Software quality metrics aggregation in industry

Journal of software: Evolution and Process

Volumn 25, Issue 10, 2013, Pages 1117-1135

  Mordal, Karine ^a   Anquetil, Nicolas ^b   Laval, Jannik ^d   Serebrenik, Alexander ^c   Vasilescu, Bogdan ^c   Ducasse, Stéphane ^b  

^a UNIVERSITÉ PARIS 8   (France)

^b INRIA   (France)

^c EINDHOVEN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Netherlands)

^d UNIVERSITÉ DE BORDEAUX   (France)

Author keywords

Aggregation; Inequality indices; Software metrics; Software quality

Indexed keywords

AGGLOMERATION; INDUSTRY;

AGGREGATION METHODS; AGGREGATION TECHNIQUES; INEQUALITY INDICES; SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE; SOFTWARE EVALUATION; SOFTWARE METRICS; SOFTWARE QUALITY; SOFTWARE QUALITY METRICS;

COMPUTER SOFTWARE SELECTION AND EVALUATION;

EID: 84901033707     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20477481     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/smr.1558     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (55)

1. Pfleeger SL,. Software metrics: Progress after 25years? Software, IEEE 2008; 25 (6): 32-34.
2. McCall J, Richards P, Walters G,. Factors in Software Quality. NTIS: Springfield, 1976.
3. Basili VR,. Software modeling and measurement: the goal/question/metric paradigm. Technical Report, College Park, MD, USA, 1992.
4. Martin RC,. OO design quality metrics: An analysis of dependencies, October 1994. Available from: http://condor.depaul.edu/dmumaugh/OOT/Design- Principles/oodmetrc.pdf Consulted on January 11, 2009.
5. Vasilescu B, Serebrenik A, van den Brand MGJ,. Comparative study of software metrics' aggregation techniques. In 9th Belgian-Netherlands Softw. Evolution Seminar, Ducasse S, Duchien L, Seinturier L, (eds.). University of Lille-1: Lille, France, 2010; 1-5.
6. Vasilescu B, Serebrenik A, van den Brand MGJ,. By no means: A study on aggregating software metrics. In 2nd International Workshop on Emerging Trends in Software Metrics, Concas G, Di Penta M, Tempero E, Zhang H, (eds.). ACM Press: New York, NY, USA, 2011.
7. Serebrenik A, van den Brand MGJ,. Theil index for aggregation of software metrics values. In Int. Conf. on Software Maintenance. IEEE, 2010; 1-9.
8. Vasa R, Lumpe M, Branch P, Nierstrasz OM,. Comparative analysis of evolving software systems using the Gini coefficient. In Int. Conf. on Software Maintenance. IEEE, 2009; 179-188.
9. Goeminne M, Mens T,. Evidence for the Pareto principle in Open Source Software Activity. In Proc. Int'l Workshop SQM 2011. CEUR-WS workshop proceedings, 2011.
10. Mordal-Manet K, Laval J, Ducasse S, Anquetil N, Balmas F, Bellingard F, Bouhier L, Vaillergues P, McCabe T,. An empirical model for continuous and weighted metric aggregation. In 15th Eur. Conf. Soft. Maintenance and Reeng. IEEE, 2011; 141-150.
11. Vasilescu B, Serebrenik A, van den Brand MGJ,. You can't control the unfamiliar: A study on the relations between aggregation techniques for software metrics. In Int. Conf. on Software Maintenance. IEEE, 2011.
12. ISO/IEC. ISO/IEC 9126 software engineering -product quality-, 2003.
13. Wiegers KE,. Software process improvement: Ten traps to avoid. Software Development 1996; 4: 51-58.
14. Likert R,. A technique for measurement of attitudes. Archives of Psychology 1932; 140: 5-53.
15. Perepletchikov M, Ryan C, Frampton K, Tari Z,. Coupling metrics for predicting maintainability in service-oriented designs. In Software Engineering Conference, 2007. ASWEC 2007. 18th Australian. IEEE Computer Society: Los Alamitos, California, USA, 2007; 329-340.
16. Lanza M, Marinescu R,. Object-Oriented Metrics in Practice: Using Software Metrics to Characterize, Evaluate, and Improve the Design of Object-Oriented Systems. Springer Verlag: Berlin Heidelberg, 2006.
17. Barkmann H, Lincke R, Löwe W,. Quantitative evaluation of software quality metrics in open-source projects. In Advanced Information Networking and Applications (WAINA'09). International Conference on, IEEE, 2009; 1067-1072.
18. Turnu I, Concas G, Marchesi M, Pinna S, Tonelli R,. A modified Yule process to model the evolution of some object-oriented system properties. Information Sciences February 2011; 181: 883-902.
19. Concas G, Marchesi M, Pinna S, Serra N,. Power-laws in a large object-oriented software system. IEEE Transactions Software Engineering 2007; 33 (10): 687-708.
20. n-based architecture assessment of Java open source software systems. In ICPC '09: Proc. 17th Int. Conf. on Program Comprehension, 2009, IEEE, 2009; 198-207.
21. Herraiz I,. A statistical examination of the evolution and properties of libre software. In Proceedings of the 25th IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance (ICSM). IEEE Computer Society, 2009; 439-442.
22. Cowell FA, Jenkins SP,. How much inequality can we explain? a methodology and an application to the United States. The Economic Journal March 1995; 105 (429): 421-30.
23. Cowell FA, Kuga K,. Inequality measurement: An axiomatic approach. European Economic Review March 1981; 15 (3): 287-305.
24. Cowell FA,. Measurement of inequality. In Handbook of Income Distribution, volume 1, Atkinson AB, Bourguignon F, (eds.). Elsevier Science: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2000; 87-166.
25. Gini C,. Measurement of inequality of incomes. The Economic Journal 1921; 31: 124-126.
26. Theil H,. Economics and Information Theory. North-Holland Publishing Company: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1967.
27. Atkinson AB,. On the measurement of inequality. Journal of Economic Theory 1970; 2 (3): 244-263.
28. Hoover EM,. The measurement of industrial localization. The Review of Economic Statistics 1936; 18 (4): 162-171.
29. Kolm S-C,. Unequal inequalities I. Journal of Economic Theory 1976; 12 (3): 416-442.
30. Johnsonbaugh R,. Discrete mathematics. Pearson Education, an imprint of Prentice Hall: Harlow, Essex, UK, 2001.
31. Oman P, Hagemeister J,. Construction and testing of polynomials predicting software maintainability. Journal of Systems and Software 1994; 24 (3): 251-266.
32. Foster JE,. An axiomatic characterization of the theil measure of income inequality. Journal of Economic Theory October 1983; 31 (1): 105-121.
33. Shorrocks AF,. The class of additively decomposable inequality measures. Econometrica April 1980; 48 (3): 613-625.
34. Akita T, Lukman RA, Yamada Y,. Inequality in the distribution of household expenditures in Indonesia: A Theil decomposition analysis. The Developing Economies June 1999; XXXVII (2): 197-221.
35. Parker SC,. The inequality of employment and self-employment incomes: a decomposition analysis for the U.K. Review of Income and Wealth 1999; 45 (2): 263-274.
36. Blackorby C, Donaldson D, Auersperg M,. A new procedure for the measurement of inequality within and among population subgroups. The Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'Economique 1981; 14 (4): 665-685.
37. Bourguignon F,. Decomposable income inequality measures. Econometrica July 1979; 47 (4): 901-20.
38. Lambert PJ, Aronson JR,. Inequality decomposition analysis and the Gini coefficient revisited. The Economic Journal September 1993; 103 (420): 1221-27.
39. Rosenberg LH,. Applying and interpreting object oriented metrics. Software Technology Conference, Utah, April 1998.
40. Stapleton J,. DSDM Dynamic Systems Development Method: The Method in Practice. Pearson Education Limited: Harlow, Essex, UK, 1997.
41. Mordal-Manet K, Balmas F, Denier S, Ducasse S, Wertz H, Laval J, Bellingard F, Vaillergues P,. The Squale model-a practice-based industrial quality model. In ICSM '09. IEEE Computer Society: Los Alamitos, California, USA, 2009; 94-103.
42. Balmas F, Bellingard F, Denier S, Ducasse S, Franchet B, Laval J, Mordal-Manet K, Vaillergues P,. The Squale quality model. modèle enrichi d'agrégation des pratiques pour java et c++ (Squale deliverable 1.3). Technical Report, INRIA, 2010.
43. Lanza M, Marinescu R,. Object-oriented metrics in practice: using software metrics to characterize, evaluate, and improve the design of object-oriented systems. Springer-Verlag: Berlin Heidelberg, 2006.
44. Zeileis A,. Package 'ineq' for R. Technical Report, CRAN, 2009.
45. Boehm B, Brown W,. Value-based software metrics. IEE Seminar Digests 2004; 2004 (909): 4-6.
46. Bucci G, Fioravanti F, Nesi P, Perlini S,. Metrics and tool for system assessment. In Proceedings of IEEE Conference on Complex Computer Systems. USA: IEEE Publ, 1998; 36-46.
47. Kitchenham BA,. What's up with software metrics?-a preliminary mapping study. Journal of Systems and Software 2010; 83 (1): 37-51.
48. Mancoridis S, Mitchell BS, Chen Y, Gansner ER,. Bunch: A clustering tool for the recovery and maintenance of software system structures. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance. ICSM'99, IEEE Computer Society: Washington, DC, USA, 1999; 50-62.
49. Heitlager I, Kuipers T, Visser J,. A practical model for measuring maintainability. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Quality of Information and Communications Technology. IEEE Computer Society: Washington, DC, USA, 2007; 30-39.
50. Subramanyam R, Krishnan MS,. Empirical analysis of ck metrics for object-oriented design complexity: implications for software defects. Software Engineering, IEEE Transactions on april 2003; 29 (4): 297-310.
51. Yu P, Systa T, Muller H,. Predicting fault-proneness using oo metrics. an industrial case study. In Software Maintenance and Reengineering, 2002. Proceedings. Sixth European Conference on. IEEE Computer Society: Los Alamitos, California, USA, 2002; 99-107.
52. Chidamber SR, Kemerer CF,. A metrics suite for object oriented design. Software Engineering, IEEE Transactions on jun 1994; 20 (6): 476-493.
53. Tamai T, Nakatani T,. Statistical modelling of software evolution processes. In Software Evolution and Feedback. Theory and Practice, Madhavji NH, Fernández-Ramil JC, Perry DE, (eds.). John Wiley & Sons Ltd: Chichester, England, 2006; 143-160.
54. ISO. ISO 31-11 mathematical signs and symbols for use in physical sciences and technology. ISO: Geneva, Switzerland, 1992.
55. Marinescu R,. Detection strategies: Metrics-based rules for detecting design flaws. In ICSM. IEEE Computer Society: Los Alamitos, California, USA, 2004; 350-359.