І, І І І І І І І І - І І І : є 2015

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "І, І І І І І І І І - І І І : є 2015"

Transcription

1 І, І І І І І І І І - І І І : є 2015

2 TRА є

3 є є - є

4

5

6 6 - є FP Function point ICAM Integrated Computer-Aided Manufacturing IDEF Icam DEFinition IDEF0 Function Modeling IEEE Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers IEC International Electro technical Commission ISO International Organization for Standardization PROMISE PRedictOr Models In Software Engineering CASE Computer-Aided Software Engineering CMM Capability Maturity Model

7 ь ь. - ( ), є є,, -,. -, є.. -,., є.., TRW, Hewlett-Packard IBM, 4-100,. є,,,,,., є. ISO/IEC ,, є. ISO/IEC 9126,,.,,. є є, 7

8 ,. є, є,,,,,. є,. є. -,. -, є.,, є ь, є. ',, , 1066/ , -,,. -,, є,,.. є -. : 8

9 -, є, ; -,, - ; - ; -, є - -. є -., -..., є є. 9

10 є, -. : -, є, є, є - ; ь ь -, є, - ; -, є є -, є ; -, є,. 10

11 ь є., є, : є ( 20%, ); ;, є. є.,, 6,5%,. 8%. є 7% 8,8%. - є,.,,, 11

12 ( «є», )..,,,, є. Д1, 5, 6, 10, 11 13, 17, 20Ж.,, Д9, 14-16, 18, 19Ж, Д12Ж, Д2Ж, Д3Ж, [7],, Д4,8Ж. ь. : - «, DESSERT» (2010,, ,, 2014, ); ( , ); «TAAPSD» (2010,, 2011, ); -... (2013, 2015, ); (2014, ).. 20, 12, 2, 6. 12

13 ( ) [21, 22, 23]., є,,,, є [24, 25]. - є,,. є [26]., є,,,, [27, 28, 29, 30]., 1996 $ $ $ , є,, [31], є,,

14 ,. [32]. [33],. є,, є ( ),, є.,,, [34, 35, 36, 37, 38]., - є,,. [34],.,,,. [35]. є,,. є, [36], є є., [36], є. -, є є. (, 14

15 ), є.,., є, ( «1»), ( ), є. [37],, ь,,,... є [21, 38] є, є., ь,..,. [21, 38]. ь, є, є. є ( 2015 [21, 39]),, є ( є 2015 ). [38, 33, 34]. 95% ( ), є,, є,, 15

16 16, є [21, 38]. ь є ь, є, [38, 39, 40], є,..., TRW, Hewlett-Packard IBM, 4-100,. є,,,,,., є.,. є є. є. ь (Reliability) ISO/IEC 9126 [41, 42, 43], є ISO/IEC 25010:2011 Д44Ж є є, : Q f ( F, E, C, U, R, S, P, M ) (1.1) F - (Functional suitability), E - (Performance efficiency), C - (Compatibility), U - (Usability), R - (Reliability), S - (Security), P - (Portability), M - (Maintainability). [45,46] [47-51]. ISO/IEC 9126,

17 ,,. (defect, fault) [51,53], є,,,,.. [54, 55]. [41, 42, 43, 43] : N est ; defects) (the Estimated Density of not revealed N Nrev ( t) ED( t) (1.2) Size ( t) est Nrev -, Size soft - (,,, ); revealing) soft (the Estimated Resolution of defects N ( t) ER t Nest є 17 rev ( ) (1.3), [56-60]. [56, 58], 0,8. 0,95. [61],, є CMM (Capability Maturity Model), є,

18 є 5 15%. є (,, ),, , % 1 0, ,75 2 0, ,44 3 0,91 9 0,27 4 0,93 7 0,14 5 0,99 5 0,05 18.,,. [55Ж є ( ),,,. є. є ь.,, :,,. є. є, є ( )

19 ,., є є..,,..,,, [56]. [56, 57, 58, 59], є :, є, є 5 % ;, є,,, є 15 % ;, є, є 30 % ;, є,, є 50 80% ;. [55], (software testing),,.. [60],, [61],, [59]., [60-64], є, 80% є. [61] є, 25 %.,, 19

20 є,,., $50. [28, 57]. є, є, є, є,.. [60, 61, 64], є є. [57, 58, 59], є,. [61], є.,., (,,, ) є., є, (1.2) (1.3),. є [64]. [57-63],.,., [59], 80% 20 %, 50% 5 %. є 20

21 . є. [59], є є. є. є,, ь І ,. є, ( ), є, [55].,

22 [51],, ,.. [62] є.,

23 . 2, є,,. 3,.. [63] є :,,,,. [64, 65] є,.... [66] є.,,.., є.,. 6,.. [67], є,,., є,,,.....,. 23

24 . є,,.. [1,6,13,2], - [69], - [70,71], [71], [72], [73], [74], - [75], [76], S- [77], S- [77], [67], [68-79], [1-6, 13-15]. Д6,13Ж,,,... 1,.. 2,.. 3. [2],,,,,,, S-, S-,,.,.. 4, є. 5. [5], - S.6.. 7,. 8,. 9. є Д3, 4Ж, Д78, 79],

25 Д1-6, 13-15],.. є [21]., [68,78,79],. є ( ),,. є є., , [49,68,80-89],,. [51]. [49,68,79],,,., [80-85],., [49,50],., [86-89],., [48, 50, 51],..

26 є ь, [49,68], є t 2 Nest E 1 exp( K t ) (1.4) -, є, t - (, t= 4 є ), -. є,. ь ь, [49,68], є ED N est ED A D ( SA ST SQ) ( SL SS SM SU SX SR) (1.5) N est ED LOC (1.6) LOC (lines of code). (1.5) :, (,, ), D,. : SA ( ), ST, SQ -, SL - (, ), SS -, SM -, SU -, SX, SR.,,. ь [79] є N est 26 N K (1.7) total

27 Ntotal -, є, K - є.,, є є. є (FP-function point), IBM (AХХКЧ AХЛrОМСЭ) 1979, [80]., International Function Point Users Group [81], є FP : (EбЭОrЧКХ ТЧЩЮЭЬ) ; (External outputs) ; є є (External inquiries); (Internal logical files); є (External interface files). : 1 -, 2 -, 3. (, ) FP ( 3 FP 15). FP (UFP) є 3 UFP (1.8) 5 i 1 j 1 N ij W ij Nij Wij i j. UFP VAF ( 0.62 VAF 1. 35), є (,, ) AFP ( UFP CFP) VAF (1.9)

28 28 CFP FP,,,, /. є FP (1.10) Nest AFP N1 FP N 1 - FP, [82], FP FP 1 1,25 1,75 0,4 0,6 5 UFP, AFP, [83] UFP,,. ISO/IEC 20926:2003 [84] є UFP.,., [85],. 100%..

29 1.3.3., [49, 50], IBM,,.. є. i -,. i+ 1 - є, :,,,. N est є i = 0,9 i + 0,15 І i (1.11) i = 0,15 i + 0,006 І i (1.12) N est = 23 i + 2 i (1.13) i -, i -, І i -, i -. є IBM... є, є є. є. є,,, (,,,, ) , [86], є є N est

30 N est LOC (1.14), [87], є N N n, 4.2 n 0,0015 ( ) (1.15) est LOC i i 1 i n 4/3 LOC i -., [88], є est 30 N est 2 LOC (1.16) N est , ( LOC ), [89], є є A 0, A1, A2, N est 2 L A0 A1 ln LOC A2 ln LOC (1.17), є : A ; A ; A , - PROMISE (PRedictOr Models In Software Engineering) [90]. є : , , ,.,, ,,,

31 , (80- ), є., є A 0, A1, A2,, C, C++, Java, PHP, Perl, JavaScript.,, є., є. [91], «., r -,,,,» є є [47, 48, 56, 58], є.

32 ,,,,.,.,. [29, 47, 48, 51, 56, 58, 59, 60],, Д92Ж,,,., є (,,, ), є. Д93Ж, є, є. ґ,, є [94]. є., [59, 62, 95, 96] є є.. Д95Ж є : «-,.. :,».. [62] є, «,.,,,.,

33 ,,». є :,,,.. [96] є, «,».. [59] є, «, 15». [97, 98], є.,,. є. [99],, є є ( ), є,,.. [100] є,... [101] є,.,. [102] є, є,,. є,., є, є 33

34 ,,,,,. Д103], є,.,. [104],, є,,. є, є.,,. [105] є, є. є є,, є -., є., є є,,,. є,,,,, є.., [106]. -, є. є, є... - [107]. -, ь, є,,. 34

35 (,,, ) є, є. [108, 109, 110] ь, ь. є, є є (,,,,, ) є, є,. є є є [108]. [109] є,.. [51], є,,.,,,. IEEE 1061[111], є Д42,55,111Ж (metric) ( ),. ( ) -.,. є.,

36 (,,,,, ),.,,,,.,,,.. є - є є є. TIOBE Software Д112], Google, Google Blogs, Yahoo!, Wikipedia, MSN, YouTube, Bing, Amazon, Baidu...12., є є є. є є є.., [113Ж. n n 1 n2, n1-, n2 - ; N N 1 N2, N1-, N є [107]. Ч є [114, 115], є, C Ch P 2M 3C 0. 5T (1.18) 36

37 P -, M -, C -, T -. є [114, 115] Ncall -, N mod ul C N 37 call Jilb (1.19) Nmodul -. є є. [116],,,, є, є є. є : WMC (Weighted methods per class) WMC C i, i=1 n, n -, Ci - i -. DIT (Depth of Inheritance tree) є є - -. NOC (Number of children) є -. CBO (Coupling between object classes) є,,. RFC (Response for a class) є ( ), є. LCOM (Lack of cohesion in Methods) є,. Vi - M i, Vj - M, V V 0 j i j M, M, V V 0. є i j i j LCOM є : NR0 NR1, NR0 NR1 LCOM (1.20) 0, NR0 NR1 NR0 -, NR1 -. [7, 8, 9, 10, 16, 17].,.1.6.,.

38 ґ.,. є є.,.,,, Ndepend, [117, 118] є 80, NET Framework, 19, 22, 18, 12.. Resource Standard Metrics (RSM) [119] є 20,,, C, C++, C# Java,,,. Eclipse Metrics Plugin [120] є 20 Java,. IBM Rational Telelogic Logiscope [121]. CSV, HTML, XML.. PVCS Version Manager [122], Microsoft Visual Source Safe [123], SoftBench CM, SoftStatic, Development Manager Hewlett-Packard [124], RCS, CVS, Subversion (SVN), Mercurial, Git, Bazaar.

39 ,,.. є.,,.,, є., , , [113], є N est V / 3000, V N log 2 n (1.21) V - є, n -, N -. [7].,,,. 1.4.

40 N n N n n N V ,, % ,33 3,95 67,41 41,90 85,89 129,16 156,24-17% -34% 87% 7% 51% 70% 76% 87%, є 49%. є : 1),, є,, є ; 2) є, є., є TRА TRW [48] Nest Ltot k1 0.1 Cinf k2 0.2 Cc k3 0.4 Cio k4 ( 0.1) U read k5 (1.22) Ltot -, ; C inf - є ; Cc -, ; - ; U read Cio - -,

41 є є ; ki - є i -, TRW. [8]., є 44%, є є 31%., є, TRW, є,, 0.63 k , 0.43 k є є,. є, є [125] N est 0,042 MCI 0,075 N 0, HE (1.23) MCI, N, HE [113], N est 0,25 MCI 0,53 DI 0, 09 VG (1.24) DI, VG - - [107]. [126]., є, є

42 . є, [8] є є є.,, З., %.,. є є. є,, , [49, 58, 64], є є., [47, 56, 60, 126Ж,.. є., є.

43 є.,, 4, є [ ]. є, [127]. є є,., є.,,., є. є, є є. є. [127, 128].

44 [ Ж. є :, є. є [135]. [136,137Ж. є,,,,,.,, є,... [138], є MatLab.,,, є є є [139, 140].,,,. є,.., є.

45 є,., -.,, є.,.,,,, є, , [139, 140] є , : є,, є ;, 100% ;

46 ,, є ; TRW є є, є. є є,,,. є.. є є,. 1.9, : ;, є ;,, є ;

47 є. є є,. є.,. є., ь -, є,,. 47 1, є, є,. : є,. 2.,,..,.,

48 31-49%. є, є. 3.,,. є є. 4.,.,,,. -, є,, 5., є :,,,, є,. 6., :, ; ;. 48

49 49 2.., , є.. [7, 16]. ь є :,,,,,,,,,. ь є.,,,,,,,., є,,,,,,. ь є є. є

50 ,,,,,,. є є,. ь, ь є.,,,,,.. [7, 8, 9], : 1) ; 2) ; 3) є ; 4). є.. ь І,,, є. є., [8], є, є.. 50

51 51 ь M 1 ь 1. ь,,,,,,, M 2 2.,,, M 3 M 4 3. є 4.,,,,.,,, є є ґ, [16],,. 2.1,. 2.2.

52 є є, ( ) є - є 29. WMC 30. DIT 31. NOC 32. CBO 33. RFC 34. LCOM 35. NOO 36. NOA 37. SI 38. A 39. CE 40. I

53 53 -,,, - є є є 4.,,.,, є,,,, -, s,,,,,,,,,,,,,wmc, LCOM, NOO,NOA,SI,, CBO, RFC, CA, CE, I DIT, NOC є ґ. є. є є.

54 2.2. [141], (. statement),,.,, ( )...,. є є [48],,.. є. є. [142],,, є. є. (,, )... є,., є. є,

55 .,,... є, є. ґ є,. 2.2, ( i 1... n) є... -a 1 1 a-b 2 4 sin(a) 1 2 a+ b 2 3 a-b-c 3 10 round(a,b) 2 4 a+ b+ c 3 5 a-b-c-d 4 30 substr(a,b,c) 3 9 a+ b+ c+ d 4 7 a-b-c-d-e func(a,b,c,d) 4 28 a+ b+ c+ d+ e 5 9 func(a,b,c,d,e) є k com i k notcom = 2-1+!-1 = 2 +!-2 k func = + 1+!-1 = +! є i- k com 2 i 1 -,,. є i- k notcom 2 i i! 2..,,. є i- i i!, k func

56 ., є,,. є є. (Modified Metric) : MM n n n ( 2 i 1) Ncom _ i (2 i i! 2) Nnotcom _ i ( i i!) N func _i i 1 i 1 i 1 56 (2.1) ( i 1... n), ( 2 i 1) є -, N com _ i -, ( 2 i i! 2) є -, N notcom _ i -, ( i i! ) є -, N func_ i -., ,,,, є : 1), ; 2) ; 3) ; 4) (2.1).,. 2.3.

57 57? N 1 -?. N 2 _ com -?. N _ notcom 2 -?. N i _ com -? N _ i notcom Є? (2.2) 2.3 -

58 ,. [8, 9] 8,3%..,, є, є,. є., є, , [57-64], є є, є :. є 50 80%,

59 є, є, є ;.,,, ;.,, ;., Case -.,,,,,. є.. є.,,. є,,. : є є, M M, M,..., M }; { 1 2 n 59

60 60 M є X x, x,..., x }, { 1 2 n ( ); ;, (,,,,, ),, є Nest x... ґ 1 M1 x2 M 2 xn M n (2.2),,,,., ( є,,, ) є [143]: x1 M x1 M x1 M n1 x 2 x 2 x 2 M M M n2... x n... x... n... x n M M 1n M 2n nn N d1 N N d 2 dn (2.3) d N d... N dn N 1, 2,,, M, i j

61 61 i -, j -. є. є,,. - [144],,.,. є є (2.3), є. є,. є є є, є є.,, є - є. WMC C Mac NPM DIT NOC LCOM CBO RFC CA LOC - CE є є є ',.

62 ' : є, є R, є D M i M i D j R,, [90]. є..1, / є.. 1 RFC 0,8650 0, WMC 0,8285 0, LCOM 0,8165 0, LOC 0,8151 0, NPM 0,7935 0, CE 0,7381 0, CBO 0,6994 0, CA 0,6177 0, MOA 0,5920 0, AMC 0,4710 0, MAX_CC 0,4598 0, CBM 0,3479 0, AVG_CC 0,3126 0, DAM 0,3087 0, IC 0,2770 0, NOC 0,2300 0, DIT 0,1317 0, MFA 0,0816 0, LCOM3 0,0251 0, CAM -0,1581 0,

63 є, M RFC, WMC, LOC, CE, NPM, LCOM, CBO R D, M i.. 1. RFC є. H R 0; H : R 0 0 a ; (2.4) 0 : 0. [145]. є z=1.293, z z z t- t fact t k= 40 t z t fact t 0.01 (8,4787>3.55), є, є. : WMC, LOC, CE, NPM, LCOM, CBO R, D M i, R, , R, Д145], ' D M i є, R X, Y 0. 7., D M i

64 M WMC, RFC, LCOM, NPM, CBO, CF, CE, R, D M i R, D M i R, D M i RFC 0,8650±0,0159 0,8085 0,9215 WMC 0,8285±0,0194 0,7597 0,8973 LOC 0,8165±0,233 0,7338 0,8992 CE 0,8151±0,213 0,7395 0,8907 NPM 0,7935±0,0260 0,7012 0,8858 LCOM 0,7381±0,0203 0,6659 0,8103 CBO 0,6994±0,0275 0,6018 0,7970 є WMC. NPM., WMC.,, є.. LCЇM є,, NPM. RFC є,,.,

65 ., RFC, WMC NPM. є, є,. CBO є,,. RFC є., RFC є CBO,, є. CA CE CBO. CBO є CA CE,. є є. NOC є є, є є. CA, є є. DIT є, є є. DIT,, є WMC LOC LCOM NPM DIT RFC NOC CE CBO CA є - є

66 : 1)WMC-RFC, 2)WMC-LCOM, 3)WMC-NPM, 4)CBO-CA, 5)RFC-LCOM, 6)RFC-CE, 7)RFC-NPM, 8)LCOM-NPM.,, є - є, - PROMISE (PRedictOr Models In Software Engineering) [90] , :, ( ), ( ) /

67 ,, : 1) є 67 R M i M j ; 2) R M i M j ; 3) R M i M j. 1. WMC RFC є R, WMC RFC H R 0; H : R 0 0 a ; (2.6) 0 : 0 R,. [145]. WMC RFC є 1 z=1.333, z- z z t- t fact t Ф= t z t fact t 0.01, є, є, , : WMC-LCOM, WMC-NPM, CBO-CA, RFC-LCOM, RFC-CE, RFC-NPM, LCOM-NPM є ~ R M i, M j ~ 2 R (. 2.6) (. 2.7).

68 є WMC DIT NOC CBO RFC LCOM CA CE NPM WMC 1-0,1311 0,1099 0,5038 0,8988 0,7051 0,2596 0,4594 0,7883 DIT -0, ,0547-0,0704-0,0605-0,0671-0,0801 0,1117-0,0777 NOC 0,1099-0, ,3527 0,0668 0,0800 0,3129 0,0652 0,0916 CBO 0,5038-0,0704 0, ,5102 0,3731 0,7384 0,5354 0,4065 RFC 0,8988-0,0605 0,0668 0, ,6161 0,1983 0,6025 0,6688 LCOM 0,7051-0,0671 0,0800 0,3731 0, ,2800 0,4798 0,7466 CA 0,2596-0,0801 0,3129 0,7384 0,1983 0, ,1344 0,3280 CE 0,4594 0,1117 0,0652 0,5354 0,6025 0,4798 0, ,4408 NPM 0,7883-0,0777 0,0916 0,4065 0,6688 0,7466 0,3280 0, ~ R 0. 9, M i, M j, , 2.7 є є WMC DIT NOC CBO RFC LCOM CA CE NPM WMC 0 0,0026 0,0067 0,0060 0,0016 0,1130 0,0134 0,0935 0,0921 DIT 0, ,0111 0,0141 0,0008 0,0028 0,0199 0,0086 0,0083 NOC 0,0067 0, ,0030 0,0120 0,0027 0,0311 0,0141 0,0105 CBO 0,0060 0,0141 0, ,0097 0,0252 0,1116 0,0429 0,0360 RFC 0,0016 0,0008 0,0120 0, ,1110 0,0103 0,1046 0,0706 LCOM 0,1130 0,0028 0,0027 0,0252 0, ,0069 0,0271 0,0041 CA 0,0134 0,0199 0,0311 0,1116 0,0103 0, ,0172 0,0052 CE 0,0935 0,0086 0,0141 0,0429 0,1046 0,0271 0, ,0278 NPM 0,0921 0,0083 0,0105 0,0360 0,0706 0,0041 0,0052 0, ~ R M i, M j ~ 2 R, S 2 ~ 2 n R n= 46,. n 1 2 S R. n

69 ~ R 0 ~ R M 1, M 2 R. 69 R t R. ~ ~ R. 0 R M 1, M R є WMC, RFC 0,8988 0,0091 0,8809 0,9166 WMC, LCOM 0,7051 0,0771 0,5539 0,8563 WMC, NPM 0,7883 0,0696 0,6519 0,9247 CBO, CA 0,7384 0,0766 0,5882 0,8886 RFC, LCOM 0,6161 0,0764 0,4663 0,7659 RFC, CE 0,6025 0,0742 0,4571 0,7479 RFC, NPM 0,6688 0,0610 0,5493 0,7883 LCOM, NPM 0,7466 0,0148 0,7177 0,7756., WMC-LCOM, WMC-NPM, CBO-CA, RFC- LCOM, RFC-CE, RFC-NPM, LCOM-NPM., є є,. є є. є. є :

70 ? , [146], [90]. STATGRAPHICS PLUS [147] :, є, є ;, є ;.,, є, , %, % WMC 83,762 83,762 6,700 CBO 5,724 89,486 0,457 RFC 4,540 94,026 0,363 LCOM 3,469 97,495 0,277 CE 1,202 98,697 0,096 NPM 0,841 99,537 0,067 LOC 0, , , WMC є 83%.

71 CBO, RFC, LCOM 14%. 2,3 %. є WMC. CBO, RFC, LCOM є є. CE, NPM, LOC,., є. 97%, є,..,. - є ( = %) , % 1 0, ,18 43,7049 0, , ,59 1, , , ,80 0, , , ,98 0, , , ,32 0, , , ,08 0, , , ,06 0, ,

72 , є,,,, є. є,. є,., ' RFC, WMC, LOC, CE, NPM, LCOM, CBO. [145] є : R< 0.19, 0.20<R< 0.29, 0.30<R< 0.49, 0.50<R< 0.69, R> 0.70., є.,, є., ,. (2.2) є,.,

73 .,.. є : 1. : 1.1. є 73 R N d, M i RFC, WMC, LOC, CE, NPM, LCOM, CBO, 1.2. N d M i R ; M i M j R,. R, 0. 29,, N d M i. ; 1.3. R M i,m 1. R 0. 7, є, є, M i M1. 2. : R N d, ; M i rank i ; 2 rank i sum i R N d, ; M i 1 i 2 i rank = rank + rank. 3. sum rank i., є,, є. MS EбМОХ,, є є.., є (2.2).

74 (2.2) є є (2.3), [148], є (2.3) -, x... x x i i (2.7) i - i-., : 1) 0; 2) i 0. 1) 0, (2.3) є,, є., 0, ( ). (2.3) є, M. (2.3),. (2.3) є, M. (2.3), M,.,, 0, 0, є. i n

75 (2.3) є,. (2.3) ь,. є,. [11],, є (2.3)..3., є. є,. є,. ( 10) є 15., є,. 2) i- (2.3) i 0, є,. є 75 i 0 x. є,.., (2.3).,, є.,,. (2.3) i

76 ., ь є (2.3). ( ),. (2.2) є,,.., є,.,.,. M..,., ь є M. (2.2) є. є є, є. є є,., ь є. 76

77 , (2.2)., ,. (waterfall model) [149] є, /. ь є M. ь є,. (iteration model) [150], (КРТХО),. ь є M.,., [151], є ( ), : 1) ; 2) ; 3)., є

78 є M. ь є є. (spiral model) [152] є,. є. ь є є.,., ь ь -, є, -. є є : 1) ( є ); 2). є :, ( є,,, ) ; 78

79 ( ) M ; ( ), M, ; ( ), M ; ( ), є M, є є є ; M ( ). є., [8, 9] , є є, є. є є є є - є,, [8]. є

80 50, ,. : ,,, [49, 50, 59, 107, ]; 2. ; 3. є, є., ( ) є ( )... 4., є k def 80. k def,,,,,,. є, є k def, 0 k def 1 LOCdef kdef (2.8) LOC total

81 LOC new - ( ), k def LOC total -., є є, є. k def, (2.3), M, (2.2). M,,, , d, є N pred _ def Nopen _ def d 100% (2.9) N open _ def N pred _ def -, open def 81 N _ , 1, 2, (2.3). M , ,4,5,6,7. є -15,24%, 0, , 1, 2,. M , ,4,5,6,7. є +12,06%, 0,002.

82 , 1, 2,. M , ,4,5,6,7. є - 16,31%, 0, ,, 1, 2, 3,. M , , ,5,6,7. є +7,71%., 2, ,, 4,5,6,. M , , ,2,3,7. є -4,23%, 27, ,,,.2.2, 1,2,3,. M , , ,5,6,7. є -7,3%, 0, ,,, 1,2,3, 4,. M , , , ,6,7. є - 3,82%, 28, ,,, 4,5,6,7,.

83 83 M , , , ,2,3. є -5,67%, 30,25. 9.,,, 2,3,4,5,. M , , , ,6,7. є -1,40%, 12,69. 36, є є % -15,24 0,0060 1,2,3 12,06 0, ,31 0,0060 7,71 2,1500 3,4,5-4,23 27, ,30 0,0050-3,82 28,8000 6,7,8-5,67 30, ,40 12, ,31 є 8,19. 1,40 27, ,2305, є

84 16,31% є 8,19%, 1,40%..2.11,, є є - є, [9], є - є, - PROMISE (PRedictOr Models In Software Engineering) [90] є , 7000., [9], ( ),, , ,,. 1. LCOM, WMC 8, 9 (.. 5 ), (2.3). M , , 10. є 12,86%. 2. LCOM, LOC 8, 9 (.. 5 ),. M , , 10. є 4,05%. 3. LCOM, RFC 8, 9 (.. 5 ),.

85 85 M , , 10. є -8,39%. 4. LOC, WMC 11, 12 (.. 6 ),. M , , 13. є 8,17%. 5. LOC, CBO 11, 12 (.. 6 ),. M , , 13. є 30,15%. 6. LOC, RFC 11, 12 (.. 6 ),. M , , 13. є 28,33%. 7. RFC, WMC 14, 15 (.. 7 ),. M , , 16. є 8,31%. 8. RFC, CBO 14, 15 (.. 7 ),. M , , 16. є -12,36%. 9. RFC, CE 14, 15 (.. 7 ),. M , , 16. є 42,05%. 10. LOC, WMC 17, 18 (.. 8 ),

86 . M , , 19. є 8,61%. 11. LOC, WMC 17, 18 (.. 7 ),. M , , 19. є 6,06%. 12. LOC, NPM 17, 18 (.. 8 ),. M , , 19. є 9,61%. є є,. 2.12, 42,05% є 14,74%, 4,05% є є 8-19, % 1-12,86 2 4,05 3-8,39 4 8, , ,35 7 7, , , , , ,61. 42,05 є 14,74. 4,05

87 87 140,34 11, , (11,85) є , % є (.1.6.2) (.1.8.1) TRW (.1.8.2) ь, 1,40 8,19 16,31 ь, є - є 4,05 14,74 42,05 ь 2,73 11,47 29,18 11,27 19,53 14, Д8, 9]:,. є 11%,, TRW 49% 31%.

88 Ві ві я А і і і а і і ь ь, 2 ь, 3 ь, 4 ь, 5 ь, 6 ь TRW, 7 ь ь І, 20%. З І : 1) ; 2), є ; 3)

89 ; 4),. ( ) є : 1. є є (2.3). 1.1 є. є : , ; ,, є. 1.2 є є. є : є (2.3);, є. 2.1 є (2.2) є. 2.2 є (1.2)., [57-63, 151, 152] є (,, ).

90 90 1 є є (4) 2.1 (4) 2.2 (5), (5) є ь ь ь ь ь є. 3.1 є. 3.2 є (1.2).

91 3.3 є (1.3). є. 4. є. 4.1 є. 4.2 є. 4.3 є. є, (,,, ) , %, ( TRW). є, є. є, є,. є., -, є є -, є. є. 91

92 є : 1., ; 2. є ґ ; 3. є ; 4. є,...,,,.. є M 8-19.,

93 81%, 15%., 34%., є.., , є, -,.. 1..,, є.. є ґ. 2.., 8,3%.

94 ; є ;. 4., є,,, є 20%. є,,.. 5.,.. 94

95 95 3 ( ).,,. 1.6.,,.. [57-61, 138, 151], є. є, є [62, 63, 67, ]. є, , %. '.,,..

96 ,. 2.3, , , є є : є (, 3 4; 7 8); є (, 12 13); : WMC є 7 9; RFC є 4 133; LCOM є , WMC RFC LCOM

97 є,, ь * ( ) P ( ), - c i (i=1 n)., 10 P ( c 0 ) 0. 3, * P ( c 1 ) 0. 5, * P ( c 2 ) 0.1 P ( c 3 ) 0. 1., є,,,., M RFC, WMC, LOC, CE, NPM, LCOM, CBO, ,,... * *

98 є. є. є,.. є :,, (. 1.1), (. 1.4). є, [154, 155]. є, І, І. є :. є. ;,,.,,, i.,, P ( ) i. * 98 c i

99 3.2. є M RFC, WMC, LOC, CE, NPM, LCOM, CBO A pred 99 A base A, : A A A, A A 0. base A base A base pred base pred A base 1.4., є... A. 1.5., є N gr lg N, N. A.. A pred. 2.. A base

100 2.1. i (Т=0,1,,n) 2.2. Ф=1,,m) A base nbi A base nb k (k - ь ь, A pred np k. : nb k nb i ; N base nb k ; N pred np k n i m k i k A base m k P * k nbi ( ci ) nb k 3.2 nb i i, nb k k. C c c,..., c i,... c n P ( ) 0, 1 * k c i i- (Т=0 n). P ( ) 1; 3.2. j A base M k i 0 n i 0 ( c ) ( c ) P ( c ) 3.3 j n i 3.3. (Part of Defectiveness Components) * k i NDbase PDC 100% 3.4 N 3.4. k base * c i A pred

101 101 nd * k M ( c ) np nb k k k j k A pred 3.5, A pred ND * m 3.5. k 1 * nd k 3.6 A pred ED (t) ED( t) ND * Size l soft nd * l ; ED ( t) DD 3.7 result ED(t) -, (1), DD result, l. A pred * nd l, KLOC, KLOC 400, ND * 512, ED ( t) 512/ DD 0. 5 ( ) Gr =д8,9,10ж, nd 323, 323>280. select 10 k 8 : 10 * k result DD result, * 512 nd k k ED ( t) 0.47; ED ( t) DDresult ; A pred (Estimation of Number of not revealed defects) * EN( t) ND N ( t) 3.8 N rev (t) -, A pred ; rev

102 3.7. ER (t) (2) A base A base 2.2. A base 2.3. A pred , , A base A pred, -. i P ( ) (3.2) (3.4). * c i

103 j 103 A base (3.3). є (3.4), (3.5). є. є A base i (i= 0,1,,,,n) Abase A pred i A base (3.2) A base (3.4) 1- i A base (3.3) A pred (3.4), (3.5) 2- A pred (3.7) A pred (3.8) є є 1.1, є M RFC, WMC, LOC, CE, NPM, LCOM, CBO,

104 є є є A 1.2. A base A pred,. N base A base, N pred A pred. N base N 10%. N base DN base. DN base w, [145, 156] N base w(1 w) Nbase w (1 ) (3.9) N N base proj w t w (3.10) t -, (, P t ). є w. w є, є, є. N base, w, t P N base 2 t w(1 w) N proj 2 2 (3.11) N t w(1 w) w proj, є w, N base.

105 ,. A base M RFC, WMC, LOC, CE, NPM, LCOM, CBO A pred. 1.3 є 105. A base є. 1.4 є , M RFC, WMC, LOC, CE, NPM, LCOM, CBO. є, є. є,, є,. є, , 2.3.5, [8, 9, 16], є : 1.. є : 1.1. є є R M i,m 1 R N d, ; M i

106 R N d, < M i ' R M i,m 1,., R 0. 7,., M i M1 R N d,., є M i. 2.. (Complexity Indicator) CI k M... k n M, 1 1 n, n k,..., M 1,..., M - 1 kn- є.. [17] є R,, є N d CI R N d,. M i [90]. STATGRAPHICS PLUS [147] є,. 3.2., є R,, є N d CI R N d,. є M i

107 є,., [17], R N CI d, R N d, M i 1 0,029 CBO + 0,009 LCOM + 0,0282 CE 0,81 0,73 0,08 2 0,049 CBO + 0,008 LCOM + 0,015 RFC 0,84 0,71 0, WMC NPM LOC 0,76 0,36 0,40 4 0,036 CE + 0,001 LOC 0,62 0,48 0,14 5-0,015 WMC + 0,027 RFC 0,64 0,49 0, WMC RFC LCOM 0, ,20 7 0,009 RFC CE 0,55 0,46 0, RFC CE , RFC LOC , CE LOC ,34 є є 0,21,, є є N є Д145] N gr lg N (3.12) (Number Components) є

108 N 108 NCgr (3.13) N gr N gr NC gr.., A base A pred : 1. M ( c j ) є M c ). є ; ( j 2. * ( P ( ) 1) c i, ; 3. ( P ( ) 0).,. * c i

109 * k * nd, ND,, ; 5. PDC є.,, [58, 59, 63], є,,,. є., PDC 60%, 60%.. 60%. є ; 6. EN (t),., 50. 3, 50 3=150 /. 7 /, 50 7=350 /. є. 7., ER (t) є (,, ). є,.,,,

110 ..,, є,. є,,,,,,,. є,., є, , (3.8)-(3.13),,.

111 є (. 3.2), (3.1)-(3.8), : 1. M c ) ( j. * k c i P ( ) (3.2),, 111, є, є. 2. ь * nd k, * ND, є, EN (t), ER (t). 3. PDC є є., є - є, - PROMISE [90]. є : ,.

112 ( ) [145],,, є, 2 ( ) є ( ) [156].,., є є Д90Ж ', СЭЭЩ://МШНО.РШШРХО.МШЦ/Щ/ЩrШЦТЬОНКЭК/аТФТ/бКХКЧ , ,94 3 СЭЭЩ://МШНО.РШШРХО.МШЦ/Щ/ЩrШЦТЬОНКЭК/аТФТ/бОrМОЬ ,32 4 СЭЭЩ://МШНО.РШШРХО.МШЦ/Щ/ЩrШЦТЬОНКЭК/аТФТ/ХЮМОЧО , , , , ,62

113 ,91 10 СЭЭЩ://МШНО.РШШРХО.МШЦ/Щ/ЩrШЦТЬОНКЭК/аТФТ/МКЦОХ, ,42 11 СЭЭЩ://МШНО.РШШРХО.МШЦ/Щ/ЩrШЦТЬОНКЭК/аТФТ/МКЦОХ, ,42 12 СЭЭЩ://МШНО.РШШРХО.МШЦ/Щ/ЩrШЦТЬОНКЭК/аТФТ/бКХКЧ , ,93 14 СЭЭЩ://МШНО.РШШРХО.МШЦ/Щ/ЩrШЦТЬОНКЭК/аТФТ/ЩШТ ,13 15 hээщ://мшно.ршшрхо.мшц/щ/щrшцтьонкэк/атфт/хюмочо ,14 : , ++, Java є., ,. 2.3,..,, І , 625 СЭЭЩ://МШНО.РШШРХО.МШЦ/Щ/ЩrШЦТЬОНКЭК/аТФТ/бКХКЧ 2.6. STATGRAPHICS PLUS [143] =( RFC LOC) 100). A base 300. :, 8, (..1 ); (..2,.3 ) (..4 ) A pred, є 585 ; -, є,,,

114 , ,48%, 1,33%, 8,83%. -5,83%, 3,01 8,37%. 3,10%, -7,89 9,88%. І , 1213 СЭЭЩ://МШНО.РШШРХО.МШЦ/Щ/ЩrШЦТЬОНКЭК/аТФТ/бКХКЧ A base 100. A pred, є 810,, ,76%, 3,22%, 8,77%. -2,85%, 3,09 8,94%. -0,40%, 0,40 0,84%. І , 1596 СЭЭЩ://МШНО.РШШРХО.МШЦ/Щ/ЩrШЦТЬОНКЭК/аТФТ/бОrМОЬ 1.4. A pred A base 200., є 388,,..7. 2,55%, 1,51%, 19,39%. 2,54%, 1,17 18,86%. -2,25%, 2,61 8,70%. І , 414 СЭЭЩ://МШНО.РШШРХО.МШЦ/Щ/ЩrШЦТЬОНКЭК/аТФТ/ХЮМОЧО 2.2. A base 120.

115 A pred 115, є 127,,..8. 4,17%, -10,31%, 23,89%. 0,66%, -6,47 18,73%. 4,34%, -4,29 19,76%. І , 79 A base 200. A pred, є 460,,..9. є (79,. 3.3), (0,81,. 3.3)., є. 5.. є. -5,88%, -8,91%, 30,48%. 19,23%, -16,60 41,49%. -33,18%, 31,42%. І , A base A pred, є 6718,,..10.,, є. 5.

116 -7,69%, 7,18%, 13,84%. -7,33%, 4,91 15,55%. 10,38%, -12,78 26,51%. І , 1640, A base A pred 116, є 8274,, ,33%, - 5,15%, 10,70%. 3,10%, -5,41 14,38%. 24,86%, -26,18 26,18%. І , 338, A base 200. A pred, є 545,, ,88%, 5,29%, 12,28%. 4,42%, 5,98 9,98%. -3,60%, 0,37 21,30%. І , 522, A base 100. A pred, є 508,

117 , ,00%, 7,11%, 17,61%. -2,33%, 6,49 18,04%. 3,26%, 2,49 5,43%. І , 500, A base 200. A pred 117, є 765,, ,57%, 6,06%, 13,38%. 4,52%, 6,35 13,57%. -7,42%, 9,41 14,72%. І , 670, A base 500. A pred, є 1245,, ,44%, 11,07%, 14,16%. -1,14%, 9,76 15,97%. -9,46%, 15,98 16,53%. І , 531, СЭЭЩ://МШНО.РШШРХО.МШЦ/Щ/ЩrШЦТЬОНКЭК/аТФТ/бКХКЧ 2.5. A base 200.

118 A pred 118, є 603,, ,03%, - 1,96%, 6,89%. 2,01%, -2,93 7,91%. 2,84%, -2,43 7,33%. І , 114, СЭЭЩ://МШНО.РШШРХО.МШЦ/Щ/ЩrШЦТЬОНКЭК/аТФТ/ЭШЦМКЭ 6.0. A base 200. A pred, є 658,,..17. є, (0, )., є ,44%, 10,36%. - 18,89%, 13,32%. - 18,85%, 8,10 15,90%. І , 496, СЭЭЩ://МШНО.РШШРХО.МШЦ/Щ/ЩrШЦТЬОНКЭК/аТФТ/ЩШТ 2.5. A base 100. A pred, є 286,, ,69%, 9,38%, 16,37%. -12,83%, 8,96 17,29%. -7,92%, 5,50 12,76%.

119 І , 632, A base 140. A pred 119, є 201,, ,30%, - 4,68%, 8,63%. 6,67%, -2,65 9,41%. 7,74%, -7,64 12,40%.,, є 30,48%, 32,30%., (79,. 3.3), (0,81,. 3.3).. 0,81 є 30 %

120 3.4 - %.% 2 є...% є.. 1 0,69 0,73-5,48 1,33 119,63 10,94 8,83 20,11 4,48 2 1,28 1,33-3,76 3,22 101,12 10,06 8,77 34,56 5,88 3 2,81 2,74 2,55 1,51 613,57 24,77 19,39 240,06 15,49 4 1,75 1,68 4,17-10,31 790,08 28,11 23,89 325,45 18,04 5 0,16 0,17-5,88-8, ,45 32,30 30,48 194,02 13,93 6 0,24 0,26-7,69 7,18 275,80 16,61 13,84 56,79 7,54 7 0,17 0,15 13,33-5,15 240,00 15,49 10,70 14,57 3,82 8 0,54 0,51 5,88 5,29 646,94 25,44 12,28 406,39 20,16 9 0,82 0,82 0,00 7,11 441,01 21,00 17,61 102,19 10, ,58 0,56 3,57 6,06 283,70 16,84 13,38 141,54 11, ,40 0,41-2,44 11,07 250,90 15,84 14,16 121,98 11, ,68 0,66 3,03-1,96 56,55 7,52 6,89 12,90 3, ,29 0,36-19,44 10,36 146,17 12,09 10,36 146,17 12, ,17 1,34-12,69 9,38 246,70 15,71 16,37 66,80 8, ,67 2,61 2,30-4,68 82,07 9,06 8,63 29,44 5,43 є 6,17 6,04 306,73 16,39 13,22 122,78 9, % є є.% 2...% ,83 3,01 101,16 10,06 8,37 21,60 4, ,85 3,09 103,98 10,20 8,94 33,68 5, ,54 1,17 709,85 26,64 18,86 247,18 15, ,66-6,47 623,51 24,97 18,73 314,56 17, ,23-16, ,28 41,17 41,49 249,39 15, ,33 4,91 347,55 18,64 15,55 129,77 11, ,10-5,41 275,14 16,59 14,38 97,55 9, ,42 5,98 553,16 23,52 9,98 357,72 18, ,33 6,49 419,63 20,48 18,04 49,43 7, ,52 6,35 322,88 17,97 13,57 135,09 11, ,14 9,76 419,43 20,48 15,97 217,07 14, ,01-2,93 74,46 8,63 7,91 20,41 4, ,89 13,32 127,13 11,28 13,32 127,13 11, ,83 8,96 278,67 16,69 17,29 59,96 7, ,67-2,65 164,96 12,84 9,45 52,87 7,27 є 5,37 5,75 322,97 17,07 13,60 133,14 10, (79

121 . 3.3), (0,81,. 3.3),. є. 0,81 є 40% є є. 0,81 є 30% , %, % %.% є...% є ,61 46,18 3,10-7,89 161,27 12,70 9,88 115,15 10, ,37 98,77-0,40 0,40 5,81 2,41 0,84 2,85 1, ,51 75,20-2,25 2,61 148,21 12,17 8,70 58,23 7, ,56 58,04 4,34-4,29 859,37 29,31 19,76 129,85 11, ,23 15,31-33,18 31,42 96,05 9,80 31,42 96,05 9, ,00 13,59 10,38-12,78 837,20 28,93 26,51 297,80 17, ,51 10,82 24,86-26,18 133,93 11,57 26,18 133,93 11, ,40 25,31-3,60 0,37 794,68 28,19 21,30 341,00 18, ,21 32,16 3,26-2,49 46,11 6,79 5,43 15,70 3, ,47 21,03-7,42 9,41 256,95 16,03 14,72 89,56 9, ,69 17,33-9,46 15,98 362,47 19,04 16,53 339,79 18, ,53 48,16 2,84-2,43 75,01 8,66 7,33 12,50 3, ,00 22,18-18,85 8,10 389,47 19,73 15,90 202,32 14, ,57 65,78-7,92 5,50 304,36 17,45 12,76 44,73 6, ,04 63,15 7,74-7,64 369,42 19,22 12,40 182,26 13,50 є 7,60 7,58 338,88 16,59 14,16 140,41 10,61 ь ( ), ( ) ь.

122 122 Кі ь і ь ів 1,8 1,6 1,4 1,2 1 0,8 0,6 0,4 0, З АІС ь ь. 300 Кі ь і ь ів З АІС ( %)., 5,. 3.7.

123 123 % ів З АІС , % - є - -, % є - є - 6,17 0,00 19,44 6,04 1,33 11,07 13,22 6,89 23,89 5,37 0,66 18,89 5,75 1,17 13,32 13,60 7,91 18,86 7,60 0,40 24,86 7,58 0,37 26,18 14,16 0,84 26,51 2 % є 9 % 20 %,, : 2%, є 9%, 20%., /, [ , 157],

124 , % є / є ( ь ) ( ), ( ) ( ) а ві я в % М 3.6-1, 2 є ь, 3, 4, 5 З, ,,, є,

125 / є. є : - 2%, 7%, 5%,., є. є є є., є,,, є., ь, І є. є, є є - є.. 0,81 є, 30%. 3, є : 1., є

126 ,., є. 2.,. - 2%, 7%, 5%,, є,.. 3.,,,,.. 0,81 є 30%. 4.,.. 126

127 127 4, є - -. є -. [158],,. є є, є, є є. є,,. є,,. є : 1. є,.

128 2. є, є ; 3. ; 4. є ; 5. є є ; 6. ; 7. є [159], (. Conceptio - ) є,,,. є, ,.. є [21], є, є. ь є, є. ь

129 є,. ь є є,, [159]. Ч ь є,, ь І ь І , 2., , , : [93], [59, 62, 95, 96],

130 [97, 98], [99-103] [51, ] І. IEEE 1061 [111], є [107, ] [7, 8, 9, 10, 16, 17] [90, , 114, 143, 145],,., є...1.1, Д48, 107, 113, 125, 126Ж Д7, 8Ж, Д8, 9, 11]., Д17Ж. 2 3, є.. є,. є. є [47, 49, 56, 58, 130

131 60, 64] [ ],., є : [9, 18] ;. 2.5 [18] ; [17] ; 3 [10, 19] ;,, є.. є VТЬЮКХ FШбPrШ 9.0. є : 1., є ; 2., є ; 3., є ; 4.,. 131

132 , ,. 4.2, є. є. є., є, є ,. 4.2, є, є, ,, є. (2.6), є є (2.5), (2.5), (1.2).

133 133 ь І І 1. (. 1,2,3 ) - 2. (.4,8 ) ? 5. (.6,8 ) 6. 7.? 8., (.8,9 ) - - -, ь ь, 4.2 -

134 -, [57-63, 151, 152], є (,, ) ,, є -. є є. ь є є,. - є. є, 3. є,.. є,,., 134

135 , ,. є. є ,, є. ь є є. є,. є,, ь є,.,. є ,. 4.3, є IDEF (Integrated computer-aided manufacturing DEFinition). [160] IDEF є,. є є, 135

136 , ',, '.,,,. IDEF є IDEF0, IDEF1.. IDEF0 є, є, 'є, IDEF ISO/IEC :2001 ISO/IEC :2003 ISO/IEC :2003 ISO/IEC 25010:2011 ISO/IEC '....,. є, є.

137 є є C1 I1 I2 1 2 O1 M1 2 ISO/IEC M2 3 ISO/IEC O2 M3 4 M4 O : 1 ; 2 ; 1, ISO/IEC :2001, ISO/IEC :2003, ISO/IEC :2003, ISO/IEC 25010:2011; 2 ; ; ; ; 1, 2, 3, ; 4, ; 1 ; 2 ; є,

138 ,,.. 2.5,. 3.1., , є є є.,, І 4.5 -

139 , є., є є. є.,,..,..,. є,.,.. 4.2, :,,,. є.,... - є 11%. - є 139

140 ,.,, є,. є 9%. є., є 1000., є є - є,., є - є,. є, є. (waterfall model) [149]. є,. є. є. (iteration model) [150]. є. є.,,,. є 140

141 , ь,,., є : 1. ( 11%, 20% ) є є ; 2. ( 9%), ; 3. ; 4. ; є VТЬЮКХ FШбPrШ є, є,, є.

142 ( ) (, ), є :.,.1.4.2,, [ ], (HTML, CSV, XML).

143 . EМХТЩЬО MОЭrТМЬ PХЮРТЧ Д120Ж є, є є Eclipse Metrics Plugin., Rational ClearQuest [161], Borland StarTeam [162], Ticket Tracking [163], Mozilla Bugzilla [164], Trac, TUTOS. Bugzilla Mozilla ( Perl,, Mozilla Public License). Web- є є

144 (HTML, CSV, XML) Eclipse Metrics Plugin 4.9 Eclipse Metrics Plugin

145 Web - Bugzilla Mozilla ( ),. PVCS Version Manager [122], Microsoft Visual Source Safe [123], SoftBench CM, SoftStatic, Development Manager Hewlett-Packard [124], RCS, CVS, Subversion (SVN), Mercurial, Git, Bazaar. Subversion (, FreeBSD, Linux, Mac OS X, Windows, Apache License).

146 ь ь, І ,. є є..

147 є є, ( 1,. 4.6.) ( 2). 3 є,..,.. dbf, Visual FoxPro 9.0. є ( 4). є є,.,,, є. є є ( 6).,, ( 8), ( 9). є

148 , є ( 5) ( 7),. є ( ) є : 1. ; ( ) є : 4. ; 5. ; 6. ; 7. ; 8.. ( ) є : 9. : 10. ; 11. ;

149 12.,, є : : є. 1 є. 2 є. 3 є є. 4 є. 5 є. 6 є. 7 є є. 8 є (Complexity Index)

150 CI k M... k n M 1 1 n, n, 150 M 1,..., M - k,..., 1 kn - є. 9 є є ,12, є є є є є. 16 є є є. є , є : 1 є...1..

151 2 є є є, є :,,.,,, є, ,,., є.,,, є є «є» «

152 є»,., є,,,, -. «є»,,,.,,.,, ; ; ;,,,, є. є, є. ( ), [165, 166]

153 , є., ( ) / , ( ).,.,,. -,,,,,,,.. (,,,,, ); (,,, ). є : 1. «З» є. є,,.,,, ; 2.. є, є є. є є. є,., ; 3.. є. 153

154 є ( / ) ; 4.. є. є.,,,. Case- : ; ; ;..,. 4.2,.,. 4.2, :, 2.3.7,, ; ; (2.3) , є (2.5) ;, 154

155 . (2.2) є. ь,,..,. : ( ), є ; ,, ;..,.3.4,. ь,. 4.2, -,.,,,. ь..,.. 12,8%. 155

156 11,2%. ( )... 8%.,, 6,5%,., є., ,. є 7%,, 8,8%.. 10,3%.,.

157 ( 6,3%) ( 8,6%). є,. є.,. 8., є - -, є,,, 7%,. 8% , є. є - -. : 1., є,. є. 2., є

158 . 3., є,. 4., «є». 5. є -, 7%,. 8%. 158

159 -, є,,. є.,, є є. : 1.,,.,,. є, є,.,. 2. є.,,. 159

160 3.. є,. 4.., є,,. 2,73%, є 11,47%, 29,18%. 20% ( TRА). 5., є,. 2%, є 9%, 20% , «є»,,. 160

161 8. є є.,, 7%,. 8%. - є,. 12,8% 10,3%. 11,2% 6,3%.. 161

162 1.,.. Д Ж /..,..,.. //. 6(47). :, ,.. Д Ж /..,.. //. 76..:, ,.. Д Ж /..,..,.. //. 01 (77)..:, ,.. Д Ж /.. //. 02 (78)..:, ,.. Д Ж /..,.. // : (35) є.. /.. є,.. // ,. 1, ,.. Д Ж /.. //. 5(57). :, ,.. Д Ж /..,.. // 162

163 . 07 (83)..:, ,... Д Ж /..,.. //. 4(56). :, ,.. Д Ж /..,.. // : (40) ,.. Д Ж /.. //. 5(64). :, ,.. Д Ж /.. //. 5(69). :, ,... /..,.. // - TAAPSD : ,.. Д Ж /... // :... :, ,.. Д Ж /.. // - «163

164 » TAAPSD : ,.. /..,... // :... :, ,.. Д Ж /.. // :... :, Maevsky, D. A. A method of a priori software reliability evaluation [Electronic resource] / D. A. Maevsky, S. A. Yaremchuk, L. N. Shapa // Reliability: Theory & Applications Vol. 9. 1(31). p Access mode: Yaremchuk, S. A. The Software Reliability Increase Method / S. A. Yaremchuk, D. A. Maevsky // Studies in Sociology of Science (2). p Access mode: DOI: 20.,.. Д Ж /.. //, :... :, є.. :... /.. є ;... -., /..... :,

165 23... /.... :, /.... : -, : /..,.... :, : /.... :, Д Ж : Anthes G. H. IRS Project Failures Cost Taxpayers $50B Annually / G. H. Anthes // Computerworld VШХ. 30, 42. P /... : -, Neumann P. G. Computer-Related Risks / P. G. Neumann. Addison-Wesley, p :.. /..,.. є -.. :, /.... :, /.... : -, /.,. // [ Ж : СЭЭЩ://СОХЩinform.ru/ lassif_inf_system_po_priznaku_struk_zadach.htm. 165

166 36.. /. // PC АООФ RОЯТОа // ,.. /... // : Д... Ж, є є. Д Ж : ua/uk/finances/macroeconomics-ukraine/v-ukran-zarestrovano-blshe-mliona-pdprimstv /.. // ISO/IEC : :. 42. ISO/IEC : :. 43. ISO/IEC : :. 44. ISO/IEC 25010:2011.Systems and software Quality Requirements and Evaluation (SQuaRE) System and software quality models. [Electronic resource]. Access mode: standards. ru/document/ aspx :90... Д Ж : : : -, /.... :,

167 48.. /.,.,... :, /..,..,..,...,, c /..,..,... :.. -, /. // IEC 61513:2001 Nuclear power plants - Instrumentation and control systems important for safety - General requirements for systems ( - -, ). 53. IEC 60880:2010 Software for computers in the safety systems of nuclear power stations ( ). 54. IEEE Std. 982:2005 IEEE Standard Dictionary of Measures of the Software Aspects of Dependability. 55. IEEE Std :1990 IEEE Standard Glossary of Software Engineering Terminology :.... /..,..,.... :, /... : &, r /... :, /... :,

168 /.,.,... :, ,,, /... :, : - /... :, /... :, /..,.... :, Haag S. Quality Function Deployment. Usage in Software Development / S. Haag, H. K. Raja, L. L. Sekade // CШЦЦ. П ACM Goel A. L. Software reliability models: Assumptions, Limitations and Applicability / A. L. Goel, K. Okumoto // IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering : Д Ж / [..,..,...] ;....,... [..], Lyu M. R. Handbook of Software Reliability Engineering / M. R. Lyu. McGraw-Hill Company, p. 69. Moranda P. B. Final Report of Software Reliability Study / P. B Moranda, J. Jelinski // McDonnel Douglas Astronautic Company RОЩШrЭ Wolverton R. W. Assessment of Software Reliability / R. W. Wolverton, C. J. Shick // Annual Reliability and Maintainability Symp P Sukert C. A. An investigation of software reliability models / C. A. Sukert // Proc. Annual Reliability and Maintainability Symp P Musa J. D. Validity of Execution time theory of software reliability/ J. D. Musa // IEEE Trans. on reliability P

169 73. Levendel Y. Reliability analysis of large software systems: defect data modeling / Y. Levendel // IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering P Duan J. T. Lourning Curve Approach to Reliability Monitoring / J. T. Duan // IEEE Trans. on Aerospace P Musa J. D. Logarithmic Poisson Time Model for Software Reliability Measurement / J.D. Musa, K. A. Okumoto // Proc. Seventh International Conference on Software Engineering P Moranda P. B. Probability-Based Models for the Failures During Burn / P. B. Moranda // Joint National Meeting ORSA Yamada S. S-shaped software reliability grows modeling for software error detection / S. Yamada, M. Ohba, S. Osaki // IEEE Trans. Reliability P Musa J. D. Software Reliability Models: Concepts, Classification, Comparisons, and Practice / J. D. Musa, K. Okumoto // Electronic Systems Effectiveness and Life Cycle Costing, NATO ASI Series, F P Amrit L. Software reliability models: Assumptions, limitations, and applicability / Amrit L., Goel //I EEE Transactions on Software Engineering P Albrecht A. J. Measuring Application Development Productivity / A. J. Albrecht // Proceedings of the JШТЧЭ S R /GUID /IB AЩЩХТМКЭТШЧ Development Symposium P International Function Point Users Group Д Ж : Jones C. Applied Software Measurement: Global Analysis of Productivity and Quality Category. Quality Control Publisher / C. Jones. McGraw Hill Osborne Media, Gaffney J. Estimating Software SТгО ПrШЦ CШЮЧЭЬ ШП EбЭОrЧКХЬ, GОЧОrКХТгКЭТШЧ of Function Points, / J. Gaffney, R. Werling // Software Productivity Consortium document number SPC

170 84. ISO/IEC 20926:2003. Software Engineering IFPUG 4.1 Unadjusted functional size measurement method. International Organization for Standardization, Vogelezang F.W. One year experience with COSMIC-FFP / F.W. Vogelezang, A.J.E. Dekkers // Software Measurement European Forum Rome (Italy). 86. Akiyama F. An example of software system debugging / F. Akiyama // Information Processing P Gaffney J. R. Estimating the Number of Faults in Code / J. R. Gaffney // IEEE Trans. Software Eng P Compton T. Prediction and control of Ada software defects / T. Compton, C. Withrow // Systems and Software P Lipow M. Number of Faults per Line of CODE / M. Lipow / IEEE Trans. Software Engineering Vol. 8, 4. P The PROMISE Repository of empirical software engineering data Д Ж : GХТЛ. CШЦЩОЭТЭТЯО EЧРТЧООrТЧР: HКЧНЛШШФ ПШr SвЬЭОЦЬ EЧРТЧООrТЧР, Requirements Engineering, and Software Engineering using Planguage /. Glib. Amsterdam. : Netherlands: Elsevir, p. 92. ISO/IEC :1993. Information technology Vocabulary Part 1: Fundamental terms :, /.... : -, /... :, Dijkstra E. On the Cruelty of Really Teaching Computer Science / E. Dijkstra // Communications of the ACM P

171 97. Miller G. The Magical Number Seven, Plus or Minus Two: Some Limits on Our Capacity for Processing Information / G. Miller // The Psychological Reviev P Simon H. The Sciences of the Artificial / H. Simon. Cambridge : The MIT Press, p :. /... :.., /.. //. ( ) /.... :, /..,.... :, /..,... :, Ε.Α. / Ε.Α., Η..,... :, /.... : - -, /.. // , McCabe T.A. Complexity Measure / T.A. McCabe // IEEE Transaction on Software Engineering v. SE 2, 4. P A. / A,.,... :, c. 171

172 /.. // /.... :, IEEE Std. 1061:1998. IEEE Computer Society: Standard for Software Quality Metrics Methodology, p TIOBE Software: Tiobe Index Д Ж : /.... :, Fenton N.E. Software Metrics: A Rigorous and Practical Approach / N.E. Fenton, S.L Pfleeger // International Thomson Computer Press nd ed. PWS Publishing. P SЮЛЯОrЬТШЧ CХОКrCКЬО /.,.,. // [ Ж : Chidamber S. A Metrics Suite for Object-Oriented Design / S. Chidamber, C. Kemerer // IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, , P Ndepend Д Ж : C# 5.0.NET 4.5 /... :, Resource Standard Metrics Д Ж : Eclipse Metrics Plugin Д Ж : IBM Rational Telelogic Logiscope Д Ж :: PVCS Version Manager Д Ж : 172

173 123. Visual SourceSafe 6.0 Solution Center [ ] : HP SoftBench Software Д Ж : Kitchenham B.A. An evaluation of some design metrics / B.A. Kitchenham, L.M. Pickard, S.J. Linkman // Software Engineering Vol. 5, No.1. P Gao K. Comprehensive Empirical Study of Count Models for Software Fault Prediction / K. Gao, T. Khoshgoftaar // IEEE Transactions on Reliability Vol. 56. P Khoshgoftaar T. Software Quality Classifcation Modeling Using The SPRINT Decision Tree Algorithm / T. M Khoshgoftaar, N. Seliya // Proceedings of the 14th IEEE International Conference on Tools with Artifcial Intelligence, Washington, USA P Koru A. An investigation of the effect of module size on defect prediction using static measures / A. Koru, H. Liu // Proceedings of the 2005 workshop on Predictor models in sofэакrо ОЧРТЧООrТЧР. PRЇMISE 05, New York, USA P Ma Y. Statistical framework for the prediction of fault proneness / Y. Ma, L. Guo, B. Cukic // Advances in machine learning application in software engineering Idea Group Inc P Guo L. Robust Prediction of Fault-Proneness by Random Forests / L. Guo, Y. Ma, B. Cukic // Proceedings of the 15th International Symposium on Software Reliability Engineering, Washington, USA, IEEE Computer Society P Drummond C. Class Imbalance, and Cost Sensitivity: Why Under-sampling beats Over-sampling / C. Drummond, R. Holte // In Workshop on Learning from Imbalanced Datasets, Washington, USA P Drummond C. Severe class imbalance: Why better algorithms are not the answer / C. Drummond, R. Holte // Proceedings of the 16th European Conference of Machine Learning. Portugal, Springer P

174 133. Yuan X. An Application of Fuzzy Clustering to Software Quality Prediction / X. Yuan, T. Khoshgoftaar, Allen E. // Proceedings of the 3th IEEE Symposium on Application-Specifc Systems and Software Engineering Technology, Washington, USA, IEEE Computer Society P Mahaweerawat A. Software fault prediction using fuzzy clustering and radial basis function network / A. Mahaweerawat, P. Sophasathit, C. Lursinsap // In International conference on intelligent technologies, Vietnam P Sahraoui H. Extending Software Quality Predictive Models Using Domain Knowledge / H. Sahraoui, M. Boukadoum // Proceedings of the 5th International ECOOP Workshop on Quantitative Approaches in Object-Oriented Software Engineering, Budapest P Wang Q. Extract Rules from Software Quality Prediction Model Based on Neural Network / Q. Wang, B. Yu, J. Zhu // Proceedings of the 16th IEEE International Conference on Tools with Artifcial Intelligence, Washington, USA, IEEE Computer Society P Thwin M. Application of neural networks for software quality prediction using Object-oriented metrics / Thwin M. M. T., Quah T.-S. // Journal of systems and software Vol. 76, No. 2. P ,.. MatLab Д Ж /..,.. //. : Munson J. C. The use of software complexity metrics in software reliability modeling / J. C. Munson, T. M Khoshgoftaar // Software Reliability Engineering Proceedings International Symposium P Fenton N. E. A Critique of Software Defect Prediction Models / N. Fenton, M. Neil // IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng Vol. 25, 5. P /.,.... :,

175 142. Д Ж : СЭЭЩ://НТМ.КМКНОЦТМ.rЮ/НТМ.ЧЬП/ОЧМИЦКЭСОЦКЭТМЬ/3687/ /.... : -, :.. /.,.... :, /.... :, , /.,.,... :, Statgraphics Statistical Analysis and Data Visualization Software. Д Ж : /... :, Winston R. Managing the Development of Large Software Systems / R. Winston // Proceedings of IEEE WESCON P Scrum: Succeeding with Agile: Software Development Using Scrum /... :, /... :, : /... :, ,.. Д Ж /..,.. // :, /.... :,

176 :. /.... :, : /... :, :... / , Д Ж : Д Ж : , Д Ж : Rational ClearQuest and Rational ClearQuest ALM Download appliance [ ] : Why choose StarTeam Д Ж : Ticket Tracking System Д Ж : Bugzilla Main Page Д Ж : /.... :, ,,, /.... :,

177 177 1.,,,., [6, 13]. є, є,, ( )

178 ,1 15,4 17,2 15, ,3 12,0 13,3 11, ,1 9,3 10,2 9, ,3 7,2 7,9 7, ,9 5,6 6,1 5, ,7 4,4 4,7 4, ,8 3,4 3,6 3, ,1 2,6 2,8 2, ,5 2,0 2,1 2, ,0 1,6 1,6 1, ,6 1,2 1,3 1, ,3 1,0 1,0 1, ,7 65,7 71,8 67, , , , , , , , , ,,,,,,, S-, S-,,., [2]. є є.5.

179 S ,01 8,07 8,06 8,01 7,95 13,09 14,77 8,00 7,38 2,00 8, ,64 6,65 6,50 6,55 6,51 10,47 7,52 5,73 6,35 4,52 2, ,51 5,48 5,24 5,36 5,34 6,28 5,06 4,71 5,58 5,47 2, ,57 4,51 4,23 4,39 4,37 4,54 3,82 4,10 4,98 5,53 2, ,79 3,72 3,41 3,59 3,58 3,59 3,08 3,69 4,49 5,13 2, ,15 3,06 2,75 2,93 2,94 1,72 2,58 3,38 4,09 4,53 2, ,61 2,52 2,22 2,40 2,40 1,27 2,22 3,13 3,76 3,86 1, ,16 2,08 1,79 1,96 1,97 1,07 1,95 2,94 3,47 3,21 1, ,80 1,71 1,44 1,61 1,61 1,03 1,73 2,78 3,23 2,62 1, ,49 1,41 1,16 1,31 1,32 1,15 1,56 2,64 3,02 2,11 1, ,24 1,16 0,94 1,08 1,08 0,93 1,43 2,52 2,83 1,68 1, ,03 0,96 0,76 0,88 0,89 0,87 1,31 2,42 2,67 1,33 1,37 S ,33 38,5 40,07 39,96 46,01 47,03 46,04 51,85 41,99 30,3, % 13, , , , , , , , ,80 57,02 43,97 0-1,6-8,3-4,6-4,86 +9,54 +11,98 +9,62 +23,45-0,02-27,85

180 .5 - є 13, , , , , ,80 6 S- 43,97 7 S- 57, , , , , - S. 12 ь, є. [5]..6..7,.8,.9. є

181 S ,94 16,98 28, ,39 13,90 15, ,94 11,77 12, ,47 10,21 10, ,47 9,01 8, ,73 8,06 7, ,16 7,30 6, ,70 6,66 4, ,31 6,13 4, ,99 5,68 3, ,71 5,29 2, ,47 4,95 2,27 200,86 168,31 191, S 80 9,84 7,46 15, ,96 6,54 8, ,68 5,83 6, ,92 5,26 5, ,40 4,79 4, ,02 4,39 3,77

182 ,72 4,06 3, ,48 3,77 2, ,28 3,53 2, ,11 3,31 1, ,97 3,12 1, ,84 2,94 1,12 50,93 45,89 79, S 15 7,10 8,89 10, ,02 6,27 5, ,10 4,85 4, ,55 3,96 4, ,18 3,34 3, ,90 2,89 3, ,68 2,55 2, ,51 2,28 2, ,37 2,06 2, ,25 1,88 1, ,14 1,73 1, ,05 1,60 1, ,97 1,49 1, ,90 1,39 1, ,83 1,31 1, ,78 1,23 0, ,72 1,17 0, ,67 1,11 0,69 80,23 49,62 56, є - S 1 168, , , , , , , , ,

183 4. є : 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. є,, є є S 8. S S 19. -

184 TIOBE Software Google, Google Blogs, Yahoo!, Wikipedia, MSN, YouTube, Bing, Amazon, Baidu C % 2 Java % є - є 3 Objective-C % є - є 4 C % є - є 5 PHP % є - є 6 C# % є - є 7 (Visual) % Basic є - є 8 Python % є - є 9 Perl % 10 JavaScript % є - є є - є

185 є є є wmc dit noc cbo rfc lcom ca ce npm lcom3 loc ,3842-0,0654 0,0150 0,2175 0,5969 0,3492 0,0222 0,3880 0,2627-0,0402 0, ,2246-0,1824-0,0083 0,1242 0,2977 0,2455 0,0278 0,1958 0,1438-0,0723 0, ,4966 0,1053-0,0040 0,1899 0,5727 0,3862-0,0235 0,4188 0,4333-0,1987 0, ,5261-0,1325 0,0296 0,3103 0,6860 0,3787 0,1216 0,4377 0,4553-0,1378 0, ,2125 0,3239 0,0000 0,0788 0,2891 0,1813 0,0140 0,1516 0,1814-0,3868 0, ,2997-0,0160 0,0606 0,2957 0,4508 0,1406 0,1156 0,0000 0,2033-0,0755 0, ,2320-0,0022-0,0290 0,1333 0,3720 0,1160 0,0789 0,2788 0,1141-0,0818 0, ,0441 0,1377-0,0201-0,0171 0,1293-0,0169-0,1140 0,3142 0,0336 0,0441 0, ,3256 0,1312-0,0191 0,0669 0,4958 0,2012-0,0501 0,4124 0,2788-0,0958 0, ,6045 0,0021 0,0043 0,2775 0,6718 0,4918 0,1757 0,4615 0,5607-0,0805 0, ,5620 0,0333-0,0153 0,2710 0,6535 0,5003 0,1796 0,5203 0,4871-0,0872 0, ,1287-0,0472 0,1667 0,2510 0,1115 0,0494 0,2340 0,0638 0,1243 0,0451 0, ,4122-0,0448 0,1762 0,1796 0,4439 0,4749 0,0891 0,3789 0,4060-0,0279 0, ,3051-0,0141 0,1456 0,4631 0,2796 0,2409 0,4235 0,1990 0,2731-0,0524 0, ,4482 0,0506 0,1656 0,2583 0,4287 0,4355 0,1921 0,3010 0,4358-0,0616 0, ,2481 0,4851 0,0000 0,2461-0,0270-0,0914-0,6547 0,3658-0,4975 0,3496 0, ,2972-0,0895-0,0624 0,2952 0,2929 0,2576-0,1579 0,3030 0,0988-0,0559 0, ,0046 0,0303-0,0438-0,2572 0,0931 0,0413 0,0926-0,2818 0,1126 0,2257-0, ,8285 0,0174 0,0637 0,6994 0,8650 0,8965 0,3526 0,7381 0,7935-0,0917 0, ,5045-0,0136 0,2364 0,4226 0,5393-0,0034 0,2539 0,4825 0,5078 0,0046 0, ,4112-0,0202-0,0160 0,3034 0,5095 0,4940 0,0684 0,4571 0,3055-0,0732 0, ,4647 0,1317-0,0412 0,5315 0,6913 0,3733 0,4521 0,6074 0,7236-0,0923 0, ,4996 0,0244-0,0432 0,6626 0,6870 0,2761 0,6177 0,6337 0,7204-0,1018 0, ,4651 0,0382-0,0538 0,6477 0,6984 0,5052 0,5937 0,6392 0,6480-0,0753 0, ,4980 0,0237-0,0299 0,6494 0,6534 0,3266 0,6151 0,5795 0,6546-0,0599 0, ,1177 0,0605-0,0219 0,1746 0,1899 0,2254 0,1563 0,1937 0,1560 0,0271 0, ,7200-0,0624 0,1370 0,6296 0,5825 0,7346 0,5453 0,4776 0,7152-0,0443 0, ,7610-0,0492 0,2300 0,6795 0,6906 0,7100 0,5288 0,5999 0,7041-0,1072 0, ,2479 0,0784 0,0851 0,2932 0,2108 0,0459 0,2134 0,2110 0,3693-0,1163 0, ,1810-0,0736-0,0604 0,2267 0,4290 0,0539-0,0521 0,4389 0,1151-0,0703 0, ,2476-0,1292-0,0455 0,2442 0,4547 0,2096-0,0537 0,4875 0,1629-0,1449 0, ,2683-0,0461 0,0711 0,3199 0,4871 0,1539 0,0808 0,4368 0,1922-0,1716 0, ,0216-0,2545 0,0430 0,1690 0,0384-0,0331 0,0814 0,1254 0,0739-0,1719-0, ,4073-0,0703 0,1217 0,3641 0,5204 0,3253 0,1517 0,4650 0,3106-0,3314 0, ,4786-0,1000 0,0091 0,2553 0,5253 0,4317 0,0647 0,4702 0,2684-0,1346 0,4883

186 ,5327-0,0885 0,1973 0,2095 0,5251 0,4957 0,0356 0,3503 0,5543 0,0251 0, ,1072-0,1379 0,0072 0,0479 0,1598 0,1498 0,0083 0,1259 0,0306-0,0136 0, ,4301-0,0253-0,0003 0,3822 0,5914 0,5214 0,0946 0,6510 0,1849-0,1893 0, ,4478 0,0506 0,0634 0,5043 0,6945 0,3383 0,2143 0,6793 0,2801-0,2379 0, ,3788-0,0019 0,0549 0,2235 0,4593 0,3076 0,1637 0,2215 0,3442-0,0854 0, ,3433 0,0480 0,0690 0,2197 0,4689 0,3099 0,1215 0,2768 0,3039-0,0704 0, ,3972 0,0259 0,0531 0,1925 0,4558 0,3170 0,1230 0,2033 0,3419-0,1693 0, ,2433 0,0506 0,0230 0,2035 0,3292 0,1934 0,1226 0,2273 0,2088-0,0365 0, ,6298-0,0708-0,0468 0,3524 0,6886 0,5513 0,1300 0,5560 0,5082-0,1240 0, ,6746-0,0982-0,0263 0,2584 0,6522 0,6116 0,0843 0,4482 0,5601-0,0919 0, ,6998 0,0597 0,0989 0,4807 0,7337 0,6545 0,2757 0,5547 0,6373-0,1303 0,5669 є 0,3744 0,0016 0,0378 0,2985 0,4646 0,3165 0,1480 0,3749 0,3366-0,0798 0,4002 є 0,8285 0,4851 0,2364 0,6994 0,8650 0,8965 0,6177 0,7381 0,7935 0,3496 0,8851 є є є є dam moa mfa cam ic cbm amc max_cc avg_cc ,1089 0,0943-0,0985-0,2639-0,0297-0,0927 0,2035 0,2761 0, ,0643 0,1500-0,2125-0,1294-0,1719-0,2072 0,1906 0,2003 0, ,1245 0,2364 0,0816-0,2868 0,2350 0,2921 0,0390 0,3688 0, ,1730 0,2443-0,1301-0,2642 0,0411 0,0554 0,0880 0,3491 0, ,3339 0,2312 0,2211-0,2805-0,1652-0,1652 0,0541 0,1173 0, ,1750 0,3149-0,0307-0,2206 0,1127 0,1796 0,1332 0,3007 0, ,1459 0,1051-0,0309-0,3191 0,0370 0,0194 0,1867 0,1558 0, ,0015 0,1289 0,1616-0,0237 0,0996 0,0388 0,0681 0,0641 0, ,1751 0,3103 0,0676-0,2446 0,2535 0,1670 0,0044 0,1229 0, ,1669 0,3811-0,0729-0,3636 0,1537 0,1836 0,0149 0,2614 0, ,1632 0,3389-0,0408-0,3285 0,1274 0,1191 0,0544 0,4261 0, ,0153 0,0772-0,0832-0,0929-0,0678-0,0613-0,0045 0,0319 0, ,0483 0,2236-0,0212-0,2114 0,0522 0,1055 0,1201 0,1976 0,

187 ,0548 0,2353-0,0585-0,1919 0,0011-0,0374 0,0580 0,2088 0, ,1016 0,2047 0,0064-0,2341 0,1028 0,0841 0,0596 0,2278 0, ,2683 0,4472 0,3344 0,6757 0,0000-0,3381 0,5288-0,5571-0, ,1782 0,2865-0,1170-0,2238-0,0090-0,0583 0,0147-0,0955-0, ,1611-0,1381 0,0453-0,1122 0,2672 0,5979-0,0697 0,2250 0, ,1785 0,5793 0,0245-0,3795 0,1920 0,1430 0,2784 0,4598 0, ,0220 0,2471-0,0418-0,2015 0,0810 0,0568 0,2800 0,2939 0, ,1498 0,3170-0,0729-0,2807 0,0542 0,1104 0,1784 0,4020 0, ,2191 0,5153 0,0399-0,3071 0,2228 0,3083 0,0651 0,2769 0, ,1900 0,5920-0,0657-0,3102 0,0897 0,1758 0,0626 0,4371 0, ,1179 0,4808-0,0615-0,3417 0,1596 0,2762 0,0688 0,3738 0, ,0975 0,4321-0,0461-0,2930 0,0853 0,2208 0,0659 0,3659 0, ,0152 0,1780 0,0191-0,0495 0,0226 0,0717-0,0282 0,0240-0, ,1490 0,3124-0,0272-0,2507 0,1486 0,0878 0,0949 0,3586 0, ,1544 0,5426-0,0741-0,3367 0,1454 0,1555 0,0172 0,3109 0, ,2302 0,0821 0,1287-0,1781 0,2422 0,3453 0,0345 0,4070 0, ,0787 0,0648-0,1023-0,2162-0,1135-0,1245 0,2229 0,2708 0, ,2158 0,2308-0,1823-0,2933-0,0588-0,0238 0,2268 0,4121 0, ,1934 0,2161-0,0561-0,2728 0,0174 0,0368 0,1640 0,2546 0, ,1335 0,1794-0,1092-0,1187-0,3126-0,2756-0,1391-0,0360-0, ,3087 0,5316-0,1135-0,3062-0,0017-0,0373 0,3417 0,1968 0, ,1147 0,4083-0,0737-0,3304-0,1029-0,0909 0,4710 0,3218 0, ,1368 0,4815-0,1140-0,2217 0,0181 0,0358-0,0630 0,1266-0, ,0228 0,1395-0,1287 0,0224-0,0471 0,0358-0,0159 0,0475-0, ,2145 0,4724-0,0020-0,1581 0,1397 0,1515 0,1414 0,1927 0, ,2872 0,5907 0,0547-0,3100 0,2770 0,2890 0,3463 0,3813 0, ,0738 0,2746-0,0695-0,2438 0,0910 0,1468 0,1425 0,2367 0, ,1131 0,2707-0,0069-0,1697 0,0982 0,1475-0,0120 0,2139 0, ,0757 0,2641 0,0444-0,2558 0,0737 0,1570 0,2219 0,2295 0, ,0634 0,1921 0,1153-0,1301 0,0487 0,1275 0,2358 0,1265 0,

188 ,1533 0, ,1246 0,4517-0,0632-0, ,2172 0,3170 0,0357 є є є 0,1221 0,2960-0,0226-0,2591-0,0506 0,0819 0,1416 0,0473-0, ,2477 0,0689 0,0576 0,1368 0,0277 0, ,3303 0,2324 0,3479 0,0670 0,1116-0, ,2149 0,0592 0,0847 0,1194 0,2120 0,1228 0,3339 0,5920 0,3344 0,6757 0,2770 0,5979 0,5288 0,4598 0, ( 40 ) є є ,0500 0, , ,0494 0, , ,0465 0, , ,0438 0, , ,0416 0, , ,0403 0, , ,0389 0, , ,0233 0, , ,0153 0, , ,0040 0, , ,0004 0, , ,0004 0, , ,0037 0, , ,0134 0, , ,1792 0, , ,2071 0, , ,5405 0, , ,1098 0,8049 4,76

189 ,3019 1, , ,3750 2, , , , , ,3235-1, , ,9048-1, , ,0109-0, , ,5455-0, , ,2600-0, , ,3137-0, , ,1509-0, , ,1041-0, , ,0914-0, , ,0854-0, , ,0819-0, , ,0797-0, , ,0781-0, , ,0726-0, , ,0713-0, , ,0706-0, , ,0696-0, , ,0693-0, , ,0692-0, , ,0691-0, , є , ,

190 LCOM WMC LOC RFC LЇC WMC CBЇ RFC RFC WMC CBЇ CE LOC WMC LCOM NPM

191 , ,82 0,18 0,18 0, ,76 0,24 0,22 0,02 0, ,58 0,42 0,39 0,03 0, ,64 0,36 0,27 0,09 0, ,55 0,45 0,26 0,18 0, ,35 0,65 0,50 0,12 0,03 0, ,37 0,63 0,47 0,11 0,05 0, ,12 0,88 0,33 0,35 0,09 0,05 0,02 0,05 1,88

192 , ,46

193 , %, %, % 1 6 0,18 0,19 5,26 5,26 13,00 14,00 7,14 7,14 17,57 14,86-18,24 18, ,27 0,24-12,50 12,50 17,00 16,00-6,25 6,25 24,24 21,21-14,29 14, ,45 0,50 10,00 10,00 35,00 40,00 12,50 12,50 42,50 43,75 2,86 2, ,45 0,40-12,50 12,50 35,00 31,00-12,90 12,90 35,90 26,92-33,36 33, ,63 0,60-5,00 5,00 45,00 44,00-2,27 2,27 45,21 43,84-3,13 3, ,82 0,82 63,00 63,00 64,94 63,64-2,04 2, ,84 1,03 18,45 18,45 62,00 75,00 17,33 17,33 63,01 63, ,88 2,02 6,93 6,93 118,00 129,00 8,53 8,53 87,50 92,19 5,09 5,09 є 0,69 0,73 1,33 8,83 388,00 412,00 3,01 8,37 47,61 46,18-7,89 9,88-5,48-5,83 3,10-12,50 5,00-12,90 2,27-33,36 2,04 18,45 18,45 17,33 17,33 5,09 33,36 119,63 20,11 101,16 21,60 161,27 115,15.6-2, %, %, % 1 3 1,19 1,52 21,71 21,71 139,00 178,00 21,91 21,91 94,02 98,29 4,34 4, ,00 0,95-5,26 5,26 112,00 106,00-5,66 5,66 94,59 94, ,40 1,31-6,87 6,87 225,00 211,00-6,64 6,64 100,00 99,38-0,62 0, ,00 1,10 9,09 9,09 79,00 87,00 9,20 9,20 100,00 100, ,18 1,14-3,51 3,51 131,00 126,00-3,97 3,97 100,00 99,10-0,91 0, ,27 1,43 11,19 11,19 146,00 164,00 10,98 10,98 100,00 100, ,92 1,85-3,78 3,78 224,00 215,00-4,19 4,19 100,00 100,00 є 1,28 1,33 3,22 8, , ,00 3,09 8,94 98,37 98,77 0,40 0,84-3,76-2,85-0,40-6,87 3,51-6,64 3,97-0,91 0,62 21,71 21,71 21,91 21,91 4,34 4,34 101,12 34,56 103,98 33,68 5,81 2,85

194 , %, %, % 1 2 0,78 0,88 11,36 11,36 49,00 49,00 53,57 53, ,58 1,10 47,27 47,27 27,00 54,00 50,00 50,00 46,94 63,27 25,81 25, ,31 1,52 13,82 13,82 58,00 73,00 20,55 20,55 68,75 75,00 8,33 8, ,63 1,53-6,54 6,54 95,00 87,00-9,20 9,20 80,70 77,19-4,55 4, ,35 1,65-42,42 42,42 91,33 66,00-38,38 38,38 75,00 72,50-3,45 3, ,48 2,90-20,00 20,00 174,00 145,00-20,00 20,00 80,00 90,00 11,11 11, ,32 2,61 11,11 11,11 85,00 94,00 9,57 9,57 88,89 77,78-14,28 14, ,00 9,75-2,56 2,56 523,00 507,00-3,16 3,16 94,23 92,31-2,08 2,08 є 2,81 2,74 1,51 19, , ,00 1,17 18,86 73,51 75,20 2,61 8,70 2,55 2,54-2,25-42,42 2,56-38,38 3,16-14,28 2,08 47,27 47,27 50,00 50,00 25,81 25,81 613,57 240,06 709,85 247,18 148,21 58,23.8-4, %, %, % 1 4 0,42 0,65 35,38 35,38 8,00 11,00 27,27 27,27 29,41 47,06 37,51 37, ,81 0,83 2,41 2,41 14,00 15,00 6,67 6,67 44,44 44, ,36 0,86-58,14 58,14 19,00 12,00-58,33 58,33 64,29 57,14-12,51 12, ,14 0,86-32,56 32,56 20,00 18,00-11,11 11,11 61,90 47,62-29,99 29, ,50 1,25-20,00 20,00 29,00 25,00-16,00 16,00 85,00 60,00-41,67 41, ,18 2,00-9,00 9,00 37,00 36,00-2,78 2,78 55,56 66,67 16,66 16, ,81 5,33 9,76 9,76 87,40 96,00 8,96 8,96 83,33 83,33 є 1,75 1,68-10,31 23,89 214,40 213,00-6,47 18,73 60,56 58,04-4,29 19,76 4,17 0,66 4,34-58,14 2,41-58,33 2,78-41,67 12,51 35,38 58,14 27,27 58,33 37,51 41,67 790,08 325,45 623,51 314,56 859,37 129,85

195 , %, %, % ,09 0,06-50,00 50,00 30,00 18,00-66,67 66,67 4,93 6,34 22,24 22, ,11 0,10-10,00 10,00 9,00 7,00-28,57 28,57 7,46 10,45 28,61 28, ,14 0,21 33,33 33,33 3,00 5,00 40,00 40,00 8,33 16,67 50,03 50, ,18 0,13-38,46 38,46 6,00 4,00-50,00 50,00 9,68 12,90 24,96 24, ,27 0,34 20,59 20,59 14,00 18,00 22,22 22,22 20,75 30,19 31,27 31,27 є 0,16 0,17-8,91 30,48 62,00 52,00-16,60 41,49 10,23 15,31 31,42 31,42-5,88 19,23-33,18-50,00 10,00-66,67 22,22 22,24 22,24 33,33 50,00 40,00 66,67 50,03 50, ,45 194, ,28 249,39 96,05 96, , %, %, % ,06 0,08 25,00 25,00 192,00 260,00 26,15 26,15 5,01 6,16 18,67 18, ,07 0,06-16,67 16,67 90,00 73,00-23,29 23,29 6,99 4,78-46,23 46, ,14 0,18 22,22 22,22 114,00 152,00 25,00 25,00 9,97 11,82 15,65 15, ,23 0,23 246,00 240,00-2,50 2,50 19,98 13,55-47,45 47, ,71 0,75 5,33 5,33 369,00 366,00-0,82 0,82 33,06 31,62-4,55 4,55 є 0,24 0,26 7,18 13, , ,00 4,91 15,55 15,00 13,59-12,78 26,51-7,69-7,33 10,38-16,67 5,33-23,29 0,82-47,45 4,55 25,00 25,00 26,15 26,15 18,67 47,45 275,80 56,79 347,55 129,77 837,20 297,80

196 , %, %, % 1 7 0,07 0,09 22,22 22,22 86,00 126,00 31,75 31,75 4,98 4,28-16,36 16, ,11 0,11 100,00 97,00-3,09 3,09 11,04 9,27-19,09 19, ,12 0,10-20,00 20,00 90,00 78,00-15,38 15,38 12,02 8,71-38,00 38, ,14 0,12-16,67 16,67 207,00 178,00-16,29 16,29 13,97 9,72-43,72 43, ,14 0,14 105,00 97,00-8,25 8,25 14,00 10,14-38,07 38, ,17 0,17 138,00 127,00-8,66 8,66 13,99 12,42-12,64 12, ,20 0,18-11,11 11,11 167,00 131,00-27,48 27,48 15,06 11,80-27,63 27, ,37 0,32-15,63 15,63 439,00 458,00 4,15 4,15 23,01 20,20-13,91 13,91 є 0,17 0,15-5,15 10, , ,00-5,41 14,38 13,51 10,82-26,18 26,18 13,33 3,10 24,86-20,00 11,11-27,48 3,09-43,72 12,64 22,22 22,22 31,75 31,75-12,64 43,72 240,00 14,57 275,14 97,55 133,93 133, , %, %, % 1 5 0,04 0,04 3,00 3,00 3,80 2,53-50,20 50, ,03 0,07 57,14 57,14 4,00 8,00 50,00 50,00 3,31 6,61 49,92 49, ,22 0,23 4,35 4,35 16,00 17,00 5,88 5,88 13,33 14,67 9,13 9, ,11 0,10-10,00 10,00 7,00 7,00 10,45 8,96-16,63 16, ,37 0,37 24,00 24,00 26,15 29,23 10,54 10, ,78 0,75-4,00 4,00 53,00 51,00-3,92 3,92 48,53 45,59-6,45 6, ,22 2,01-10,45 10,45 153,00 139,00-10,07 10,07 65,22 69,57 6,25 6,25 є 0,54 0,51 5,29 12,28 260,00 249,00 5,98 9,98 24,40 25,31 0,37 21,30 5,88 4,42-3,60-10,45 4,00-10,07 3,92-50,20 6,25 57,14 57,14 50,00 50,00 49,92 50,20 646,94 406,39 553,16 357,72 794,68 341,00

197 , %, %, % 1 0 0,31 0,40 22,50 22,50 44,00 56,00 21,43 21,43 26,95 26,24-2,71 2, ,38 0,54 29,63 29,63 25,00 35,00 28,57 28,57 38,46 36,92-4,17 4, ,36 0,52 30,77 30,77 20,00 28,00 28,57 28,57 27,78 31,48 11,75 11, ,91 0,82-10,98 10,98 60,00 53,00-13,21 13,21 35,38 33,85-4,52 4, ,00 0,98-2,04 2,04 64,00 59,00-8,47 8,47 43,33 38,33-13,04 13, ,21 1,44 15,97 15,97 74,00 92,00 19,57 19,57 43,75 42,19-3,70 3, ,36 1,83-28,96 28,96 132,00 106,00-24,53 24,53 50,00 48,28-3,56 3,56 є 0,82 0,82 7,11 17,61 419,00 429,00 6,49 18,04 33,21 32,16-2,49 5,43 0,00-2,33 3,26-28,96 2,04-24,53 8,47-13,04 2,71 30,77 30,77 28,57 28,57 11,75 13,04 441,01 102,19 419,63 49,43 46,11 15, , %, %, % 1 3 0,06 0,10 40,00 40,00 10,00 17,00 41,18 41,18 6,02 8,43 28,59 28, ,25 0,23-8,70 8,70 16,00 16,00 12,68 16,90 24,97 24, ,18 0,19 5,26 5,26 8,00 9,00 11,11 11,11 17,02 17, ,35 0,40 12,50 12,50 45,00 51,00 11,76 11,76 14,84 20,31 26,93 26, ,28 0,35 20,00 20,00 27,00 32,00 15,63 15,63 18,48 17,39-6,27 6, ,53 0,52-1,92 1,92 45,00 44,00-2,27 2,27 23,81 27,38 13,04 13, ,75 0,74-1,35 1,35 72,00 67,00-7,46 7,46 25,27 21,98-14,97 14, ,24 1,91-17,28 17,28 193,00 162,00-19,14 19,14 37,65 38,82 3,01 3,01 є 0,58 0,56 6,06 13,38 416,00 398,00 6,35 13,57 19,47 21,03 9,41 14,72 3,57 4,52-7,42-17,28 1,35-19,14 2,27-14,97 3,01 40,00 40,00 41,18 41,18 28,59 28,59 283,70 141,54 322,88 135,09 256,95 89,56

198 , %, %, % 1 3 0,05 0,05 10,00 10,00 3,74 4,81 22,25 22, ,05 0,08 37,50 37,50 5,00 8,00 37,50 37,50 4,90 7,84 37,50 37, ,12 0,17 29,41 29,41 18,00 34,00 47,06 47,06 4,04 9,60 57,92 57, ,17 0,20 15,00 15,00 18,00 20,00 10,00 10,00 11,00 11, ,25 0,26 3,85 3,85 44,00 47,00 6,38 6,38 18,23 19,89 8,35 8, ,25 0,27 7,41 7,41 19,00 17,00-11,76 11,76 14,06 15,63 10,04 10, ,43 0,54 20,37 20,37 63,00 74,00 14,86 14,86 24,09 25,55 5,71 5, ,57 0,57 90,00 88,00-2,27 2,27 27,27 28,57 4,55 4, ,72 1,51-13,91 13,91 208,50 183,00-13,93 13,93 33,88 33,06-2,48 2,48 є 0,40 0,41 11,07 14,16 475,50 481,00 9,76 15,97 15,69 17,33 15,98 16,53-2,44-1,14-9,46-13,91 3,85-13,93 2,27-2,48 2,48 37,50 37,50 47,06 47,06 57,92 57,92 250,90 121,98 419,43 217,07 362,47 339, , %, %, % 1 3 0,33 0,36 8,33 8,33 24,00 26,00 7,69 7,69 33,33 34,72 4,00 4, ,43 0,47 8,51 8,51 55,00 60,00 8,33 8,33 42,64 42, ,44 0,43-2,33 2,33 26,00 25,00-4,00 4,00 41,38 37,93-9,10 9, ,64 0,56-14,29 14,29 38,00 33,00-15,15 15,15 57,63 50,85-13,33 13, ,50 0,47-6,38 6,38 30,00 27,00-11,11 11,11 41,38 43,10 3,99 3, ,67 0,69 2,90 2,90 49,00 51,00 3,92 3,92 50,00 47,30-5,71 5, ,82 0,76-7,89 7,89 64,00 57,00-12,28 12,28 50,67 57,33 11,62 11, ,63 1,56-4,49 4,49 121,00 120,00-0,83 0,83 79,22 71,43-10,91 10,91 є 0,68 0,66-1,96 6,89 407,00 399,00-2,93 7,91 49,53 48,16-2,43 7,33 3,03 2,01 2,84-14,29 2,33-15,15 0,83-13,33 3,99 8,51 14,29 8,33 15,15 11,62 13,33 56,55 12,90 74,46 20,41 75,01 12,50

199 , %, %, % ,04 0,04 21,00 23,00 8,70 8,70 3,97 3,78-5,03 5, ,28 0,29 3,45 3,45 19,00 19,00 24,62 23,08-6,67 6, ,55 0,76 27,63 27,63 33,00 48,00 31,25 31,25 25,40 39,68 35,99 35,99 є 0,29 0,36 10,36 10,36 73,00 90,00 13,32 13,32 18,00 22,18 8,10 15,90-19,44-18,89-18,85 3,45 3,45 8,70 8,70-6,67 5,03 27,63 27,63 31,25 31,25 35,99 35,99 146,17 146,17 127,13 127,13 389,47 202, , %, %, % 1 9 0,20 0,18-11,11 11,11 9,00 8,00-12,50 12,50 20,00 17,78-12,49 12, ,61 0,87 29,89 29,89 23,00 33,00 30,30 30,30 50,00 63,16 20,84 20, ,24 1,19-4,20 4,20 47,00 44,00-6,82 6,82 70,27 70, ,67 1,53-9,15 9,15 67,00 61,00-9,84 9,84 87,50 77,50-12,90 12, ,11 1,35 17,78 17,78 52,00 62,00 16,13 16,13 56,52 65,22 13,34 13, ,29 1,68 23,21 23,21 54,00 69,00 21,74 21,74 63,41 90,24 29,73 29, ,06 2,55 19,22 19,22 74,00 97,00 23,71 23,71 76,32 76,32 є 1,17 1,34 9,38 16,37 326,00 374,00 8,96 17,29 60,57 65,78 5,50 12,76-12,69-12,83-7,92-11,11 4,20-12,50 6,82-12,90 12,49 29,89 29,89 30,30 30,30 29,73 29,73 246,70 66,80 278,67 59,96 304,36 44,73

200 , %, %, % ,63 0,60-5,00 5,00 33,00 31,00-6,45 6,45 34,62 32,69-5,90 5, ,63 1,44-13,19 13,19 26,00 26,00 61,11 66,67 8,34 8, ,15 1,24 7,26 7,26 16,00 21,00 23,81 23,81 47,06 47, ,30 1,36 4,41 4,41 56,00 53,00-5,66 5,66 56,41 61,54 8,34 8, ,18 1,83-19,13 19,13 37,00 33,00-12,12 12,12 94,44 66,67-41,65 41, ,83 2,59-9,27 9,27 138,00 119,00-15,97 15,97 82,61 67,39-22,58 22, ,00 9,20 2,17 2,17 94,00 92,00-2,17 2,17 100,00 100,00 є 2,67 2,61-4,68 8,63 400,00 375,00-2,65 9,45 68,04 63,15-7,64 12,40 2,30 6,67 7,74-19,13 2,17-15,97 2,17-41,65 5,90 7,26 19,13 23,81 23,81 8,34 41,65 82,07 29,44 164,96 52,87 369,42 182,26

201 ** 11 ** є ** є tabliza1(m+2,12) 1 12 nazva=tabliza1 select 1 set filter to np > partp go top ** ********************* 1- m=1 count for cm<=inter(m,2).and. bug=0 to &nazva(m,3) count for cm<=inter(m,2).and. bug#0 to &nazva(m,4) count for cm<=inter(m,2).and. bug=1 to &nazva(m,5) count for cm<=inter(m,2).and. bug=2 to &nazva(m,6) count for cm<=inter(m,2).and. bug=3 to &nazva(m,7) count for cm<=inter(m,2).and. bug=4 to &nazva(m,8) count for cm<=inter(m,2).and. bug=5 to &nazva(m,9) count for cm<=inter(m,2).and. bug>5 to &nazva(m,10) count for cm<=inter(m,2) to &nazva(m,11) sum bug for cm<=inter(m,2) to &nazva(m,12) ************************ m=2 do while m<=kolzap-1 select 1 count for cm>inter(m-1,2).and. cm<=inter(m,2).and. bug=0 to &nazva(m,3) count for cm>inter(m-1,2).and. cm<=inter(m,2).and. bug#0 to &nazva(m,4) count for cm>inter(m-1,2).and. cm<=inter(m,2).and. bug=1 to &nazva(m,5) count for cm>inter(m-1,2).and. cm<=inter(m,2).and. bug=2 to &nazva(m,6) count for cm>inter(m-1,2).and. cm<=inter(m,2).and. bug=3 to &nazva(m,7) count for cm>inter(m-1,2).and. cm<=inter(m,2).and. bug=4 to &nazva(m,8) count for cm>inter(m-1,2).and. cm<=inter(m,2).and. bug=5 to &nazva(m,9) count for cm>inter(m-1,2).and. cm<=inter(m,2).and. bug>5 to &nazva(m,10) count for cm>inter(m-1,2).and. cm<=inter(m,2) to &nazva(m,11) sum bug for cm>inter(m-1,2).and. cm<=inter(m,2) to &nazva(m,12) m=m+1 enddo ********************** ********************** m=kolzap select 1 count for cm>inter(m-1,2).and. bug=0 to &nazva(m,3) count for cm>inter(m-1,2).and. bug#0 to &nazva(m,4) count for cm>inter(m-1,2).and. bug=1 to &nazva(m,5) count for cm>inter(m-1,2).and. bug=2 to &nazva(m,6) count for cm>inter(m-1,2).and. bug=3 to &nazva(m,7)

202 count for cm>inter(m-1,2).and. bug=4 to &nazva(m,8) count for cm>inter(m-1,2).and. bug=5 to &nazva(m,9) count for cm>inter(m-1,2).and. bug>5 to &nazva(m,10) count for cm>inter(m-1,2) to &nazva(m,11) sum bug for cm>inter(m-1,2) to &nazva(m,12) *********************** 1- m=1 && n=1 && 12 do while m<=12 do while n<=kolzap &nazva(kolzap+1,m)=&nazva(kolzap+1,m)+&nazva(n,m) n=n+1 enddo m=m+1 n=1 enddo *********************** if &nazva(kolzap+1,11)#0 &nazva(kolzap+2,4)=round( &nazva(kolzap+1,4) / &nazva(kolzap+1,11), 2) endif ************************************************************************ return ** 12 ** є ** є tabliza2(m,11) 2 11 m=1 do while m<=kolzap if tabliza1(m,11)#0 tabliza2(m,3) = round(tabliza1(m,3) /tabliza1(m,11), 2) &&. tabliza2(m,4) = round(tabliza1(m,4) /tabliza1(m,11), 2) &&. tabliza2(m,5) = round(tabliza1(m,5) /tabliza1(m,11), 2) && 1-. tabliza2(m,6) = round(tabliza1(m,6) /tabliza1(m,11), 2) && 2- tabliza2(m,7) = round(tabliza1(m,7) /tabliza1(m,11), 2) && 3- tabliza2(m,8) = round(tabliza1(m,8) /tabliza1(m,11), 2) && 4- tabliza2(m,9) = round(tabliza1(m,9) /tabliza1(m,11), 2) && 5- tabliza2(m,10)= round(tabliza1(m,10)/tabliza1(m,11), 2) && 6-. tabliza2(m,11) = round( tabliza1(m,12)/tabliza1(m,11), 2) && endif && m=m+1 enddo return ** 13 ** є 202

203 ** є tabliza3(m+2,18) 3 18 select 1 set filter to np < partp go top m=1 count for cm<=inter(1,2) to tabliza3(1,11) ****************************************** go top m=2 do while m<=kolzap-1 count for cm>inter(m-1,2).and. cm<=inter(m,2) to tabliza3(m,11) m=m+1 enddo ****************************** m=kolzap ******************************** count for cm>inter(m-1,2) to tabliza3(m,11) ************************************************************************ m=1 do while m<=kolzap tabliza3(m,3)=round(tabliza2(m,3) *tabliza3(m,11), 0) && tabliza3(m,4)=round(tabliza2(m,4) *tabliza3(m,11), 0) && tabliza3(m,5)=round(tabliza2(m,5) *tabliza3(m,11), 0) && 1 tabliza3(m,6)=round(tabliza2(m,6) *tabliza3(m,11), 0) && 2 tabliza3(m,7)=round(tabliza2(m,7) *tabliza3(m,11), 0) && 3 tabliza3(m,8)=round(tabliza2(m,8) *tabliza3(m,11), 0) && 4 tabliza3(m,9)=round(tabliza2(m,9) *tabliza3(m,11), 0) && 5 tabliza3(m,10)=round(tabliza2(m,10)*tabliza3(m,11), 0) && 6. ** tabliza3(m,11) tabliza3(m,12)=tabliza3(m,5) && 1 tabliza3(m,13)=tabliza3(m,6)*2 && 2 tabliza3(m,14)=tabliza3(m,7)*3 && 3 tabliza3(m,15)=tabliza3(m,8)*4 && 4 tabliza3(m,16)=tabliza3(m,9)*5 && 5 ****************** є 6 if tabliza1(m,10)#0 && 6 d6=tabliza1(m,12)-tabliza1(m,5) *1 ; -tabliza1(m,6) *2 ; -tabliza1(m,7) *3 ; -tabliza1(m,8) *4 ; -tabliza1(m,9) *5 tabliza3(m,17)=round( tabliza3(m,10)* d6/tabliza1(m,10), 2) endif ************************** є tabliza3(m,18)=tabliza3(m,12)+tabliza3(m,13)+tabliza3(m,14)+ ; tabliza3(m,15)+tabliza3(m,16)+tabliza3(m,17) m=m+1 n=1 enddo ************************** 3 m=3 n=1 do while m<=18 do while n<=kolzap 203

204 tabliza3(kolzap+1,m)=tabliza3(kolzap+1,m)+tabliza3(n,m) 204 n=n+1 enddo m=m+1 n=1 enddo *********************** є tabliza3(kolzap+2,4)=round( tabliza3(kolzap+1,4) / tabliza3(kolzap+1,11), 2) ************************************************************************ return ** 16 ** є ( ) ** є tabliza4(m+2,18) 4 18 select 1 set filter to np < partp go top m=1 count for cm<=inter(m,2).and. bug=0 to &nazva(m,3) count for cm<=inter(m,2).and. bug#0 to &nazva(m,4) count for cm<=inter(m,2).and. bug=1 to &nazva(m,5) count for cm<=inter(m,2).and. bug=2 to &nazva(m,6) count for cm<=inter(m,2).and. bug=3 to &nazva(m,7) count for cm<=inter(m,2).and. bug=4 to &nazva(m,8) count for cm<=inter(m,2).and. bug=5 to &nazva(m,9) count for cm<=inter(m,2).and. bug>5 to &nazva(m,10) count for cm<=inter(m,2) to &nazva(m,11) sum bug for cm<=inter(m,2).and. bug=1 to &nazva(m,12) sum bug for cm<=inter(m,2).and. bug=2 to &nazva(m,13) sum bug for cm<=inter(m,2).and. bug=3 to &nazva(m,14) sum bug for cm<=inter(m,2).and. bug=4 to &nazva(m,15) sum bug for cm<=inter(m,2).and. bug=5 to &nazva(m,16) sum bug for cm<=inter(m,2).and. bug>5 to &nazva(m,17) sum bug for cm<=inter(m,2) to &nazva(m,18) ************************************************************************* m=2 do while m<=kolzap-1 count for cm>inter(m-1,2).and. cm<=inter(m,2).and. bug=0 to &nazva(m,3) count for cm>inter(m-1,2).and. cm<=inter(m,2).and. bug#0 to &nazva(m,4) count for cm>inter(m-1,2).and. cm<=inter(m,2).and. bug=1 to &nazva(m,5) count for cm>inter(m-1,2).and. cm<=inter(m,2).and. bug=2 to &nazva(m,6) count for cm>inter(m-1,2).and. cm<=inter(m,2).and. bug=3 to &nazva(m,7) count for cm>inter(m-1,2).and. cm<=inter(m,2).and. bug=4 to &nazva(m,8) count for cm>inter(m-1,2).and. cm<=inter(m,2).and. bug=5 to &nazva(m,9) count for cm>inter(m-1,2).and. cm<=inter(m,2).and. bug>5 to &nazva(m,10) count for cm>inter(m-1,2).and. cm<=inter(m,2) to &nazva(m,11) sum bug for cm>inter(m-1,2).and. cm<=inter(m,2).and. bug=1 to &nazva(m,12) sum bug for cm>inter(m-1,2).and. cm<=inter(m,2).and. bug=2 to &nazva(m,13)

205 sum bug for cm>inter(m-1,2).and. cm<=inter(m,2).and. bug=3 to &nazva(m,14) sum bug for cm>inter(m-1,2).and. cm<=inter(m,2).and. bug=4 to &nazva(m,15) sum bug for cm>inter(m-1,2).and. cm<=inter(m,2).and. bug=5 to &nazva(m,16) sum bug for cm>inter(m-1,2).and. cm<=inter(m,2).and. bug>5 to &nazva(m,17) sum bug for cm>inter(m-1,2).and. cm<=inter(m,2) to &nazva(m,18) m=m+1 enddo ****************************************** m=kolzap********************** count for cm>inter(m-1,2).and. bug=0 to &nazva(m,3) count for cm>inter(m-1,2).and. bug#0 to &nazva(m,4) count for cm>inter(m-1,2).and. bug=1 to &nazva(m,5) count for cm>inter(m-1,2).and. bug=2 to &nazva(m,6) count for cm>inter(m-1,2).and. bug=3 to &nazva(m,7) count for cm>inter(m-1,2).and. bug=4 to &nazva(m,8) count for cm>inter(m-1,2).and. bug=5 to &nazva(m,9) count for cm>inter(m-1,2).and. bug>5 to &nazva(m,10) count for cm>inter(m-1,2) to &nazva(m,11) sum bug for cm>inter(m-1,2).and. bug=1 to &nazva(m,12) sum bug for cm>inter(m-1,2).and. bug=2 to &nazva(m,13) sum bug for cm>inter(m-1,2).and. bug=3 to &nazva(m,14) sum bug for cm>inter(m-1,2).and. bug=4 to &nazva(m,15) sum bug for cm>inter(m-1,2).and. bug=5 to &nazva(m,16) sum bug for cm>inter(m-1,2).and. bug>5 to &nazva(m,17) sum bug for cm>inter(m-1,2) to &nazva(m,18) **************************** 4 m=1 n=1 do while m<=18 do while n<=kolzap &nazva(kolzap+1,m)=&nazva(kolzap+1,m)+&nazva(n,m) n=n+1 enddo m=m+1 n=1 enddo *********************** tabliza4(kolzap+2,4)=round( tabliza4(kolzap+1,4) / tabliza4(kolzap+1,11), 2) ************************************************************************ return ** 17 ** є ( ) ** є tabliza5(m+2,14) 5 14 itog3=0 && itog4=0 && itog5=0 && itog6=0 && itog7=0 && 205

206 itog8=0 && itog9=0 && itog10=0 && itog11=0 && itog12=0 && itog13=0 && itog14=0 && ************************************************************************ m=1 do while m<=kolzap tabliza5(m,3) = tabliza2(m,11) if tabliza4(m,11) #0 tabliza5(m,4) = round(tabliza4(m,18) /tabliza4(m,11), 2) endif if tabliza5(m,4)#0 tabliza5(m,5) = round( (tabliza5(m,4)-tabliza5(m,3))/tabliza5(m,4)*100, 2) endif if tabliza5(m,4)#0 tabliza5(m,6) = abs( round( (tabliza5(m,4)-tabliza5(m,3))/tabliza5(m,4)*100, 2) ) endif itog3=itog3+tabliza5(m,3) itog4=itog4+tabliza5(m,4) itog5=itog5+tabliza5(m,5) itog6=itog6+tabliza5(m,6) ************************************************************************** tabliza5(m,7) = tabliza3(m,18) tabliza5(m,8) = tabliza4(m,18) if tabliza5(m,8)#0 tabliza5(m,9) = round( (tabliza5(m,8)-tabliza5(m,7))/tabliza5(m,8)*100, 2) endif if tabliza5(m,8)#0 tabliza5(m,10)= abs( round( (tabliza5(m,8)-tabliza5(m,7))/tabliza5(m,8)*100, 2) ) endif itog7 =itog7 +tabliza3(m,18) itog8 =itog8 +tabliza4(m,18) itog9 =itog9 +tabliza5(m,9) itog10=itog10+tabliza5(m,10) ************************************************************************** if tabliza3(m,11)#0 tabliza5(m,11) = round( tabliza3(m,4) / tabliza3(m,11)*100, 2) endif if tabliza4(m,11)#0 tabliza5(m,12) = round( tabliza4(m,4) / tabliza4(m,11)*100, 2) endif if tabliza5(m,12)#0 tabliza5(m,13) = round( (tabliza5(m,12)-tabliza5(m,11))/tabliza5(m,12)*100, 2) endif if tabliza5(m,12)#0 tabliza5(m,14)= abs( round( (tabliza5(m,12)-tabliza5(m,11))/tabliza5(m,12)*100, 2) ) 206

207 endif 207 itog11=itog11+tabliza5(m,11) itog12=itog12+tabliza5(m,12) itog13=itog13+tabliza5(m,13) itog14=itog14+tabliza5(m,14) ************************************************************************ m=m+1 enddo ************************************************************************ tabliza5(kolzap+1,3) = round( itog3/kolzap, 2) tabliza5(kolzap+1,4) = round( itog4/kolzap, 2) tabliza5(kolzap+1,5) = round( itog5/kolzap, 2) tabliza5(kolzap+1,6) = round( itog6/kolzap, 2) if tabliza5(kolzap+1,4)#0 tabliza5(kolzap+2,4) = round( (tabliza5(kolzap+1,3)-tabliza5(kolzap+1,4)) ; / tabliza5(kolzap+1,4)*100, 2) endif ************************************************************************ tabliza5(kolzap+1,7) = itog7 tabliza5(kolzap+1,8) = itog8 tabliza5(kolzap+1,9) = round( itog9 /kolzap, 2) tabliza5(kolzap+1,10)= round( itog10/kolzap, 2) if tabliza5(kolzap+1,8)#0 tabliza5(kolzap+2,8) = round( (tabliza5(kolzap+1,7)-tabliza5(kolzap+1,8)) ; / tabliza5(kolzap+1,8)*100, 2) endif ************************************************************************ tabliza5(kolzap+1,11) = round( itog11/kolzap, 2) tabliza5(kolzap+1,12) = round( itog12/kolzap, 2) tabliza5(kolzap+1,13) = round( itog13/kolzap, 2) tabliza5(kolzap+1,14) = round( itog14/kolzap, 2) if tabliza5(kolzap+1,12)#0 tabliza5(kolzap+2,12) = round( (tabliza5(kolzap+1,11)-tabliza5(kolzap+1,12)) / tabliza5(kolzap+1,12)*100, 2) endif ************************************************************************ return

208 .6-208

209 .7 - є 209

210 .8 - є 210

Using Fuzzy Clustering and Software Metrics to Predict Faults in large Industrial Software Systems

Using Fuzzy Clustering and Software Metrics to Predict Faults in large Industrial Software Systems IOSR Journal of Computer Engineering (IOSR-JCE) e-issn: 2278-0661, p- ISSN: 2278-8727Volume 13, Issue 6 (Jul. - Aug. 2013), PP 32-36 Using Fuzzy Clustering and Software Metrics to Predict Faults in large

More information

ISSN (Online) Improving The Fault Prediction In Oo Systems Using ANN With Firefly Algorithm

ISSN (Online) Improving The Fault Prediction In Oo Systems Using ANN With Firefly Algorithm Improving The Fault Prediction In Oo Systems Using ANN With Firefly Algorithm Bhavya G Asst. professor,dept.of ISE,BMSIT Bangalore,India. bhavya20.g@gmail.com Abstract Assessing the quality of the software

More information

Object Oriented Measurement

Object Oriented Measurement Object Oriented Measurement Diego Chaparro González dchaparro@acm.org Student number: 59881P 17th January 2003 Abstract This document examines the state of art in software products measurement, with focus

More information

Reusability Metrics for Object-Oriented System: An Alternative Approach

Reusability Metrics for Object-Oriented System: An Alternative Approach Reusability Metrics for Object-Oriented System: An Alternative Approach Parul Gandhi Department of Computer Science & Business Administration Manav Rachna International University Faridabad, 121001, India

More information

Technical Metrics for OO Systems

Technical Metrics for OO Systems Technical Metrics for OO Systems 1 Last time: Metrics Non-technical: about process Technical: about product Size, complexity (cyclomatic, function points) How to use metrics Prioritize work Measure programmer

More information

SNS College of Technology, Coimbatore, India

SNS College of Technology, Coimbatore, India Support Vector Machine: An efficient classifier for Method Level Bug Prediction using Information Gain 1 M.Vaijayanthi and 2 M. Nithya, 1,2 Assistant Professor, Department of Computer Science and Engineering,

More information

Application of a Fuzzy Inference System to Measure Maintainability of Object-Oriented Software

Application of a Fuzzy Inference System to Measure Maintainability of Object-Oriented Software Application of a Fuzzy Inference System to Measure Maintainability of Object-Oriented Software Nasib Singh Gill and Meenakshi Sharma Department of Computer Science & Applications Maharshi Dayanand University,

More information

Effectiveness of software metrics for object-oriented system

Effectiveness of software metrics for object-oriented system Available online at www.sciencedirect.com Procedia Technology 6 (2012 ) 420 427 2nd International Conference on Communication, Computing & Security [ICCCS-2012] Effectiveness of software metrics for object-oriented

More information

Investigation of Metrics for Object-Oriented Design Logical Stability

Investigation of Metrics for Object-Oriented Design Logical Stability Investigation of Metrics for Object-Oriented Design Logical Stability Mahmoud O. Elish Department of Computer Science George Mason University Fairfax, VA 22030-4400, USA melish@gmu.edu Abstract As changes

More information

Metrics and OO. SE 3S03 - Tutorial 12. Alicia Marinache. Week of Apr 04, Department of Computer Science McMaster University

Metrics and OO. SE 3S03 - Tutorial 12. Alicia Marinache. Week of Apr 04, Department of Computer Science McMaster University and OO OO and OO SE 3S03 - Tutorial 12 Department of Computer Science McMaster University Complexity Lorenz CK Week of Apr 04, 2016 Acknowledgments: The material of these slides is based on [1] (chapter

More information

Risk-based Object Oriented Testing

Risk-based Object Oriented Testing Risk-based Object Oriented Testing Linda H. Rosenberg, Ph.D. Ruth Stapko Albert Gallo NASA GSFC SATC NASA, Unisys SATC NASA, Unisys Code 302 Code 300.1 Code 300.1 Greenbelt, MD 20771 Greenbelt, MD 20771

More information

Software bug prediction using object-oriented metrics

Software bug prediction using object-oriented metrics Sādhanā Vol. 42, No. 5, May 2017, pp. 655 669 DOI 10.1007/s12046-017-0629-5 Ó Indian Academy of Sciences Software bug prediction using object-oriented metrics DHARMENDRA LAL GUPTA 1,2, * and KAVITA SAXENA

More information

Application of Object Oriented Metrics to Java and C Sharp: Comparative Study

Application of Object Oriented Metrics to Java and C Sharp: Comparative Study International Journal of Computer Applications (9 888) Volume 64 No., February Application of Object Oriented Metrics to Java and C Sharp: Comparative Study Arti Chhikara Maharaja Agrasen College,Delhi,India

More information

An Experimental Study on Conceptual Data Model Based Software Code Size Estimation

An Experimental Study on Conceptual Data Model Based Software Code Size Estimation An Exp. Study on Conceptual Data Model Based Software Code Size Est. An Experimental Study on Conceptual Data Model Based Software Code Size Estimation Oguz Atak 1, Cigdem Gencel 2 1 Havelsan Inc., 2 Informatics

More information

Measuring software size

Measuring software size Measuring software size a question to start with have you ever written a large program? if so how did you know it was large? 2 outline ideas and problems associated with measuring software size assessing

More information

Object Oriented Metrics. Impact on Software Quality

Object Oriented Metrics. Impact on Software Quality Object Oriented Metrics Impact on Software Quality Classic metrics Lines Of Code Function points Complexity Code coverage - testing Maintainability Index discussed later Lines of Code KLOC = 1000 Lines

More information

SOFTWARE COMPLEXITY MEASUREMENT USING MULTIPLE CRITERIA ABSTRACT

SOFTWARE COMPLEXITY MEASUREMENT USING MULTIPLE CRITERIA ABSTRACT SOFTWARE COMPLEXITY MEASUREMENT USING MULTIPLE CRITERIA Bhaskar Raj Sinha, Pradip Peter Dey, Mohammad Amin and Hassan Badkoobehi National University, School of Engineering, Technology, and Media 3678 Aero

More information

A Study of Software Metrics

A Study of Software Metrics International Journal of Computational Engineering & Management, Vol. 11, January 2011 www..org 22 A Study of Software Metrics Gurdev Singh 1, Dilbag Singh 2, Vikram Singh 3 1 Assistant Professor, JIET

More information

An Object-Oriented Metrics Suite for Ada 95

An Object-Oriented Metrics Suite for Ada 95 An Object-Oriented Metrics Suite for Ada 95 William W. Pritchett IV DCS Corporation 133 Braddock Place Alexandria, VA 22314 73.683.843 x726 wpritche@dcscorp.com 1. ABSTRACT Ada 95 added object-oriented

More information

Utilizing Computational Intelligence to Assist in Software Release Decision

Utilizing Computational Intelligence to Assist in Software Release Decision Engineering Letters, 14:2, EL_14_2_11 (Advance online publication: 16 May 2007) Utilizing Computational Intelligence to Assist in Software Release Decision Tong-Seng Quah and Mie Mie Thet Thwin Abstract

More information

An Approach to Early Prediction of Software Quality *

An Approach to Early Prediction of Software Quality * Mar. 2007 Journal of Electronic Science and Technology of China Vol.5 No.1 An Approach to Early Prediction of Software Quality * YAO Lan 1, YANG Bo 2 1. School of Electronic Engineering, University of

More information

Evaluation of a Business Application Framework Using Complexity and Functionality Metrics

Evaluation of a Business Application Framework Using Complexity and Functionality Metrics Evaluation of a Business Application Framework Using Complexity and Functionality Metrics Hikaru Fujiwara 1, Shinji Kusumoto 1, Katsuro Inoue 1, Toshifusa Ootsubo 2 and Katsuhiko Yuura 2 1 Graduate School

More information

Effects of Dependency Injection on Maintainability. Kate Razina

Effects of Dependency Injection on Maintainability. Kate Razina Effects of Dependency Injection on Maintainability Kate Razina Overview Introduction Maintainability Dependency Injection Hypothesis Research Measuring Maintainability Data Collection Results Conclusion

More information

Mixing SNA and Classical Software Metrics for Sub-Projects Analysis.

Mixing SNA and Classical Software Metrics for Sub-Projects Analysis. Mixing SNA and Classical Software Metrics for Sub-Projects Analysis. ROBERTO TONELLI University of Cagliari DIEE P.zza D Armi, 91 Cagliari ITALY roberto.tonelli@dsf.unica.it GIUSEPPE DESTEFANIS University

More information

Support Vector Regression for Software Reliability Growth Modeling and Prediction

Support Vector Regression for Software Reliability Growth Modeling and Prediction Support Vector Regression for Software Reliability Growth Modeling and Prediction 925 Fei Xing 1 and Ping Guo 2 1 Department of Computer Science Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China xsoar@163.com

More information

Keywords: Software reliability, Logistic Growth, Curve Model, Software Reliability Model, Mean Value Function, Failure Intensity Function.

Keywords: Software reliability, Logistic Growth, Curve Model, Software Reliability Model, Mean Value Function, Failure Intensity Function. Volume 4, Issue 1, January 2014 ISSN: 2277 128X International Journal of Advanced Research in Computer Science and Software Engineering Research Paper Available online at: www.ijarcsse.com Software Reliability

More information

International Journal of Advance Research in Engineering, Science & Technology

International Journal of Advance Research in Engineering, Science & Technology Impact Factor (SJIF): 4.542 International Journal of Advance Research in Engineering, Science & Technology e-issn: 2393-9877, p-issn: 2394-2444 Volume 4, Issue5,May-2017 Software Fault Detection using

More information

Metrics in assessing the quality and evolution of jedit

Metrics in assessing the quality and evolution of jedit Metrics in assessing the quality and evolution of jedit Ilona Bluemke, Rafał Roguski Institute of Computer Science, Warsaw University of Technology Nowowiejska 15/19, 00-665 Warsaw, Poland I.Bluemke@ii.pw.edu.pl

More information

Empirical Evaluation and Critical Review of Complexity Metrics for Software Components

Empirical Evaluation and Critical Review of Complexity Metrics for Software Components Proceedings of the 6th WSEAS Int. Conf. on Software Engineering, Parallel and Distributed Systems, Corfu Island, Greece, February 16-19, 2007 24 Empirical Evaluation and Critical Review of Complexity Metrics

More information

Prediction of Software Readiness Using Neural Network

Prediction of Software Readiness Using Neural Network Prediction of Software Readiness Using Neural Network Jon T.S. Quah, Mie Mie Thet Thwin Abstract-- In this paper, we explore the behaviour of neural network in predicting software readiness. Our neural

More information

Principal Component Analysis of Lack of Cohesion in Methods (LCOM) metrics

Principal Component Analysis of Lack of Cohesion in Methods (LCOM) metrics Principal Component Analysis of Lack of Cohesion in Methods (LCOM) metrics Anuradha Lakshminarayana Timothy S.Newman Department of Computer Science University of Alabama in Huntsville Abstract In this

More information

Software Reliability Models: Failure rate estimation

Software Reliability Models: Failure rate estimation Software Reliability Models: Failure rate estimation Animesh Kumar Rai M.Tech Student, Department of information Technology Amity School of Engineering and Technology Amity University, Noida, Uttar Pradesh

More information

SOFTWARE ASSESSMENT USING OBJECT METRICS

SOFTWARE ASSESSMENT USING OBJECT METRICS Key words: object metrics, metrics measuring tools, software assessment, software evolution Ilona BLUEMKE*, Rafał ROGUSKI* SOFTWARE ASSESSMENT USING OBJECT METRICS Adequate metrics of object-oriented software

More information

International Journal of Advanced Research in Computer Science and Software Engineering

International Journal of Advanced Research in Computer Science and Software Engineering ISSN: 2277 128X International Journal of Advanced Research in Computer Science and Software Engineering Research Paper Available online at: Applying Machine Learning for Fault Prediction Using Software

More information

Towards the re-usability of software metric definitions at the meta level

Towards the re-usability of software metric definitions at the meta level Towards the re-usability of software metric definitions at the meta level - Position Paper - Jacqueline A. McQuillan and James F. Power Department of Computer Science, National University of Ireland, Maynooth,

More information

M. Xie, G. Y. Hong and C. Wohlin, "A Study of Exponential Smoothing Technique in Software Reliability Growth Prediction", Quality and Reliability

M. Xie, G. Y. Hong and C. Wohlin, A Study of Exponential Smoothing Technique in Software Reliability Growth Prediction, Quality and Reliability M. Xie, G. Y. Hong and C. Wohlin, "A Study of Exponential Smoothing Technique in Software Reliability Growth Prediction", Quality and Reliability Engineering International, Vol.13, pp. 247-353, 1997. 1

More information

Prediction of Number of Faults And Time To Remove Errors

Prediction of Number of Faults And Time To Remove Errors International Journal of Computational Engineering Research Vol, 03 Issue, 4 Prediction of Number of Faults And Time To Remove Errors 1, Nirvikar Katiyar 2, Dr. Raghuraj Singh 1, Ph.D. SCHOLAR J.J.T.U.

More information

CHAPTER 4 HEURISTICS BASED ON OBJECT ORIENTED METRICS

CHAPTER 4 HEURISTICS BASED ON OBJECT ORIENTED METRICS CHAPTER 4 HEURISTICS BASED ON OBJECT ORIENTED METRICS Design evaluation is most critical activity during software development process. Design heuristics are proposed as a more accessible and informal means

More information

Vragen. Intra-modular complexity measures. The uses relation. System structure: inter-module complexity

Vragen. Intra-modular complexity measures. The uses relation. System structure: inter-module complexity Vragen Intra-modular complexity measures Wat wordt bedoeld met het ontwerpsprincipe: Anticipate obsolence? Wat is het voordeel van strong cohesion en weak coupling? Wat is het gevolg van hoge complexiteit

More information

Effect of Principle Component Analysis and Support Vector Machine in Software Fault Prediction

Effect of Principle Component Analysis and Support Vector Machine in Software Fault Prediction International Journal of Computer Trends and Technology (IJCTT) volume 7 number 3 Jan 2014 Effect of Principle Component Analysis and Support Vector Machine in Software Fault Prediction A. Shanthini 1,

More information

Towards Cohesion-based Metrics as Early Quality Indicators of Faulty Classes and Components

Towards Cohesion-based Metrics as Early Quality Indicators of Faulty Classes and Components 2009 International Symposium on Computing, Communication, and Control (ISCCC 2009) Proc.of CSIT vol.1 (2011) (2011) IACSIT Press, Singapore Towards Cohesion-based Metrics as Early Quality Indicators of

More information

A k-means Based Approach for Prediction of Level of Severity of Faults in Software System

A k-means Based Approach for Prediction of Level of Severity of Faults in Software System A k-means Based Approach for Prediction of Level of Severity of Faults in Software System Jaspreet Kaur, Parvinder S. Sandhu Abstract Fault-proneness of a software module is the probability that the module

More information

APPLICATION OF ARTIFICIAL NEURAL NETWORKS FOR ASSESSING THE TESTABILITY OF OBJECT ORIENTED SOFTWARE

APPLICATION OF ARTIFICIAL NEURAL NETWORKS FOR ASSESSING THE TESTABILITY OF OBJECT ORIENTED SOFTWARE International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 3, Issue 7, July-2012 1 APPLICATION OF ARTIFICIAL NEURAL NETWORKS FOR ASSESSING THE TESTABILITY OF OBJECT ORIENTED SOFTWARE Yogesh Singh,Anju

More information

A Comparative Study on State Programming: Hierarchical State Machine (HSM) Pattern and State Pattern

A Comparative Study on State Programming: Hierarchical State Machine (HSM) Pattern and State Pattern A Comparative Study on State Programming: Hierarchical State Machine (HSM) Pattern and State Pattern A. Cüneyd Tantuğ and Özdemir Kavak Abstract State machines can be implemented by using several methods.

More information

Object-Oriented Model Size Measurement: Experiences and a Proposal for a Process

Object-Oriented Model Size Measurement: Experiences and a Proposal for a Process Object-Oriented Model Size Measurement: Experiences and a Proposal for a Process Vieri Del Bianco University of Insubria Via Mazzini, 5 21100 Varese (Italy) +39-0332218938 delbian1970@yahoo.it Luigi Lavazza

More information

An Approach for Quality Control Management in Object Oriented Projects Development

An Approach for Quality Control Management in Object Oriented Projects Development J. Basic. Appl. Sci. Res., 3(1s)539-544, 2013 2013, TextRoad Publication ISSN 2090-4304 Journal of Basic and Applied Scientific Research www.textroad.com An Approach for Quality Control Management in Object

More information

Can Complexity, Coupling, and Cohesion Metrics be Used as Early Indicators of Vulnerabilities?

Can Complexity, Coupling, and Cohesion Metrics be Used as Early Indicators of Vulnerabilities? Can Complexity, Coupling, and Cohesion Metrics be Used as Early Indicators of Vulnerabilities? Istehad Chowdhury Dept. of Electrical & Computer Eng. Queen s University, Kingston Ontario, Canada, K7L3N6

More information

Fault-Proneness Estimation and Java Migration: A Preliminary Case Study

Fault-Proneness Estimation and Java Migration: A Preliminary Case Study Fault-Proneness Estimation and Java Migration: A Preliminary Case Study Mirco Bianco, Daniel Kaneider, Alberto Sillitti, and Giancarlo Succi Center for Applied Software Engineering, Free University of

More information

2 і К К Ч... 5 Т 6 1. Ч Т КТ Т Т і і і і і і Т я я і і і і 27 К ЄКТ Т Т К 'є і і я і і.

2 і К К Ч... 5 Т 6 1. Ч Т КТ Т Т і і і і і і Т я я і і і і 27 К ЄКТ Т Т К 'є і і я і і. 2 і К К Ч... 5 Т 6 1. Ч Т КТ Т Т 11 1.1. і і 11 1.2. і і і і 18 1.3. Т я я і і і і 27 К 1... 38 2. ЄКТ Т Т К. 39 2.1. 'є і і 39 2.2. я і... 40 2.3. і. 42 2.4.. 48 К 2 48 3. Т Т Ч Т Т Т - Т Ч К 49 3.1.

More information

Use of Source Code Similarity Metrics in Software Defect Prediction

Use of Source Code Similarity Metrics in Software Defect Prediction 1 Use of Source Code Similarity Metrics in Software Defect Prediction Ahmet Okutan arxiv:1808.10033v1 [cs.se] 29 Aug 2018 Abstract In recent years, defect prediction has received a great deal of attention

More information

0-1 Programming Model-Based Method for Planning Code Review using Bug Fix History

0-1 Programming Model-Based Method for Planning Code Review using Bug Fix History 0-1 Programming Model-Based Method for Planning Code Review using Bug Fix History Hirohisa Aman Center for Information Technology Ehime University Matsuyama, Japan 790 8577 Email: aman@ehime-u.ac.jp Abstract

More information

Available online at ScienceDirect. Procedia Computer Science 57 (2015 )

Available online at   ScienceDirect. Procedia Computer Science 57 (2015 ) Available online at www.sciencedirect.com ScienceDirect Procedia Computer Science 57 (2015 ) 695 702 3rd International Conference on Recent Trends in Computing 2015 (ICRTC-2015) An artificial neural-network

More information

1 Introduction. Abstract

1 Introduction. Abstract An MVC-based Analysis of Object-Oriented System Prototyping for Banking Related GUI Applications Correlationship between OO Metrics and Efforts for Requirement Change Satoru Uehara, Osamu Mizuno, Yumi

More information

Using Metrics To Manage Software Risks. 1. Introduction 2. Software Metrics 3. Case Study: Measuring Maintainability 4. Metrics and Quality

Using Metrics To Manage Software Risks. 1. Introduction 2. Software Metrics 3. Case Study: Measuring Maintainability 4. Metrics and Quality Using Metrics To Manage Software Risks 1. Introduction 2. Software Metrics 3. Case Study: Measuring Maintainability 4. Metrics and Quality 1 1. Introduction Definition Measurement is the process by which

More information

Evolutionary Decision Trees and Software Metrics for Module Defects Identification

Evolutionary Decision Trees and Software Metrics for Module Defects Identification World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology 38 008 Evolutionary Decision Trees and Software Metrics for Module Defects Identification Monica Chiş Abstract Software metric is a measure of some

More information

Theoretical Validation of Inheritance Metrics for Object-Oriented Design against Briand s Property

Theoretical Validation of Inheritance Metrics for Object-Oriented Design against Briand s Property I.J. Information Engineering and Electronic Business, 2014, 3, 28-33 Published Online June 2014 in MECS (http://www.mecs-press.org/) DOI: 10.5815/ijieeb.2014.03.05 Theoretical Validation of Inheritance

More information

ICAD A USE CASE BASED OBJECT-ORIENTED SOFTWARE DESIGN APPROACH USING THE AXIOMATIC DESIGN THEORY

ICAD A USE CASE BASED OBJECT-ORIENTED SOFTWARE DESIGN APPROACH USING THE AXIOMATIC DESIGN THEORY Proceedings of ICAD2006 ICAD-2006-29 A USE CASE BASED OBJECT-ORIENTED SOFTWARE DESIGN APPROACH USING THE AXIOMATIC DESIGN THEORY Andrey Ricardo Pimentel andreyrp@cpgei.cefetpr.br The Federal Technological

More information

An Empirical Study on Object-Oriented Metrics

An Empirical Study on Object-Oriented Metrics An Empirical Study on Object-Oriented Metrics Mei-Huei Tang Ming-Hung Kao Mei-Hwa Chen Computer Science Department SUNY at Albany Albany, NY 12222 (meitang, kao, mhc)@cs.albany.edu Abstract The objective

More information

Ь Ь, Є ; ;,,,

Ь Ь, Є ; ;,,, 342.951 Ь Ь, Є 12.00.07 ; ;,,, - 2016 2 Ь 3 4 1. - ь, є 15 1.1. :,, - 15 1.2. є, є 30 1.3., є 49 72 2. ь, є 76 2.1., є, : 76 2.2. 82 2.3. 100 2.4.,, ' 118 133 3 ь, є, 140 3.1., є,, 140 3.2., є,, 162 188

More information

METRIC ATTITUDE PLUG-IN FOR ECLIPSE USER GUIDE

METRIC ATTITUDE PLUG-IN FOR ECLIPSE USER GUIDE METRIC ATTITUDE PLUG-IN FOR ECLIPSE USER GUIDE Metric Attitude Pag. 0 CONTENTS CONTENTS... 1 INTRODUCTION... 2 ECLIPSE... 2 1. INSTALLING ECLIPS FOR WINDOWS SYSTEM... 3 2. INSTALLING METRIC ATTITUDE...

More information

Research Article ISSN:

Research Article ISSN: Research Article [Agrawal, 1(3): May, 2012] IJESRT INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING SCIENCES & RESEARCH TECHNOLOGY Use Of Software Metrics To Measure And Improve The Quality Of The Software Design

More information

Software Metrics. Lines of Code

Software Metrics. Lines of Code Software Metrics Naveed Arshad Lines of Code The total number of lines of executable code in the software program or module being measured But lines of code could mean anything e.g. count only executable

More information

Modelling Failures Occurrences of Open Source Software with Reliability Growth

Modelling Failures Occurrences of Open Source Software with Reliability Growth Modelling Failures Occurrences of Open Source Software with Reliability Growth Bruno Rossi, Barbara Russo, and Giancarlo Succi CASE Center for Applied Software Engineering Free University of Bolzano-Bozen

More information

Software Metrics 2.1 INTRODUCTION 2.2 PROJECT MANAGEMENT PROCESS ACTIVITIES

Software Metrics 2.1 INTRODUCTION 2.2 PROJECT MANAGEMENT PROCESS ACTIVITIES 2 C h a p t e r Software Metrics 2.1 INTRODUCTION I am reminded of a very interesting story when we talk of software metrics. Once there was a meeting going on in USA. In that meeting, one of the ladies

More information

Quantify the project. Better Estimates. Resolve Software crises

Quantify the project. Better Estimates. Resolve Software crises Quantify the project Quantifying schedule, performance,work effort, project status Helps software to be compared and evaluated Better Estimates Use the measure of your current performance to improve your

More information

Analysis of Various Software Metrics Used To Detect Bad Smells

Analysis of Various Software Metrics Used To Detect Bad Smells The International Journal Of Engineering And Science (IJES) Volume 5 Issue 6 Pages PP -14-20 2016 ISSN (e): 2319 1813 ISSN (p): 2319 1805 Analysis of Various Software Metrics Used To Detect Bad Smells

More information

A Complete and Comprehensive Metrics Suite for Object-Oriented Design Quality Assessment

A Complete and Comprehensive Metrics Suite for Object-Oriented Design Quality Assessment , pp.173-188 http://dx.doi.org/10.14257/ijseia.2014.8.2.17 A Complete and Comprehensive Metrics Suite for Object-Oriented Design Quality Assessment K.P. Srinivasan 1 and Dr. T.Devi 2 1 Associate Professor

More information

Towards A Dynamic Object-Oriented Design Metric Plug-in Framework

Towards A Dynamic Object-Oriented Design Metric Plug-in Framework Journal of Computer Science 4 (11): 903-909, 2008 ISSN 1549-3636 2008 Science Publications Towards A Dynamic Object-Oriented Design Metric Plug-in Framework Chuan Ho Loh and Sai Peck Lee Department of

More information

Software metrics for policy-driven software development life cycle automation

Software metrics for policy-driven software development life cycle automation Software metrics for policy-driven software development life cycle automation Leonid Borodaev Faculty of mathematics and natural sciences, University of Groningen Groningen, The Netherlands Leo.borodaev@gmail.com

More information

Taxonomy Dimensions of Complexity Metrics

Taxonomy Dimensions of Complexity Metrics 96 Int'l Conf. Software Eng. Research and Practice SERP'15 Taxonomy Dimensions of Complexity Metrics Bouchaib Falah 1, Kenneth Magel 2 1 Al Akhawayn University, Ifrane, Morocco, 2 North Dakota State University,

More information

Thresholds for Software Quality Metrics in Open Source Android Projects

Thresholds for Software Quality Metrics in Open Source Android Projects Thresholds for Software Quality Metrics in Open Source Android Projects Mile Stojkovski Applied Computer Science Submission date: December 2017 Supervisor: Deepti Mishra, IDI Co-supervisor: Mariusz Nowostawski,

More information

Quality Metrics Tool for Object Oriented Programming

Quality Metrics Tool for Object Oriented Programming Quality Metrics Tool for Object Oriented Programming Mythili Thirugnanam * and Swathi.J.N. Abstract Metrics measure certain properties of a software system by mapping them to numbers (or to other symbols)

More information

Similar Characteristics of Internal Software Quality Attributes for Object-Oriented Open-Source Software Projects

Similar Characteristics of Internal Software Quality Attributes for Object-Oriented Open-Source Software Projects Similar Characteristics of Internal Software Quality Attributes for Object-Oriented Open-Source Software Projects Mariana Santos, Rodrigo Amador, Paulo Henrique de Souza Bermejo, Heitor Costa DCC - UFLA

More information

M. Xie, G. Y. Hong and C. Wohlin, "A Practical Method for the Estimation of Software Reliability Growth in the Early Stage of Testing", Proceedings

M. Xie, G. Y. Hong and C. Wohlin, A Practical Method for the Estimation of Software Reliability Growth in the Early Stage of Testing, Proceedings M. Xie, G. Y. Hong and C. Wohlin, "A Practical Method for the Estimation of Software Reliability Growth in the Early Stage of Testing", Proceedings IEEE 7th International Symposium on Software Reliability

More information

2014, IJARCSSE All Rights Reserved Page 303

2014, IJARCSSE All Rights Reserved Page 303 Volume 4, Issue 1, January 2014 ISSN: 2277 128X International Journal of Advanced Research in Computer Science and Software Engineering Research Paper Available online at: www.ijarcsse.com A Novel Software

More information

Combining Clustering and Classification for Software Quality Evaluation

Combining Clustering and Classification for Software Quality Evaluation Combining Clustering and Classification for Software Quality Evaluation Diomidis Papas 1, Christos Tjortjis 2 1 Department of Computer Science & Engineering, University of Ioannina P.O. Box 1186, GR 45110

More information

J2EE Development Best Practices: Improving Code Quality

J2EE Development Best Practices: Improving Code Quality Session id: 40232 J2EE Development Best Practices: Improving Code Quality Stuart Malkin Senior Product Manager Oracle Corporation Agenda Why analyze and optimize code? Static Analysis Dynamic Analysis

More information

Towards a Unified Source Code Measurement Framework Supporting Multiple Programming Languages

Towards a Unified Source Code Measurement Framework Supporting Multiple Programming Languages Towards a Unified Source Code Measurement Framework Supporting Multiple Programming Languages Reisha Humaira, Kazunori Sakamoto, Akira Ohashi, Hironori Washizaki, Yoshiaki Fukazawa Dept. Computer Science

More information

Discrete time modelling in software reliability engineering a unified approach

Discrete time modelling in software reliability engineering a unified approach Comput Syst Sci & Eng 2009) 6: 71 77 2009 CRL Publishing Ltd International Journal of Computer Systems Science & Engineering Discrete time modelling in software reliability engineering a unified approach

More information

Measuring the quality of UML Designs

Measuring the quality of UML Designs Measuring the quality of UML Designs Author: Mr. Mark Micallef (mmica@cs.um.edu.mt) Supervisor: Dr. Ernest Cachia (eacaci@cs.um.edu.mt) Affiliation: University of Malta (www.um.edu.mt) Keywords Software

More information

Object Oriented Design Metrics for Predicting Fault Proneness using Naïve Bayes and Random Forest

Object Oriented Design Metrics for Predicting Fault Proneness using Naïve Bayes and Random Forest Proc. of Int. Conf. on Advances in Communication, Network, and Computing, CNC Object Oriented Design Metrics for Predicting Fault Proneness using Naïve Bayes and Random Forest Vaishnavi.J 1, Anousouya

More information

HOW AND WHEN TO FLATTEN JAVA CLASSES?

HOW AND WHEN TO FLATTEN JAVA CLASSES? HOW AND WHEN TO FLATTEN JAVA CLASSES? Jehad Al Dallal Department of Information Science, P.O. Box 5969, Safat 13060, Kuwait ABSTRACT Improving modularity and reusability are two key objectives in object-oriented

More information

Maintainability and Agile development. Author: Mika Mäntylä

Maintainability and Agile development. Author: Mika Mäntylä Maintainability and Agile development Author: Mika Mäntylä ISO 9126 Software Quality Characteristics Are the required functions available in the software? How easy is it to

More information

On the Applicability of Predictive Maintainability Models onto dynamic Languages

On the Applicability of Predictive Maintainability Models onto dynamic Languages On the Applicability of Predictive Maintainability Models onto dynamic Languages Miguel Lopez 1, Naji Habra 2, Grégory Seront 1 1 CETIC asbl Rue Clément Ader, 8 B-6041 Gosselies, Belgium malm@cetic.be,,

More information

Moonzoo Kim CS Division of EECS Dept.

Moonzoo Kim CS Division of EECS Dept. Chapter 15 Product Metrics Moonzoo Kim CS Division of EECS Dept. KAIST 1 Overview of Ch15. Product Metrics 15.1 Software Quality 15.2 A Framework for Product Metrics 15.3 Metrics for the Analysis Model

More information

Report and Opinion 2014;6(10) Measurement Of Software Complexity In Object Oriented Systems Abstract

Report and Opinion 2014;6(10)   Measurement Of Software Complexity In Object Oriented Systems Abstract Measurement Of Software Complexity In Object Oriented Systems Abstract Hari Om Sharan 1, Garima 1, Md. Haroon 1, and Rajeev Kumar 2 1 Deptt. of Computer Science, COE, Teerthankar Mahaveer University, Moradabad,

More information

2IS55 Software Evolution. Software metrics (3) Alexander Serebrenik

2IS55 Software Evolution. Software metrics (3) Alexander Serebrenik 2IS55 Software Evolution Software metrics (3) Alexander Serebrenik Sources / SET / W&I 19-3-2013 PAGE 1 From imperative to OO All metrics so far were designed for imperative languages Applicable for OO

More information

Further Thoughts on Precision

Further Thoughts on Precision Further Thoughts on Precision David Gray, David Bowes, Neil Davey, Yi Sun and Bruce Christianson Abstract Background: There has been much discussion amongst automated software defect prediction researchers

More information

2014, IJARCSSE All Rights Reserved Page 1084

2014, IJARCSSE All Rights Reserved Page 1084 Volume 4, Issue 8, August 2014 ISSN: 2277 128X International Journal of Advanced Research in Computer Science and Software Engineering Research Paper Available online at: www.ijarcsse.com Classification

More information

On the Role of Weibull-type Distributions in NHPP-based Software Reliability Modeling

On the Role of Weibull-type Distributions in NHPP-based Software Reliability Modeling International Journal of Performability Engineering Vol. 9, No. 2, March 2013, pp. 123-132. RAMS Consultants Printed in India On the Role of Weibull-type Distributions in NHPP-based Software Reliability

More information

Early Prediction of Software Fault-Prone Module using Artificial Neural Network

Early Prediction of Software Fault-Prone Module using Artificial Neural Network International Journal of Performability Engineering Vol. 11, No. 1, January 2015, pp. 43-52. RAMS Consultants Printed in India Early Prediction of Software Fault-Prone Module using Artificial Neural Network

More information

CLASSIFYING SOFTWARE FAULTS THROUGH BOOLEAN CLASSIFICATION MODEL BASED ON DISCRETIZED DEFECT DATASETS

CLASSIFYING SOFTWARE FAULTS THROUGH BOOLEAN CLASSIFICATION MODEL BASED ON DISCRETIZED DEFECT DATASETS CLASSIFYING SOFTWARE FAULTS THROUGH BOOLEAN CLASSIFICATION MODEL BASED ON DISCRETIZED DEFECT DATASETS Pooja Kapoor 1, Deepak Arora 1 and Ashwani Kumar 2 1 Department of Computer Science and Engineering,

More information

A Report on Using Simplified Function Point Measurement Processes

A Report on Using Simplified Function Point Measurement Processes ICSEA 212 : The Seventh International Conference on Software Engineering Advances A Report on Using Simplified Function Point Measurement Processes Luigi Lavazza Geng Liu Dipartimento di Scienze Teoriche

More information

OPEN source software systems are becoming evermore

OPEN source software systems are becoming evermore IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SOFTWARE ENGINEERING, VOL. 31, NO. 10, OCTOBER 2005 897 Empirical Validation of Object-Oriented Metrics on Open Source Software for Fault Prediction Tibor Gyimóthy, Rudolf Ferenc,

More information

A New Statistical Software Reliability Tool

A New Statistical Software Reliability Tool A New Statistical Software Reliability Tool M.A.A. Boon 1, E. Brandt 2, I. Corro Ramos 1, A. Di Bucchianico 1 and R. Henzen 2 1 Department of Mathematics, Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven,

More information

How to Realization Architectural testing model using Measurement Metrics

How to Realization Architectural testing model using Measurement Metrics How to Realization Architectural testing model using Measurement Metrics Lalji Prasad 1, Sarita Singh Bhadauria 2 1 TRUBA College of Engineering & Technology/ Computer Science &Engineering, INDORE, INDIA

More information

Analysis of Reusability of Object-Oriented System using CK Metrics

Analysis of Reusability of Object-Oriented System using CK Metrics Analysis of Reusability of Object-Oriented System using CK Metrics Brij Mohan Goel Research Scholar, Deptt. of CSE SGVU, Jaipur-302025, India Pradeep Kumar Bhatia Deptt. of CSE., G J University of Science

More information

An Empirical Study to Redefine the Relationship between Software Design Metrics and Maintainability in High Data Intensive Applications

An Empirical Study to Redefine the Relationship between Software Design Metrics and Maintainability in High Data Intensive Applications , 23-25 October, 2013, San Francisco, USA An Empirical Study to Redefine the Relationship between Software Design Metrics and Maintainability in High Data Intensive Applications Ruchika Malhotra and Anuradha

More information

A NOTE ON COST ESTIMATION BASED ON PRIME NUMBERS

A NOTE ON COST ESTIMATION BASED ON PRIME NUMBERS International Journal of Information Technology and Knowledge Management July-December 2010, Volume 2, No. 2, pp. 241-245 A NOTE ON COST ESTIMATION BASED ON PRIME NUMBERS Surya Prakash Tripathi 1, Kavita

More information

Effective Modular Design

Effective Modular Design CSC40232: SOFTWARE ENGINEERING Professor: Jane Cleland Huang Metrics sarec.nd.edu/courses/se2017 Department of Computer Science and Engineering Effective Modular Design Modular design Reduces complexity

More information