Scribd
Upload
32 views

What Makes A Successful Project?: Stages: 1. Set Targets 2. Attempt To Achieve Targets

The document discusses several techniques for estimating software project efforts including bottom-up, top-down, analogy, algorithmic models like function points, parametric models like COCOMO which is based on parameters, and expert opinion. It provides details on bottom-up versus top-down estimation, bottom-up estimating, top-down estimating, parametric models, function points analysis, and COCOMO models.

Uploaded by

Surya Prakash
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as PPT, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
32 views

What Makes A Successful Project?: Stages: 1. Set Targets 2. Attempt To Achieve Targets

The document discusses several techniques for estimating software project efforts including bottom-up, top-down, analogy, algorithmic models like function points, parametric models like COCOMO which is based on parameters, and expert opinion. It provides details on bottom-up versus top-down estimation, bottom-up estimating, top-down estimating, parametric models, function points analysis, and COCOMO models.

Uploaded by

Surya Prakash
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as PPT, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 26

What makes a

successful project?
Delivering:
Stages:
agreed functionality
1. set targets
on time
2. Attempt to
at the agreed cost
achieve targets
with the required
quality

The McGraw-Hill Companies, 2005

Software Effort
estimation Techniques

Bottom-up
Top-down
Analogy - case-based, comparative
algorithmic models e.g. function points
Parametric- COCOMO (Based on parameters)
Parkinson-which identifies the staff effort
available to do a project and uses that as the
estimate
price to win- where estimate is a figure that
appears to be sufficiently low to win a contract
Expert opinion - just guessing?
2

The McGraw-Hill Companies, 2005

Bottom-up versus topdown


Bottom-up
use when no past project data
identify all tasks that have to be done so quite
time-consuming
use when you have no data about similar past
projects

Top-down
produce overall estimate based on project cost
drivers
based on past project data
divide overall estimate between jobs to be done

The McGraw-Hill Companies, 2005

Bottom-up estimating
1. Break project into smaller and
smaller components
2. Estimate costs for the lowest level
activities
3. At each higher level calculate
estimate by adding estimates for
lower levels
4

The McGraw-Hill Companies, 2005

Top-down estimates
Estimate
100 days

Produce overall
estimate using
effort driver (s)

overall
project

design

code

test

30%
i.e.
30 days

30%
i.e.
30 days

40%
i.e. 40 days

distribute
proportions of
overall estimate
to components

The McGraw-Hill Companies, 2005

Parametric models - the


need for historical data
simplistic model for an estimate
estimated effort =(system size) *
(productivity)
e.g.
system size = lines of code
productivity = lines of code per day
(Based on historical data)

The McGraw-Hill Companies, 2005

Parametric models
Some models like Function Points
focus on task or system size
FPs originally used to estimate
Lines of Code, rather than effort
Number
of file types
system
size

model
Numbers of input
and output transaction types
7

The McGraw-Hill Companies, 2005

Albretch Function Point analysis

The McGraw-Hill Companies, 2005

The McGraw-Hill Companies, 2005

10

The McGraw-Hill Companies, 2005

11

The McGraw-Hill Companies, 2005

12

The McGraw-Hill Companies, 2005

Function points Mark II


Developed by Charles R. Symons I
Albrecht FP method identified 14 technical
complexityadjustment factors.
Mark II FP identify five more factors

Interface to other applications


Special security features
Direct access for third parties
User training features
Documentation requirements

Productivity= size/effort
Effort=size/productivity
13

The McGraw-Hill Companies, 2005

Function points Mark II


continued
For each
transaction,
count

#entities
accessed

#input
items

data items
input (Ni)
data items
output (No)
entity types
accessed (Ne)

#output
items

FP count = Ni * 0.58 + Ne * 1.66 + No * 0.26


14

The McGraw-Hill Companies, 2005

COCOMO
Model proposed by Boehm

Basic model
effort = c x sizek
C and k depend on the type of
system: organic, semi-detached,
embedded
Size is measured in kloc ie.
Thousands of lines of code
15

The McGraw-Hill Companies, 2005

The COCOMO constants


System type

Organic (broadly,
information
systems)

2.4

1.05

Semi-detached

3.0

1.12

Embedded
3.6
1.20
(broadly, realtime)
k exponentiation to the power of
adds disproportionately more effort to the larger projects
takes account of bigger management overheads
16

The McGraw-Hill Companies, 2005

Boehm developed the intermediate version of COCOMO (COCOMO81)


which took into account 15 cost drivers.
In the intermediate model, a nominal effort estimate (pmnom) is derived in a
similar way as for the basic model.
The nominal estimate is then adjusted by a development effort multiplier (dem):

pmest = pmnom x dem


PCAP as high and use a multiplier of0.8. effectively reducing the nominal
estimate by 20%.

17

The McGraw-Hill Companies, 2005

18

The McGraw-Hill Companies, 2005

COCOMO II
A new family of models, COCOMO II, is being refined by Barry Boehm and his
co-workers.
COCO MO II
has been designed to accommodate this by having models for three different
stages.
Application composition: Where the external features of the system that the
users will experience are designed. Prototyping will typically be employed to do
This.
Early design: Where the fundamental software structures are designed.
With larger, more demanding systems, where, for example, there will be large
volumes of transactions and performance is important, careful attention will
need to be paid to the architecture to be adopted.
Post architecture : Where the software structures undergo final construction.
modification and tuning to create a system that will perform as required.
19

The McGraw-Hill Companies, 2005

Where pm is the effort in 'person-months'.


A is a constant
size is measured in SLOC (which might have been derived from an FP
count as explained above).
em effort multiplier and
Sf is exponent scale factor.
The scale factor is derived thus:

20

The McGraw-Hill Companies, 2005

21

The McGraw-Hill Companies, 2005

22

The McGraw-Hill Companies, 2005

Estimating by analogy
Use effort
from source
as
estimate

source cases
attribute values

effort

attribute values

effort

attribute values

effort

attribute values

effort

attribute values

effort

attribute values

effort

target case
attribute values

?????

Select case
with closet attribute
values
23

The McGraw-Hill Companies, 2005

Stages: identify
Significant features of the current
project
previous project(s) with similar
features
differences between the current and
previous projects
possible reasons for error (risk)
measures to reduce uncertainty
24

The McGraw-Hill Companies, 2005

Euclidean distance =
sq root of ((Target_parameter1Source_parameter1)2 + ...(Target_parameternSource_parametern)2 )

25

The McGraw-Hill Companies, 2005

Machine assistance for


source selection (ANGEL)
Source A
Source B

Number of
inputs

It-Is
Ot-Os

target

Number of outputs

Euclidean distance = sq root ((It - Is)2 + (Ot - Os)2 )


26

The McGraw-Hill Companies, 2005

You might also like