THEORETICAL AND PRACTICAL COMPLEXITY OF UNIFIED MODELING LANGUAGE: DELPHI STUDY AND METRICS ANALYSES

Proceedings of the International Conference on Information Systems, ICIS 2004

Volumn , Issue , 2004, Pages 183-194

  Erickson, John ^a   Siau, Keng ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA AT OMAHA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA LINCOLN   (United States)

Author keywords

complexity; complexity metrics; Delphi study; modeling method metrics; UML

Indexed keywords

COMPUTATIONAL COMPLEXITY; SILICON COMPOUNDS;

COMPLEXITY; COMPLEXITY ANALYSIS; COMPLEXITY METRICS; DELPHI STUDY; DEVELOPMENT METHOD; LEARN+; METRIC ANALYSIS; MODEL METHOD; MODELING METHOD METRIC; MODELLING TECHNIQUES;

UNIFIED MODELING LANGUAGE;

EID: 85138749625     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (27)

1. Albrecht, A. “Measuring Application Development Productivity,” in Proceedings of the IBM Development, Monterey, CA, October 14-17, 1979, p. 83.
2. Albrecht, A., and Gaffney, J. “Software Function, Source lines of Code, and Development Effort Prediction: A Software Science Validation,” IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering (SE9:6), 1983, pp. 639-648.
3. Anderson, J., and Lebiere, C. The Atomic Components of Thought, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ, 1998..
4. Brooks, F. “No Silver Bullet: Essence and Accidents of Software Engineering,” IEEE Computer (20:4), 1987, pp. 10-19.
5. Dobing, B., and Parsons, J. “Understanding the Role of Use Cases in UML: A Review and Research Agenda,” Journal of Database Management (11:4), 2000, pp. 28-36.
6. Dori, D. “Why Significant UML Change Is Unlikely,” Communications of the ACM (45:11), November 2002, pp. 82-85.
7. Duddy, K. “UML2 Must Enable a Family of Languages,” Communications of the ACM (45:11), November 2002, pp. 73-75.
8. Ericsson, K., and Kintsch, W. “Long-Term Working Memory,” Psychological Review (102:2), 1995, pp. 211-245.
9. Erickson, J., and Siau, K. “Unified Modeling Language? The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly,” in IS Management Handbook, H. Toppi and C. Brown (Eds.), Auerbach, Boca Raton, FL, pp. 483-497.
10. Fenton, N., and Pfleeger, S. Software Metrics A Rigorous and Practical Approach, PWS Publishing, Boston, 1978, pp. 243-278.
11. Halstead, M. Elements of Software Science, Elsevier, New York, 1977.
12. Kim, J., Hahn, J., and Hahn, H. “How Do We Understand a System with (So) Many Diagrams? Cognitive Integration Processes in Diagrammatic Reasoning,” Information Systems Research (11:3), September 2000, pp. 284-303.
13. Kintsch, W. “The Role of Knowledge in Discourse Comprehension: A Construction Integration Model,” Psychological Review (95:2), 1988, pp. 163-182.
14. Kintsch, W. Comprehension: A Paradigm for Cognition, Cambridge University Press, New York, 1988.
15. Kobryn, C. “What to Expect from UML 2.0,” SD Times, February 25, 2002 (available online at http://www.sdtimes.com/opinions/guestview_048.htm; accessed October 22, 2002).
16. Ludwig, B. “Predicting the Future: Have You Considered Using the Delhi Methodology?,” Journal of Extension (35:5), October 1997 (available online at http://www.joe.org/joe/1997october/tt2.html).
17. Mcleod, G., and Roeleveld, D. “Method Evaluation in Practice: UML/RUP vs Inspired Method,” paper presented at the Workshop on Evaluation of Modeling Methods in Systems Analysis and Design, Tornoto, Canada, 2002.
18. Miller, G. “The Magical Number Seven, Plus or Minus Two: Some Limits on Our Capacity for Processing Information,” The Psychological Review (63:2), 1956, pp. 81-97.
19. Pfleeger, S., and McGowan C. “Software Metrics in a Process Maturity Framework,” Journal of Systems and Software (12:3), 1990, pp. 255-261.
20. Rossi, M. and Brinkkemper, S. “Complexity Metrics for Systems Development Methods and Techniques,” Information Systems (21:2), 1996, pp. 209-227.
21. Siau, K., and Cao, Q. “Unified Modeling Language (UML)—A Complexity Analysis,” Journal of Database Management (12:1), January/March 2002, pp. 26-34.
22. th Workshop on Information Technology and Systems (WITS), Barcelona, Spain, December 16-18, 2002, pp. 13-18.
23. th ed.), Addison–Wesley, Essex, UK, 2001.
24. Turoff, M., and Linstone, H. (Eds.). Delphi Method: Techniques and Applications, 2002 (available online at http://www.is.njit.edu/pubs/delphibook; accessed February 20, 2003).
25. Vessey, I., and Conger, S. “Requirements Specification: Learning Object, Process, and Data Methodologies,” Communications of the ACM (37:5), 1994, pp. 102-113.
26. Weyuker, E., 1988, “Evaluating Software Complexity Measures,” IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering (14:4), 1988, pp. 1357-1365.
27. Zendler, A., Pfeiffer, T., Eicks, M., and Lehner, F. “ Experimental Comparison of Coarse Grained Concepts in UML, OML and TOS,” Journal of Systems and Software (57), 2001, pp. 21-30.