1998
DOI: 10.1016/s0164-1212(97)10021-8
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effort estimation and prediction of object-oriented systems

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
75
0

Year Published

2001
2001
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
3
3
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 64 publications
(75 citation statements)
references
References 17 publications
0
75
0
Order By: Relevance
“…All these methods use some form of software complexity and size metrics in order to predict effort. Some studies like [58] and [32], try to develop better metrics which either relate to effort more closely or represent the complexity of software more accurately.…”
Section: Effort Prediction Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…All these methods use some form of software complexity and size metrics in order to predict effort. Some studies like [58] and [32], try to develop better metrics which either relate to effort more closely or represent the complexity of software more accurately.…”
Section: Effort Prediction Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, 3D Function Points require a greater degree of detail in order to determine size and consequently make early counting more difficult. Object point measure is another adaption of function point, used in the improved COCOMO2.0 effort estimation technique [13]. Object Point count is very similar to Function Point, but objects are taken as the basis of the counting process.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is widely accepted that system size is strongly correlated with development effort [13], [18], [19], [20]. The Class Point approach provides a system-level size measure by suitably combining well known OO measures, which consider specific aspects of a single class.…”
Section: Validation and Conclusionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Other studies validated a set of polymorphism metrics (Benlarbi and Melo, 1999), a coupling dependency metric (Binkley and Schach, 1998), a set of metrics defined on Shlaer-Mellor designs (Cartwright and Shepperd, 2000), another metrics suite (F. Brito e Abreu and Melo, 1996), and a set of coupling metrics (R. Harrison, Counsell, and Nithi, 1998). Other external measures of interest that have been studied are productivity (Chidamber et al, 1998), maintenance effort (Li and Henry, 1993), and development effort (Chidamber et al, 1998;Misic and Tesic, 1998;Nesi and Querci, 1998). However, here we will focus on the fault-proneness external measure.…”
Section: Empirical Evidencementioning
confidence: 99%