On the analysis of power law distribution in software component sizes
Component‐based software development (CBSD) is an active area of research. Ascertaining the quality of components is important for overall software quality assurance in CBSD. One of the important metrics for measuring defects, analyzability, efforts, and cost in CBSD is component size. The paper pre...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of software : evolution and process 2022-02, Vol.34 (2), p.n/a |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | n/a |
---|---|
container_issue | 2 |
container_start_page | |
container_title | Journal of software : evolution and process |
container_volume | 34 |
creator | Sharma, Shachi Pendharkar, Parag C. |
description | Component‐based software development (CBSD) is an active area of research. Ascertaining the quality of components is important for overall software quality assurance in CBSD. One of the important metrics for measuring defects, analyzability, efforts, and cost in CBSD is component size. The paper presents an analytical model based on maximization of Tsallis entropy to obtain closed form expression for component size distribution (maximum Tsallis entropy component size distribution, MTECSD) in steady state. It is found that the component size distribution follows power law asymptotically. A procedure based on generalized Jensen–Shannon measure is developed to estimate model parameters. A detailed analysis of many popular probability distributions along with MTECSD is carried out on many diverse real data sets of component‐based softwares. The analysis reveals that lognormal and MTECSD distributions fit well to component sizes in many software conforming the presence of power law behavior. The software whose component size distributions are described by MTECSD are in equilibrium implying that new defects in these software systems occur occasionally. Power law behavior in component sizes also imply high variation leading to difficulty in software analyzability. The precise knowledge of component size distribution also provides an alternative method to compute efforts and cost estimates by modified COCOMO model.
An analytical model based on maximum Tsallis entropy component size distribution (MTECSD) is proposed to obtain closed form expression of component size distribution. MTECSD, Pareto, Lognormal, and Weibull distributions are compared over 35 datasets. Lognormal and MTECSD outperform other distributions and are further used to compute expected software size leading to modified COCOMO model. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1002/smr.2417 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2627032380</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2627032380</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3277-aa48c2097f84a4b0e8fe1a625bfcbf1aefac475e19ae309deb4f97d5ba28f3543</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp10E1Lw0AQBuBFFCy14E9Y8OIldXez6SZHKdUKlYIf52WSzuKWNBt3UkL99aZWvDmXmcPDy_Aydi3FVAqh7mgXp0pLc8ZGSmiTGJ3L87_bpJdsQrQVw8yUyHQ2Yot1w7sP5NBAfSBPPDjehh4jr6HnG09d9OW-86HhvuEUXNdDRF6FXRsabDpO_gvpil04qAknv3vM3h8Wb_Nlslo_Ps3vV0mVKmMSAJ1XShTG5Rp0KTB3KGGmstJVpZOADiptMpQFYCqKDZbaFWaTlaByl2Y6HbObU24bw-ceqbPbsI_D62TVTBmRqjQXg7o9qSoGoojOttHvIB6sFPbYkx16sseeBpqcaO9rPPzr7Ovzy4__Bmfqaek</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2627032380</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>On the analysis of power law distribution in software component sizes</title><source>Wiley Online Library All Journals</source><creator>Sharma, Shachi ; Pendharkar, Parag C.</creator><creatorcontrib>Sharma, Shachi ; Pendharkar, Parag C.</creatorcontrib><description>Component‐based software development (CBSD) is an active area of research. Ascertaining the quality of components is important for overall software quality assurance in CBSD. One of the important metrics for measuring defects, analyzability, efforts, and cost in CBSD is component size. The paper presents an analytical model based on maximization of Tsallis entropy to obtain closed form expression for component size distribution (maximum Tsallis entropy component size distribution, MTECSD) in steady state. It is found that the component size distribution follows power law asymptotically. A procedure based on generalized Jensen–Shannon measure is developed to estimate model parameters. A detailed analysis of many popular probability distributions along with MTECSD is carried out on many diverse real data sets of component‐based softwares. The analysis reveals that lognormal and MTECSD distributions fit well to component sizes in many software conforming the presence of power law behavior. The software whose component size distributions are described by MTECSD are in equilibrium implying that new defects in these software systems occur occasionally. Power law behavior in component sizes also imply high variation leading to difficulty in software analyzability. The precise knowledge of component size distribution also provides an alternative method to compute efforts and cost estimates by modified COCOMO model.
An analytical model based on maximum Tsallis entropy component size distribution (MTECSD) is proposed to obtain closed form expression of component size distribution. MTECSD, Pareto, Lognormal, and Weibull distributions are compared over 35 datasets. Lognormal and MTECSD outperform other distributions and are further used to compute expected software size leading to modified COCOMO model.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2047-7473</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2047-7481</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/smr.2417</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Chichester: Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</publisher><subject>COCOMO model ; component‐based software development ; Cost analysis ; Cost estimates ; Defects ; Mathematical models ; maximum entropy principle ; nonlinear regression ; Power law ; power law probability distribution ; Quality assurance ; Size distribution ; Software development ; Software quality ; Tsallis entropy</subject><ispartof>Journal of software : evolution and process, 2022-02, Vol.34 (2), p.n/a</ispartof><rights>2021 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.</rights><rights>2022 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3277-aa48c2097f84a4b0e8fe1a625bfcbf1aefac475e19ae309deb4f97d5ba28f3543</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3277-aa48c2097f84a4b0e8fe1a625bfcbf1aefac475e19ae309deb4f97d5ba28f3543</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-8120-1995 ; 0000-0003-4295-3769</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002%2Fsmr.2417$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002%2Fsmr.2417$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,1417,27923,27924,45573,45574</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Sharma, Shachi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pendharkar, Parag C.</creatorcontrib><title>On the analysis of power law distribution in software component sizes</title><title>Journal of software : evolution and process</title><description>Component‐based software development (CBSD) is an active area of research. Ascertaining the quality of components is important for overall software quality assurance in CBSD. One of the important metrics for measuring defects, analyzability, efforts, and cost in CBSD is component size. The paper presents an analytical model based on maximization of Tsallis entropy to obtain closed form expression for component size distribution (maximum Tsallis entropy component size distribution, MTECSD) in steady state. It is found that the component size distribution follows power law asymptotically. A procedure based on generalized Jensen–Shannon measure is developed to estimate model parameters. A detailed analysis of many popular probability distributions along with MTECSD is carried out on many diverse real data sets of component‐based softwares. The analysis reveals that lognormal and MTECSD distributions fit well to component sizes in many software conforming the presence of power law behavior. The software whose component size distributions are described by MTECSD are in equilibrium implying that new defects in these software systems occur occasionally. Power law behavior in component sizes also imply high variation leading to difficulty in software analyzability. The precise knowledge of component size distribution also provides an alternative method to compute efforts and cost estimates by modified COCOMO model.
An analytical model based on maximum Tsallis entropy component size distribution (MTECSD) is proposed to obtain closed form expression of component size distribution. MTECSD, Pareto, Lognormal, and Weibull distributions are compared over 35 datasets. Lognormal and MTECSD outperform other distributions and are further used to compute expected software size leading to modified COCOMO model.</description><subject>COCOMO model</subject><subject>component‐based software development</subject><subject>Cost analysis</subject><subject>Cost estimates</subject><subject>Defects</subject><subject>Mathematical models</subject><subject>maximum entropy principle</subject><subject>nonlinear regression</subject><subject>Power law</subject><subject>power law probability distribution</subject><subject>Quality assurance</subject><subject>Size distribution</subject><subject>Software development</subject><subject>Software quality</subject><subject>Tsallis entropy</subject><issn>2047-7473</issn><issn>2047-7481</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp10E1Lw0AQBuBFFCy14E9Y8OIldXez6SZHKdUKlYIf52WSzuKWNBt3UkL99aZWvDmXmcPDy_Aydi3FVAqh7mgXp0pLc8ZGSmiTGJ3L87_bpJdsQrQVw8yUyHQ2Yot1w7sP5NBAfSBPPDjehh4jr6HnG09d9OW-86HhvuEUXNdDRF6FXRsabDpO_gvpil04qAknv3vM3h8Wb_Nlslo_Ps3vV0mVKmMSAJ1XShTG5Rp0KTB3KGGmstJVpZOADiptMpQFYCqKDZbaFWaTlaByl2Y6HbObU24bw-ceqbPbsI_D62TVTBmRqjQXg7o9qSoGoojOttHvIB6sFPbYkx16sseeBpqcaO9rPPzr7Ovzy4__Bmfqaek</recordid><startdate>202202</startdate><enddate>202202</enddate><creator>Sharma, Shachi</creator><creator>Pendharkar, Parag C.</creator><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7SC</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>JQ2</scope><scope>L7M</scope><scope>L~C</scope><scope>L~D</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8120-1995</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4295-3769</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202202</creationdate><title>On the analysis of power law distribution in software component sizes</title><author>Sharma, Shachi ; Pendharkar, Parag C.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3277-aa48c2097f84a4b0e8fe1a625bfcbf1aefac475e19ae309deb4f97d5ba28f3543</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>COCOMO model</topic><topic>component‐based software development</topic><topic>Cost analysis</topic><topic>Cost estimates</topic><topic>Defects</topic><topic>Mathematical models</topic><topic>maximum entropy principle</topic><topic>nonlinear regression</topic><topic>Power law</topic><topic>power law probability distribution</topic><topic>Quality assurance</topic><topic>Size distribution</topic><topic>Software development</topic><topic>Software quality</topic><topic>Tsallis entropy</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Sharma, Shachi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pendharkar, Parag C.</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Computer Science Collection</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies Database with Aerospace</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts Academic</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts Professional</collection><jtitle>Journal of software : evolution and process</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Sharma, Shachi</au><au>Pendharkar, Parag C.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>On the analysis of power law distribution in software component sizes</atitle><jtitle>Journal of software : evolution and process</jtitle><date>2022-02</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>34</volume><issue>2</issue><epage>n/a</epage><issn>2047-7473</issn><eissn>2047-7481</eissn><abstract>Component‐based software development (CBSD) is an active area of research. Ascertaining the quality of components is important for overall software quality assurance in CBSD. One of the important metrics for measuring defects, analyzability, efforts, and cost in CBSD is component size. The paper presents an analytical model based on maximization of Tsallis entropy to obtain closed form expression for component size distribution (maximum Tsallis entropy component size distribution, MTECSD) in steady state. It is found that the component size distribution follows power law asymptotically. A procedure based on generalized Jensen–Shannon measure is developed to estimate model parameters. A detailed analysis of many popular probability distributions along with MTECSD is carried out on many diverse real data sets of component‐based softwares. The analysis reveals that lognormal and MTECSD distributions fit well to component sizes in many software conforming the presence of power law behavior. The software whose component size distributions are described by MTECSD are in equilibrium implying that new defects in these software systems occur occasionally. Power law behavior in component sizes also imply high variation leading to difficulty in software analyzability. The precise knowledge of component size distribution also provides an alternative method to compute efforts and cost estimates by modified COCOMO model.
An analytical model based on maximum Tsallis entropy component size distribution (MTECSD) is proposed to obtain closed form expression of component size distribution. MTECSD, Pareto, Lognormal, and Weibull distributions are compared over 35 datasets. Lognormal and MTECSD outperform other distributions and are further used to compute expected software size leading to modified COCOMO model.</abstract><cop>Chichester</cop><pub>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</pub><doi>10.1002/smr.2417</doi><tpages>14</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8120-1995</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4295-3769</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 2047-7473 |
ispartof | Journal of software : evolution and process, 2022-02, Vol.34 (2), p.n/a |
issn | 2047-7473 2047-7481 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2627032380 |
source | Wiley Online Library All Journals |
subjects | COCOMO model component‐based software development Cost analysis Cost estimates Defects Mathematical models maximum entropy principle nonlinear regression Power law power law probability distribution Quality assurance Size distribution Software development Software quality Tsallis entropy |
title | On the analysis of power law distribution in software component sizes |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-08T21%3A37%3A25IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=On%20the%20analysis%20of%20power%20law%20distribution%20in%20software%20component%20sizes&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20software%20:%20evolution%20and%20process&rft.au=Sharma,%20Shachi&rft.date=2022-02&rft.volume=34&rft.issue=2&rft.epage=n/a&rft.issn=2047-7473&rft.eissn=2047-7481&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/smr.2417&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2627032380%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2627032380&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |