Untitled Document
   
You are from : ( )  
     
Untitled Document
Untitled Document
 

International Journal of Information Technology & Computer Science ( IJITCS )

Abstract :

Recently researches show that customizing inspections can increase their efficiency up to 40%. Scholars studies proved that correcting a defect in the early stages of software development is from 10 to 100 times more reasonable in cost that correcting and redoing at the final stages of development. This paper presents a novel conceptual model for software inspection. The proposed model in this article provides professional facilities to make the software inspection process more efficient. Using collaborative system enables internal and external inspectors to work together under a virtual roof and find the defects faster. Classification of defects and dynamic checklists are the core technologies for the proposed model and made it more effective comparing the traditional approach. Reduction in inspection preparation time and increasing the number of detected defects are proved through a real case study.

Keywords :

: Software Inspection; Inspection Model; Analysis Inspection; Design Inspection; Softwar Test

References :

  1. Ackerman, A.F.; Buchwald, L.S.; Lewski, F.H. (1998). Software inspections: an effective verification process, Software, IEEE , vol.6, no.3, pp.31-36, May 1989 doi: 10.1109/52.28121
  2. D. L Parnas, and M. Lawford, ”Inspection's role in software quality assurance,” IEEE Software, 20(4), 16-16-20. doi:10.1109/MS.2003.1207449
  3. F.Tuysuz, C. Kahraman, “Project risk evaluation using a fuzzy analytic hierarchy process: an application to information technology projects,” International Journal of Intelligent Systems, vol. 12, pp. 559-584, 2006.
  4. Porter, A. A., Siy, H. P., Toman, C. A., & Votta, L. G. (1997). An experiment to assess the cost-benefits of code inspections in large scale software development. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 23(6), 329-329-346. doi:10.1109/32.601071
  5. R. Schmidt, K. Lyytinen, M. Keil, and P. Cule, "Identifying software project risks: an interactional Delphi study,". Journal of Management Information Systems, vol. 17:4, pp. 5-36, Spring 2001.
  6. Godefroid, P.; de Halleux, P.; Nori, A.V.; Rajamani, S.K.; Schulte, W.; Tillmann, N.; Levin, M.Y. (2008). Automating Software Testing Using Program Analysis," Software, IEEE , vol.25, no.5, pp.30-37, Sept.-Oct. 2008 doi: 10.1109/MS.2008.109
  7. Zheng, J.; Williams, L.; Nagappan, N.; Snipes, W.; Hudepohl, J.P.; Vouk, M.A. (2006). "On the value of static analysis for fault detection in software," Software Engineering, IEEE Transactions on , vol.32, no.4, pp. 240- 253, April 2006 doi: 10.1109/TSE.2006.38
  8. Chillarege, R.; Bhandari, I.S.; Chaar, J.K.; Halliday, M.J.; Moebus, D.S.; Ray, B.K.; Wong, M.-Y. (1992). Orthogonal defect classification-a concept for in-process measurements, Software Engineering, IEEE Transactions on , vol.18, no.11, pp.943-956, Nov 1992
  9. Vodde, B. (2007). Experiences in software inspection measurements. Software Quality Professional, 9(2), 27-27-35. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/214068388?accountid=35812
  10. Gilb, T., & Graham, D. (1993). Software Inspection: Addison-Wesley.
  11. Nair, T. R. G., & Nair, N. G. (2011). Estimation of the characteristics of a software team for implementing an effective inspection process through inspection performance metric. Software Quality Professional, 13(2), 14-14-24.
  12. A. K. Chua, “Exhuming IT Projects from their Graves: an Analysis of Eight Failure Cases and Risk Factors,” Journal of Computer Information Systems, vol. 49(3), pp. 31-39, 2009.
  13. R. E. Fairiey, M. J. Willshire, "Why the Vasa sank: 10 problems and some antidotes for software projects," IEEE Software, pp. 18-25, March/April 2003.

Untitled Document
     
Untitled Document
   
  Copyright © 2013 IJITCS.  All rights reserved. IISRC® is a registered trademark of IJITCS Properties.