A lightweight approach to technical risk estimation via probabilistic impact analysis

Proceedings - International Conference on Software Engineering

Volumn , Issue , 2006, Pages 98-104

  Walker, Robert J ^a   Holmes, Reid ^a   Hedgeland, Ian ^a   Kapur, Puneet ^b   Smith, Andrew ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY   (Canada)

^b Chartwell Technology Inc   (Canada)

Author keywords

decision support; probabilistic impact analysis; revision history; technical risk estimation

Indexed keywords

CHANGE HISTORY; CHANGE PROPAGATION; CURRENT STRUCTURE; DECISION SUPPORTS; EVOLUTIONARY DEVELOPMENT; LEVEL MANAGEMENT; PROBABILISTIC IMPACT ANALYSIS; TECHNICAL RISKS;

COMPUTER SOFTWARE; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEMS; ESTIMATION; RISK MANAGEMENT;

RISK PERCEPTION;

EID: 37849010946     PISSN: 02705257     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1145/1137983.1138008     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (29)

1. L. A. Belady and M. M. Lehman. A model of large program development. IBM Systems J., 15(3):225-252, 1976.
2. B. I. Blum. Three paradigms for developing information systems. Proc. Int'l Conf. Softw. Eng., pages 534-543, 1984.
3. C. Chittister and Y. Y. Haimes. Assessment and management of software technical risk. IEEE Trans. Systems, Man and Cybernetics, 24(2):187-202, 1994.
4. E. W. Dijkstra. A note on two problems in connection with graphs. Numerische Mathematik, 1:169-271, 1959.
5. H. Fischer. Computer system simulation of an on-line interactive command and control system. In Proc. Winter Simulation Conf., pages 333-340, 1971.
6. M. Fischer, M. Pinzger, and H. Gall. Populating a release history database from version control and bug tracking systems. In Proc. Int'l Conf. Softw. Maintenance, pages 23-32, 2003.
7. M. W. Godfrey and L. Zou. Using origin analysis to detect merging and splitting of source code entities. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng., 31(2):166-181, 2005.
8. S. Horwitz, T. Reps, and D. Binkley. Interprocedural slicing using dependence graphs. ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Sys., 12(1):26-60, Jan. 1990.
9. J. Kontio, G. Getto, and D. Landes. Experiences in improving risk management processes using the concepts of the Riskit method. In Proc. ACM SIGSOFT Int'l Symp. Foundations Softw. Eng., pages 163-174, 1998.
10. J. P. Loyall and S. A. Mathisen. Using dependence analysis to support the software maintenance process. In Proc. Conf. Softw. Maintenance, pages 282-291, 1993.
11. A. Mockus, R. T. Fielding, and J. Herbsleb. Two case studies of open source software development: Apache and Mozilla. ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Method., 11(3):1-38, 2002.
12. A. Mockus and D. M. Weiss. Predicting risk of software changes. Bell Labs Technical J., 5(2):169-180, 2000.
13. L. Moonen. Lightweight impact analysis using island grammars. In Proc. Int'l Wkshp. Program Comprehension, pages 219-228, 2002.
14. M. Moriconi and T. C. Winkler. Approximate reasoning about the semantic effects of program changes. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng., 16(9):980-992, 1990.
15. G. C. Murphy and D. Notkin. Lightweight lexical source model extraction. ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Method., 5(3):262-292, 1996.
16. G. C. Murphy, D. Notkin, and K. Sullivan. Software reflexion models: Bridging the gap between source and high-level models. In Proc. ACM SIGSOFT Symp. Foundations Softw. Eng., pages 18-28, 1995.
17. N. Nagappan, T. Ball, and A. Zeller. Mining metrics to predict component failures. In Proc. Int'l Conf. Softw. Eng., 2006. To appear.
18. D. E. Neumann. An enhanced neural network technique for software risk analysis. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng., 28(9):904-912, 2002.
19. K. S. Rajeswari and R. N. Anantharaman. Development of an instrument to measure stress among software professionals: Factor analytic study. In Proc. SIGMIS Conf. Computer Personnel Research, pages 34-43, 2003.
20. J. Ropponen and K. Lyytinen. Components of software development risk: How to address them? A project manager survey. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng., 26(2):98-112, 2000.
21. O. Saliu and G. Ruhe. Software release planning for evolving systems. Innovations in Systems and Softw. Eng., 1(2), 2005. To appear.
22. J. Śliwerski, T. Zimmermann, and A. Zeller. When do changes induce fixes? In Proc. Int'l Wkshp. Mining Software Repositories, pages 24-28, 2005.
23. A. Tiwana and M. Keil. The one-minute risk assessment tool. Commun. ACM, 47(11):73-77, 2004.
24. N. Tsantalis, A. Chatzigeorgiou, and G. Stephanides. Predicting the probability of change in object-oriented systems. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng., 31(7):601-614, 2005.
25. R. J. Turver and M. Munro. An early impact analysis technique for software maintenance. J. Softw. Maintenance: Res. and Pract., 6:35-52, 1994.
26. R. J. Walker, R. Holmes, I. Hedgeland, P. Kapur, and A. Smith. A lightweight approach to technical risk estimation via probabilistic impact analysis. Tech. rep. 2006-817-10, Computer Science, Univ. of Calgary, 2006.
27. A. T. T. Ying, G. C. Murphy, R. Ng, and M. C. Chu-Carroll. Predicting source code changes by mining change history. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng., 30(9):574-586, 2004.
28. L. A. Zadeh. Fuzzy sets. Information and Control, 8(3):338-353, 1965.
29. T. Zimmermann, P. Weißgerber, S. Diehl, and A. Zeller. Mining version histories to guide software changes. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng., 31(6):429-445, 2005.