ppt课件-auto- generated code effort estimation（自动生成的代码工作量估计）.pptVIP

Schopenhauers Proof For Software: Pessimistic Bias In the NOSTROMO Tool (U) Dan Strickland Dynetics Program Software Support daniel.strickland@ Overview (U) Background Pessimism in Code Size NOSTROMO Tool NOSTROMO Demo Background (U) In 2003, TPO and Dynetics presented a methodology on using Monte Carlo simulation and uncertainty in COCOMO II to estimate risk in estimates In 2004, TPO and Dynetics presented updated methodologies to include Auto-Generated Code and other updates to NOSTROMO A new methodology for estimating pessimistic size growth has been incorporated into NOSTROMO Boehm Horn Curve (U) Code Size Growth (U) Code size estimates (and subsequent cost/schedule estimates) are required long before software requirements are baselined and finalized Code estimates grow to any number of factors: Requirements Volatility Auto-Generated Code Poor Estimating Techniques Many large, complex programs exhibit constant code size growth outside the boundaries of the “horn curve” We define pessimism as extending the boundaries of the expected code size growth to historical limits with only growth potential – “things can only get worse” Three Historical Projects – Size Growth (U) Three projects that have completed development or are very near completion Graphs represent code size estimates over time for new code and subsequent Effective SLOC Graphs show growth realization in new and ESLOC growth over time Three Historical Projects – Percentage Size Growth (U) Projects new code size grew 90-180% from original estimates Projects ESLOC size grew 40-120% from original estimates Programs exhibited extensive growth after Critical Design Review (CDR) – during Coding and Unit Testing Percentage growth is outside of the boundaries expected by the horn curve Pessimism Curve (U) Plot the data points of the three projects in the same manner as the relative size of the horn curve Assume that the “ceiling” for Pessimism is the final size x and the “floor” encompa