View
224
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
8/8/2019 Software Quality Measures
1/23
ISO/IEC 9126 SoftwareEngineering - Product Quality
Kristjn Gubjrnsson
Tlvunarfringur MSc
8/8/2019 Software Quality Measures
2/23
Agenda
Results from part 1 (Data from 2003)
Measurement theory Quality model
Quality measurement model
Quality metrics About the assignment
8/8/2019 Software Quality Measures
3/23
Results from part 1 Data from 2003
Data treatment High 7
Medium 4 Low 1
Inapropriate og Do not understand = 0
Normalized with respect to the number participants
Normalized with respect to the number of sub-charachteristics
8/8/2019 Software Quality Measures
4/23
8/8/2019 Software Quality Measures
5/23
Measurement theory
Why to measure?
Communicate effectively and unambiguously
Follow and control specific objectives of aproject
Identify and correct problems rapidly
Make decisions applying multi-criteriaapproach
Justify decisions on rational basis
8/8/2019 Software Quality Measures
6/23
Comparison of models
8/8/2019 Software Quality Measures
7/23
ISO 9126 quality model
Internal and external quality model
Overall systemquality
Functi nality Reliability Usability Eff iciency Maintainability Portability
Suitability
AccuracySecurity
Functionality
compliance
Maturity
Fault toleranceRecoverability
Reliability
compliance
Understandability
LearnabilityOperability
AttractivenessUsability
compliance
Time behaviour
Resource
utilizationEfficiency
compliance
Analysability
ChangeabilityStability
TestabilityMaintenance
compliance
Adaptability
InstallabilityCo-existance
ReplaceabilityPortability
compliance
Sub-Characteristics in blue are measured,
red Sub-Characteristics are not measured
8/8/2019 Software Quality Measures
8/23
Functionality suitability
Sources of measurement input: Requirements specification, Evaluation report(Test report),Source code, Review report, Running software
Metric:Number of functions that are suitable for
performing the specified tasks comparing to
the number of tasks evaluated
Data elements:Problematic functions
Functions evaluated: All the functions that have
been implemented
Formula: 1 A/B
METRICS
Measurement
type Data elements Measured value R ESULT Quality defects
Count A = Numberof funct
ons
n w
ch
problems re detected
nevaluat
on 3
Count B = Numberof funct
onsevaluated
Funct
onal adequacy )
,
ssing wateringamount value, Datanot saved when
registering fertilization, wateringhistory canbe deleted
8/8/2019 Software Quality Measures
9/23
Functionality suitability
Sources of measurement input: Requirements specification(User stories), Evaluationreport(Test report), Source code, Review report , Running software
Metric: Count the number of missingfunctions detected in evaluation and
compare with the number of function
described in the requirements specification
Data elements:Missing functions: Running system
Functions in the requirements spec: All
the functions that have been specified for
delivery
Formula: 1 A/B
METRICS
Mea ement
type Data elements Measured value RESULT Quality defects
CountA = Number of missing functions
detected in ev uation 2
Count B = Number of functions described in
requirement specifications 7
Functional implementation
completeness 2)
0,71 Plant status, watering history
8/8/2019 Software Quality Measures
10/23
Functionality suitability
Sources of measurement input: Requirements specification(User stories), Evaluationreport(Test report), Source code, Review report , Running software
Metric: Count the number of incorrectlyimplemented or missing functions detected
in evaluation and compare with the total
number of functions described in the
requirements specification
Data elements:Incorrect/missing functions:
Functions in requirements specification:
All specified functions, both from current
and future iteration
Formula: 1 A/B
METRICS
Me
reme t
t
e
t eleme t
Me
re
! l e RE" U # T
$ % & lit ' ( efe ) t0
Cou1
t
A = Number ofi1 2
orrectl3
impleme1
te4
ormissi1
g fu1
ctio1
s4
etecte4
i1
evaluatio1
Cou1
t B = Number of fu1
ctio1
s4
escribe4
i1
requireme
1
t specifi
2
atio
1
s
Fu1
ctio1
alimpleme1
tatio1
coverage 3)
#DIV/0!
8/8/2019 Software Quality Measures
11/23
Functionality security
Sources of measurement input: Test specification, Test report, Requirement spec, Runningsoftware
Metric: Count the number of accesscontrollability requirements implemented
correctly as in the specifications and
compare with the number of access
controllability requirements in the
specifications.
Data elements:Number of accees control requirements
defined vs. correctly implemented
access control requirements
Formula: A/B
ME5
6 IC 7
Measurement
type Data el8 ments
Measured
value 6 E7 UL5
Quality defects
Count
9
@ NumberofA
ccess controllA
bility
requirements implemented correB
tlyA
s in the speB
ificA
tions.
CountC
@ NumberofA
ccess controllA
bility
requirements in the speB
ificA
tions
#DIV/D
!
9
ccess controllA
bility 4)
8/8/2019 Software Quality Measures
12/23
Reliability recoverability
Sources of measurement input: Test report, Operation report , Running software
Metric:Test system in a production likeenvironment for a specified period of time
performing all user operations.
Data elements:Number of system operations.
Number of failed operations
Formula: A1 / A2
METRIC E
M F a G urF H F
nt
t I p F Data F lF H F
nt G
M F a G ur F d
P aluF REE ULT QualitQ dR fR S tT
Count
AU V
totW
lW
vW
ilW
ble cW
ses ofusers
suX X
essful softwW
reusewhenuserW
ttempt touse
Count
AY V
totW
lnumberof cW
ses ofusersW
ttempt touse the softwW
re during
observW
tion time. This is from theuser
cW
llW
ble funX
tionoperW
tion view. #DI / a !
AvW
ilW
bilitb
c
)
8/8/2019 Software Quality Measures
13/23
Usability understandability
Sources of measurement input: Requirement spec, Design, Review report , Runningsoftware
Metric: Count the number of functionswhich are adequately described and
compare with the total number of functions
in the product.
Data elements:Total number of functions
Number of adequately described
functions
Formula: A / B
METRICS
Med e f
reme g t
th i
ep d
t d eleme g t e
Med e f
re q
r dl f e REs U t T
u v w lit x y efe t
Cou
t
A= Number of fu
ctio
s (or t
pes of
fu
ctio
s)
escribe
i
the pro
uct
escriptio
Cou
t B=
otal
umber of fu
ctio
s (or t
pes
of fu
ctio
s)#DIV/0!
Complete
ess of
escriptio
6)
8/8/2019 Software Quality Measures
14/23
Usability understandability
Sources of measurement input: Requirement spec, Design, Review report , Runningsoftware
Metric: Count the number of functionsthat are evident to the user and compare
with the total number of functions
Data elements:Total number of functions
Number of evident functions
Formula: A / B
ME
IC
Measurement
type Data el ments
Measured
value E UL
Quality defects
Count
Numberof fun tions (ortypes of
fun tions)evident to theuser
Count
Tot l numberof fun tions (ortypes
of fun tions)#DIV/
!
Evident fun tions
)
8/8/2019 Software Quality Measures
15/23
Usability operability
Sources of measurement input: Requirement spec, Design, Review report , Runningsoftware
Metric: Count the number of inputitems, which check for valid data and
compare with the number of input items,
which could check for valid data
Data elements:Number of input items that can be
validated vs. number of items that are
validated
Formula: A/B
METRIC
M a ur
nt
t p Data l
nt
M a ur d
alu RE ULT Qualit d f tj
Count A k Numberofinput items whil
h chel
k
for vm
lid dm
tm
Count B k Numberofinput items whil
h could
chel
k for vm
lid dm
tm
Input vm
liditn
chel
king o )
#DI / !
8/8/2019 Software Quality Measures
16/23
Usability operability
Sources of measurement input: Test report , Running software
Metric: Observe user behavior who isoperating software, check failure cases for
user message error
Data elements:A: check for lack of messages or not
understandable
Time:
Formula: A/B
MET I S
Meas ement
ty e Dataelements
Meas ed
val e RES
T z
ality defects
Cou{
t
A =|
umber of times that the user
p}
uses for a lo{
g perio~
or
successively a{
~
repeate~
ly fails at the
s}
me operatio{
, bec}
use of the l}
c
of mess}
ge comprehe{
sio{
.
Time(mi{
utes) B = ser operati{
g time (observ}
tio{
perio~
)
Mess}
ge u{
~
ersta{
~
ability
i{
use 9)
#
IV/0!
8/8/2019 Software Quality Measures
17/23
Usability attractiveness
Sources of measurement input: Review, Running software
Metric: Review the software Data elements:
Formula:
ME
RI
Measurement
type ata elements
Measured
value RE
L
uality defects
Attractive interaction 10) ount
A = Inapropriate Alignment of items
(vertical and Horizontal), Grouping,
Use of colours, Appropriate and
reasonable sized graphics, Use of
hitespace/separators/borders,
Animation, Typography, and 3
interface.
8/8/2019 Software Quality Measures
18/23
Efficiency time behaviour
Sources of measurement input: Test report, Running software
Metric: Start a specified task. Measurethe time it takes for the sample to complete
its operation. Keep record of each attempt
Data elements:Time: from submitting request until
request completes
Formula: T = (time of gaining the result) (time of command entry finished)
METRICS
Measurement
type Data elements Measured value RESULT Quality defects
Response time 15) Time(seconds) T = Time of gaining the result
gefa heiti = 1
flokka = 1
skr vkvun = 2
skr burargjf = 1
eya vkvunarsgu = 3
8/8/2019 Software Quality Measures
19/23
Maintainability analyzability
Sources of measurement input: Requirements spec, Review , Running software
Metric:Count the number of itemslogged in the activity log as specified and
compare it to the number of items required
to be logged.
Data elements:Number of defined logitems
Formula: A/B
METRI S
Mea u ement
ty e Data element
Mea u ed
value RES LT Quality defect
Count A= umber ofimplemented data login
items as specified confirmed in revie
Count
= umber of data items to be logged
defined in
the specifications
IV/0!
Activity recording 12)
8/8/2019 Software Quality Measures
20/23
8/8/2019 Software Quality Measures
21/23
Comparison of models
8/8/2019 Software Quality Measures
22/23
Verkefni
Hpalisti
Mlingin er einstaklingsverkefni Skringar merkingu mlinga
- sj glrur og measures.xls
Einkunnagjf- skil verkefni- vantar mlingar?
vantar a tskra gagalla?
8/8/2019 Software Quality Measures
23/23
Recommended