首页> 外文会议>International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering >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:基于清单的阅读和透视的读取对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 (00) 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 00 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,即基于清单的读取(CBR)和基于透视的读取(PBR)的实验比较,用于面向对象(00)设计检查。软件检测是一种有效的方法,可以检测软件开发过程的早期阶段的缺陷。然而,在软件要求文档或软件代码模块中通常应用检查用于缺陷检测,并且有意大利缺乏信息,如何将检查应用于00设计文件。比较在一个有59名科目的受控实验中进行。各种数据分析的结果表明a)使用两种检测技术的缺陷检测效果类似(PBR:69%,CBR:70%); b)使用PBR的评论者比使用CBR的审稿人在检查中花费更少的时间; c)使用CBR的审阅者的每种缺陷的成本较小,3人类虚拟团队分析结果表明,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