Requirement error abstraction and classification

Subscribe (Full Service)


	Search: The ACM Digital Library The Guide

	Feedback

Requirement error abstraction and classification: an empirical study

Full text

Pdf (170 KB)

Source

International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering archive
Proceedings of the 2006 ACM/IEEE international symposium on Empirical software engineering table of contents

Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

SESSION: Defect classification table of contents

Pages: 336 - 345

Year of Publication: 2006

ISBN:1-59593-218-6

Authors

Gursimran S. Walia	Mississippi State University, Mississippi State, MS
Jeffrey Carver	Mississippi State University, Mississippi State, MS
Thomas Philip	Mississippi State University, Mississippi State, MS

Sponsors

ACM: Association for Computing Machinery
SIGSOFT: ACM Special Interest Group on Software Engineering

Publisher

ACM New York, NY, USA

Bibliometrics

Downloads (6 Weeks): 8, Downloads (12 Months): 142, Citation Count: 0

Additional Information:

abstract references index terms collaborative colleagues

Tools and Actions:	Review this Article Save this Article to a Binder Display Formats: BibTex EndNote ACM Ref

DOI Bookmark:	Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1159733.1159784 What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

Software quality and reliability is a primary concern for successful development organizations. Monitoring and controlling quality by helping developers detect as many faults as possible is a subjective and intricate approach. Due to the inherent difficulties and limitations, additional methods are required to obtain a more complete solution to the software quality problem. This paper analyzes the software quality problem from a different perspective involving a step back from faults to focus on the fundamental causes of faults. The first step in this direction is the application of the Error Abstraction Process (EAP) to the requirements phase of the software lifecycle to develop a Requirement Error Taxonomy (RET). This paper presents an empirical study on the application of the EAP and RET to requirement documents in a controlled classroom setting. The results show that the EAP significantly improves the productivity of subjects, that the RET is useful for improving software quality, that it provides useful insights into the requirements document, and that various context variables also impact the results. These results are promising and are important to motivate further investigation, to refine the RET, and to derive more formalized tools and methods for assisting developers. The result of this investigation will be a sound verification process for requirements phase.

REFERENCES

Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.

	1	Barry Boehm , Victor R. Basili, Software Defect Reduction Top 10 List, Computer, v.34 n.1, p.135-137, January 2001 [doi>10.1109/2.962984 ]
	2	Jeffrey Clark Carver , Victor Basili, The impact of background and experience on software inspections, 2003
	3	Jarir K. Chaar , Michael J. Halliday , Inderpal S. Bhandari , Ram Chillarege, In-Process Evaluation for Software Inspection and Test, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, v.19 n.11, p.1055-1070, November 1993 [doi>10.1109/32.256853 ]
	4	Ram Chillarege , Inderpal S. Bhandari , Jarir K. Chaar , Michael J. Halliday , Diane S. Moebus , Bonnie K. Ray , Man-Yuen Wong, Orthogonal Defect Classification-A Concept for In-Process Measurements, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, v.18 n.11, p.943-956, November 1992 [doi>10.1109/32.177364 ]
	5	J. Christopher Westland, The cost of errors in software development: evidence from industry, Journal of Systems and Software, v.62 n.1, p.1-9, 1 May 2002 [doi>10.1016/S0164-1212(01)00130-3 ]
	6	G. Damele, G. Bazzana, F. Andreis, S. Aquilio, "Process Improvement through Root Cause Analysis," In Proceedings of Third International Conference on Achieving Quality in Software, pp. 35--47, 1996.
	7	W. Florac, "Software Quality Measurement: A Framework for Counting Problems and Defect," Software Engineering Institute, Technical Report CMU/SEI-92-TR-22, 1992.
	8	Filippo Lanubile , Forrest Shull , Victor R. Basili, Experimenting with Error Abstraction in Requirements Documents, Proceedings of the 5th International Symposium on Software Metrics, p.114, March 20-21, 1998
	9	C. P. Lawrence, I. Kosuke, "Design Error Classification and Knowledge Management," Journal of Knowledge Management Practice, May 2004.
	10	Marek Leszak , Dewayne E. Perry , Dieter Stoll, A case study in root cause defect analysis, Proceedings of the 22nd international conference on Software engineering, p.428-437, June 04-11, 2000, Limerick, Ireland [doi>10.1145/337180.337232]
	11	S. Sakthivel, "A Survey of Requirements Verification Techniques," Journal of Information Technology, Vol.6, pp. 68--79, 1991.
	12	Forrest Shull , Ioana Rus , Victor Basili, How Perspective-Based Reading Can Improve Requirements Inspections, Computer, v.33 n.7, p.73-79, July 2000 [doi>10.1109/2.869376 ]
	13	"Software Engineering Laboratory: Software Measurement Guidebook," NASA/GSFC Software Engineering Laboratory Technical Report SEL-94-002, 1994
	14	C. Trevor, S. Jim, C. Judith, K. Brain, "Human Error in the Software Generation Process," www.branchlines.org.uk/Research/Tread1.pdf
	15	G. Walia, "Empirical Validaton of Requirement Error Abstraction and Classification: A Multidisciplinary Approach," M.S Thesis, Mississippi State University, MS, 2006.