-based systems, Ph.D., Computer Engineering, University of Benin, Benin-city (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Flater, D.W., et al.: A rational foundation for software metrology (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Rana, Z.A., Awais, M.M., Shamail, S.: Nomenclature unification of software product measures. IET Softw. 5, 83–102 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Abran, A., Sellami, A., Suryn, W.: Metrology, measurement and metrics in software engineering. In: Proceedings of the 5th International Workshop on Enterprise Networking and Computing in Healthcare Industry (IEEE Cat. No. 03EX717), pp. 2–11 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  8. García, F., et al.: Towards a consistent terminology for software measurement. Inf. Softw. Technol. 48, 631–644 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Bouwers, E., van Deursen, A., Visser, J.: Towards a catalog format for software metrics. In: Proceedings of the 5th International Workshop on Emerging Trends in Software Metrics, pp. 44–47 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Mshelia, Y.U.: MECOT: a software quality metrics collection tool. J. Syst. Integr. 10, 21–35 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Alawneh, L., Debbabi, M., Hassaine, F., Jarraya, Y., Soeanu, A.: A unified approach for verification and validation of systems and software engineering models. In: 13th Annual IEEE International Symposium and Workshop on Engineering of Computer-Based Systems (ECBS 2006), pp. 10, 418 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Lochmann, K., Goeb, A.: A unifying model for software quality. In: Proceedings of the 8th International Workshop on Software Quality, pp. 3–10 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Mercier, S., Abran, A., Lavoie, M., Champagne, R.: Unified software method: towards a method of measurement of the necessary changes to software in maintenance (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Bartolomei, T.T., Garcia, A., Sant’Anna, C., Figueiredo, E.: Towards a unified coupling framework for measuring aspect-oriented programs. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop on Software Quality Assurance, pp. 46–53 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Cavano, J.P., McCall, J.A.: A framework for the measurement of software quality. In: ACM SIGMETRICS Performance Evaluation Review, pp. 133–139 (1978)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Abran, A., Bourque, P., Dupuis, R.: The SWEBOK initiative and software measurement intentions. In: Proceedings of the 12th International Workshop on Software Measurement (IWSM 2002), pp. 168–178 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Jacquet, J.-P., Abran, A.: From software metrics to software measurement methods: a process model. In: Proceedings of IEEE International Symposium on Software Engineering Standards, pp. 128–135 (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Kelemen, Z.D., Trienekens, J., Kusters, R., Balla, K.: A process based unification of process-oriented software quality approaches. In: 2009 Fourth IEEE International Conference on Global Software Engineering, pp. 285–288 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Akingbehin, K., Maxim, B.: A three-layer model for software engineering metrics. In: Seventh ACIS International Conference on Software Engineering, Artificial Intelligence, Networking, and Parallel/Distributed Computing (SNPD 2006), pp. 17–20 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Symons, C., Abran, A., Ebert, C., Vogelezang, F.: Measurement of software size: advances made by the COSMIC community. In: 2016 Joint Conference of the International Workshop on Software Measurement and the International Conference on Software Process and Product Measurement (IWSM-MENSURA), pp. 75–86 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Dumke, R.R., Braungarten, R., Kunz, M., Schmietendorf, A., Wille, C.: Strategies and appropriateness of software measurement frameworks. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Software Process and Product Measurement (MENSURA 2006), pp. 150–170 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Abran, A.: Software metrics need to mature into software metrology (recommendations). In: NIST Workshop on Advancing Measurements and Testing for Information Technology (IT), Maryland, USA (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Misra, S., Adewumi, A., Fernandez-Sanz, L., Damasevicius, R.: A suite of object oriented cognitive complexity metrics. IEEE Access 6, 8782–8796 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Huo, X., Li, M.: Enhancing the unified features to locate buggy files by exploiting the sequential nature of source code. In: IJCAI, pp. 1909–1915 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Wan, Z., Xia, X., Hassan, A.E., Lo, D., Yin, J., Yang, X.: Perceptions, expectations, and challenges in defect prediction. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Gupta, A., Suri, B., Kumar, V., Misra, S., Blažauskas, T., Damaševičius, R.: Software code smell prediction model using Shannon, Rényi and Tsallis Entropies. Entropy 20, 372 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Gupta, A., Suri, B., Misra, S.: A systematic literature review: code bad smells in Java source code. In: Gervasi, O., et al. (eds.) ICCSA 2017. LNCS, vol. 10408, pp. 665–682. Springer, Cham (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-62404-4_49

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  28. Kumari, M., Misra, A., Misra, S., Fernandez Sanz, L., Damasevicius, R., Singh, V.B.: Quantitative quality evaluation of software products by considering summary and comments entropy of a reported bug. Entropy 21, 91 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Singh, V.B., Misra, S., Sharma, M.: Bug severity assessment in cross project context and identifying training candidates. J. Inf. Knowl. Manag. (JIKM) 16, 1–30 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Mshelia, Y.U., Apeh, S.T., Olaye, E.: Parametric correlation and variance in constituent software metrics tools of project L3. J. Data Anal. 11, 125–137 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Park, R.E.: Software size measurement: a framework for counting source statements, Carnegie-Mellon Univ Pittsburgh PA Software Engineering Inst. (1992)

    Google Scholar 

  32. Vasilescu, B., Serebrenik, A., van den Brand, M.: You can’t control the unfamiliar: a study on the relations between aggregation techniques for software metrics. In: 2011 27th IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance (ICSM), pp. 313–322 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Vasa, R., Lumpe, M., Branch, P., Nierstrasz, O.: Comparative analysis of evolving software systems using the Gini coefficient. In: 2009 IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance, pp. 179–188 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Vim, I.: International vocabulary of basic and general terms in metrology (VIM), International Organization, vol. 2004, pp. 9–14 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  35. Barwick, V., Prichard, E.: Eurachem guide: terminology in analytical measurement–Introduction to VIM 3. Disponible à l’adresse www.eurachem.org (2011)

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, University of Benin, PMB 1154, Benin-City, Nigeria

    Yusuf U. Mshelia & Simon T. Apeh

Authors
  1. Yusuf U. Mshelia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Simon T. Apeh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yusuf U. Mshelia .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Covenant University, Ota, Nigeria

    Sanjay Misra

  2. University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy

    Osvaldo Gervasi

  3. University of Basilicata, Potenza, Italy

    Beniamino Murgante

  4. Saint Petersburg State University, Saint Petersburg, Russia

    Elena Stankova

  5. Saint Petersburg State University, Saint Petersburg , Russia

    Vladimir Korkhov

  6. Polytechnic University of Bari, Bari, Italy

    Carmelo Torre

  7. University of Minho, Braga, Portugal

    Ana Maria A.C. Rocha

  8. Monash University, Clayton, VIC, Australia

    David Taniar

  9. Kyushu Sangyo University, Fukuoka, Japan

    Bernady O. Apduhan

  10. Polytechnic University of Bari, Bari, Italy

    Eufemia Tarantino

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Mshelia, Y.U., Apeh, S.T. (2019). Can Software Metrics Be Unified?. In: Misra, S., et al. Computational Science and Its Applications – ICCSA 2019. ICCSA 2019. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 11622. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-24305-0_25

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-24305-0_25

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-24304-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-24305-0

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation