research-article

Fostering software quality assessment

Author:

Martin BrandtnerAuthors Info & Claims

ICSE '13: Proceedings of the 2013 International Conference on Software Engineering

Pages 1393 - 1396

Published: 18 May 2013 Publication History

Get Access

Abstract

Software quality assessment shall monitor and guide the evolution of a system based on quality measurements. This continuous process should ideally involve multiple stakeholders and provide adequate information for each of them to use. We want to support an effective selection of quality measurements based on the type of software and individual information needs of the involved stakeholders. We propose an approach that brings together quality measurements and individual information needs for a context-sensitive tailoring of information related to a software quality assessment. We address the following research question: How can we better support different stakeholders in the quality assessment of a software system? For that we will devise theories, models, and prototypes to capture their individual information needs, tailor information from software repositories to these needs, and enable a contextual analysis of the quality aspects. Such a context-sensitive tailoring will provide a effective and individual view on the latest development trends in a project. We outline the milestones as well as evaluation approaches in this paper.

References

[1]

E. H. Chi, P. Pirolli, K. Chen, and J. Pitkow. Using information scent to model user information needs and actions and the web. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pages 490–497, NY, USA, 2001.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[2]

S. R. Chidamber and C. F. Kemerer. Towards a metrics suite for object oriented design. In Conference proceedings on Object-oriented programming systems, languages, and applications, pages 197–211, NY, USA, 1991.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[3]

P. B. Crosby. Quality is free: the art of making quality certain. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1979.

Google Scholar

[4]

G. Gousios, E. Kalliamvakou, and D. Spinellis. Measuring developer contribution from software repository data. In Proceedings of the International Working Conference on Mining Software Repositories, pages 129–132, NY, USA, 2008.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[5]

L. Hattori and M. Lanza. On the nature of commits. In Automated Software Engineering - Workshops, pages 63–71, 2008.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[6]

B. Kitchenham. A methodology for evaluating software engineering methods and tools. In Experimental Software Engineering Issues, pages 121–124, 1992.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[7]

A. J. Ko, R. DeLine, and G. Venolia. Information needs in collocated software development teams. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Software Engineering, pages 344–353, Washington, USA, 2007.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[8]

R. Koschke. Software visualization in software maintenance, reverse engineering, and re-engineering: a research survey. Journal of Software Maintenance, 15(2):87–109, Mar. 2003.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[9]

N. Nagappan, B. Murphy, and V. Basili. The influence of organizational structure on software quality: an empirical case study. In Proceedings of the 30th international conference on Software engineering, pages 521– 530, NY, USA, 2008.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[10]

J. Sillito, G. C. Murphy, and K. De Volder. Questions programmers ask during software evolution tasks. In Proceedings of the 14th ACM SIGSOFT international symposium on Foundations of software engineering, pages 23–34, NY, USA, 2006.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[11]

S. A. Slaughter, D. E. Harter, and M. S. Krishnan. Evaluating the cost of software quality. Commun. ACM, 41(8):67–73, Aug. 1998.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[12]

R. Wettel and M. Lanza. Visually localizing design problems with disharmony maps. In Proceedings of the 4th ACM symposium on Software visualization, pages 155–164, NY, USA, 2008.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[13]

D. D. Woods, E. S. Patterson, and E. M. Roth. Can we ever escape from data overload? a cognitive systems diagnosis. Cognition, Technology & Work, 4(1):22––36, 2002.

Crossref

Google Scholar

Cited By

View all

Griffioen-Both FSpruit SFitrianie SBeun RLancee JOssowski S(2016)Testing for mobile e-health interventionsProceedings of the 31st Annual ACM Symposium on Applied Computing10.1145/2851613.2851686(137-142)Online publication date: 4-Apr-2016
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/2851613.2851686
Nandakumar RLal AParmar R(2014)State of the art in software quality assuranceACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes10.1145/2597716.259772439:3(1-6)Online publication date: 4-Jun-2014
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/2597716.2597724

Index Terms

Fostering software quality assessment
1. General and reference
  1. Cross-computing tools and techniques
    1. Metrics
2. Social and professional topics
  1. Professional topics
    1. Management of computing and information systems
      1. Software management
      2. System management
        Quality assurance

Recommendations

Software quality assessment technology
ICSE '85: Proceedings of the 8th international conference on Software engineering

Necessities for Software Quality Measurement and Assurance Technology have been increased.

B. Boehm and McCall proposed software evaluation criteria. Based on these studies, G. Murine developed Software Quality Metrics (SQM).

SQM was applied to several ...
Quality assessment of systematic reviews in software engineering: a tertiary study
EASE '15: Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering

Context: The quality of an Systematic Literature Review (SLR) is as good as the quality of the reviewed papers. Hence, it is vital to rigorously assess the papers included in an SLR. There has been no tertiary study aimed at reporting the state of the ...
Risk assessment in software requirements engineering: an event driven framework

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

ICSE '13: Proceedings of the 2013 International Conference on Software Engineering

May 2013

1561 pages

ISBN:9781467330763

General Chair:
David Notkin,
Program Chairs:
Betty H. C. Cheng,
Klaus Pohl

Publisher

IEEE Press

Publication History

Published: 18 May 2013

Check for updates

Qualifiers

Research-article

Conference

ICSE '13

Sponsor:

SIGSOFT

ICSE '13: 35th International Conference on Software Engineering

May 18 - 26, 2013

CA, San Francisco, USA

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 276 of 1,856 submissions, 15%

Upcoming Conference

ICSE 2025

2025 IEEE/ACM 46th International Conference on Software Engineering

April 26 - May 3, 2025

Ottawa , ON , Canada

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

2
Total Citations
View Citations
183
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)3
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

Reflects downloads up to 22 Dec 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all

Griffioen-Both FSpruit SFitrianie SBeun RLancee JOssowski S(2016)Testing for mobile e-health interventionsProceedings of the 31st Annual ACM Symposium on Applied Computing10.1145/2851613.2851686(137-142)Online publication date: 4-Apr-2016
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/2851613.2851686
Nandakumar RLal AParmar R(2014)State of the art in software quality assuranceACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes10.1145/2597716.259772439:3(1-6)Online publication date: 4-Jun-2014
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/2597716.2597724

View Options

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Cited By

Index Terms

Recommendations

Software quality assessment technology

Quality assessment of systematic reviews in software engineering: a tertiary study

Risk assessment in software requirements engineering: an event driven framework