首页> 外文会议>Empirical Software Engineering, 2002. Proceedings. 2002 International Symposium n >An experimental comparison of checklist-based reading and perspective-based reading for UML design document inspection
【24h】

An experimental comparison of checklist-based reading and perspective-based reading for UML design document inspection

机译:基于清单的阅读和基于透视的阅读的UML设计文档检查的实验比较

获取原文

摘要

This paper describes an experimental comparison of two reading techniques, namely Checklist-based reading (CBR) and Perspective-based reading (PBR) for Object-Oriented (OO) design inspection. Software inspection is an effective approach to detect defects in the early stages of the software development process. However inspections are usually applied for defect detection in software requirement documents or software code modules, and there is a significant lack of information how inspections should be applied to OO design documents. The comparison was performed in a controlled experiment with 59 subject students. The results of individual data analysis indicate that (a) defect detection effectiveness using both inspection techniques is similar (PBR: 69%, CBR: 70%); (b) reviewers who use PBR spend less time on inspection than reviewers who use CBR; (c) cost per defect of reviewers who use CBR is smaller. The results of 3-person virtual team analysis show that CBR technique is more effective than PBR technique.
机译:本文介绍了两种阅读技术的实验比较,这两种技术分别是用于面向对象(OO)设计检查的基于清单的阅读(CBR)和基于透视的阅读(PBR)。软件检查是在软件开发过程的早期阶段检测缺陷的有效方法。但是,检查通常用于软件需求文档或软件代码模块中的缺陷检测,并且非常缺乏有关如何将检查应用于OO设计文档的信息。比较是在59名学科学生的对照实验中进行的。单独数据分析的结果表明:(a)使用两种检查技术的缺陷检测效率相似(PBR:69%,CBR:70%); (b)使用PBR的审阅者比使用CBR的审阅者花费更少的检查时间; (c)使用CBR的审稿人的每笔缺陷成本较小。 3人虚拟团队分析的结果表明,CBR技术比PBR技术更有效。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号