1 Defect Removal Effectiveness Kan ch 6 Steve Chenoweth, RHIT Left – Some defects are easier to remove than others. This is the cruise ship Costa Concordia,

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
INFO 631 Prof. Glenn Booker Week 1 – Defect Analysis and Removal 1INFO631 Week 1.
Advertisements

Metrics to improve software process
Chapter 4 Quality Assurance in Context
Computer Engineering 203 R Smith Project Tracking 12/ Project Tracking Why do we want to track a project? What is the projects MOV? – Why is tracking.
Copyright © 1994 Carnegie Mellon University Disciplined Software Engineering - Lecture 1 1 Disciplined Software Engineering Lecture #7 Software Engineering.
1 In-Process Metrics for Software Testing Kan Ch 10 Steve Chenoweth, RHIT Left – In materials testing, the goal always is to break it! That’s how you know.
1 Exponential Distribution and Reliability Growth Models Kan Ch 8 Steve Chenoweth, RHIT Right: Wait – I always thought “exponential growth” was like this!
Software Quality Assurance Inspection by Ross Simmerman Software developers follow a method of software quality assurance and try to eliminate bugs prior.
1 Ishikawa’s 7 Pillars of Wisdom Kan Ch 5 Steve Chenoweth, RHIT.
1 Software Testing and Quality Assurance Lecture 2 Software Verification & Validation.
Software Development Process Models. The Waterfall Development Model.
Defect Removal Metrics
Software Measurement and Process Improvement
© 2010 John Dalbey Ch 9: Reviews Humphrey proposes that personal reviews will result in improved quality. Now that we have a defined process and some real.
Defect Removal Metrics
SE 450 Software Processes & Product Metrics Software Metrics Overview.
RIT Software Engineering
SE 450 Software Processes & Product Metrics 1 Defect Removal.
Validating and Improving Test-Case Effectiveness Author: Yuri Chernak Presenter: Lam, Man Tat.
Software Process and Product Metrics
1 Software Quality Metrics Ch 4 in Kan Steve Chenoweth, RHIT What do you measure?
Stoimen Stoimenov QA Engineer QA Engineer SitefinityLeads,SitefinityTeam6 Telerik QA Academy Telerik QA Academy.
Software Quality Assurance For Software Engineering && Architecture and Design.
1 Quality Management Models Kan Ch 9 Steve Chenoweth, RHIT Right – To keep in mind – For Kan, this is part of Total Quality Management.
Software Defects Defect Prevention and Removal 1.
12 Steps to Useful Software Metrics
1 Software Inspections and Walkthroughs Author: A. Frank Ackerman Presented by Cynthia Johnson EEL6883.
Kan Ch 7 Steve Chenoweth, RHIT
S Neuendorf 2004 Prediction of Software Defects SASQAG March 2004 by Steve Neuendorf.
1 Measurement Theory Ch 3 in Kan Steve Chenoweth, RHIT.
S T A M © 2000, KPA Ltd. Software Trouble Assessment Matrix Software Trouble Assessment Matrix *This presentation is extracted from SOFTWARE PROCESS QUALITY:
Software Quality Chapter Software Quality  How can you tell if software has high quality?  How can we measure the quality of software?  How.
Software Inspections and Walkthroughs By. Adnan khan.
Quality Planning & Defect Estimation
Validation Metrics. Metrics are Needed to Answer the Following Questions How much time is required to find bugs, fix them, and verify that they are fixed?
Chapter 14: Inspection  Basic Concept and Generic Process  Fagan Inspection  Other Inspection and Related Activities.
1 POP Quiz T/F Defect Removal Effectiveness and Defect Removal Models are not true Predictive Models Define DRE What is a Checklist? What is it for? What.
CS 350, slide set 6 M. Overstreet Old Dominion University Spring 2005.
Software Quality Assurance SE Software Quality Assurance What is “quality”?
Software Test Metrics When you can measure what you are speaking about and express it in numbers, you know something about it; but when you cannot measure,
1 The Do’s and Don’ts of Software Process Improvement Steve Chenoweth, RHIT.
Software Quality See accompanying Word file “Software quality 1”
Disciplined Software Engineering Lecture #7 Software Engineering Institute Carnegie Mellon University Pittsburgh, PA Sponsored by the U.S. Department.
1 Pop Quiz What is an Orthogonal Defect? Which is more precise: predictive models or management models? Why? Essay: Why are metrics and models an important.
CS 3610: Software Engineering – Fall 2009 Dr. Hisham Haddad – CSIS Dept. Chapter 2 The Software Process Discussion of the Software Process: Process Framework,
Formal Technical Reviews Matt Graham 18 November 2004 EECS 814 University of Kansas.
INFO 636 Software Engineering Process I Prof. Glenn Booker Week 9 – Quality Management 1INFO636 Week 9.
INFO 636 Software Engineering Process I Prof. Glenn Booker Week 8 – Reviews 1INFO636 Week 8.
PSP Quality Strategy [SE-280 Dr. Mark L. Hornick 1.
Copyright © 1994 Carnegie Mellon University Disciplined Software Engineering - Lecture 7 1 Design and Code Reviews - Overview What are design and code.
Software Testing and Maintenance 1 Code Review  Introduction  How to Conduct Code Review  Practical Tips  Tool Support  Summary.
1 Metrics and lessons learned for OO projects Kan Ch 12 Steve Chenoweth, RHIT Above – New chapter, same Halstead. He also predicted various other project.
SE-280 Dr. Mark L. Hornick 1 Design and Code Reviews Review Checklists.
Software Defects.
Mistakes, Errors and Defects. 12/7/2015Mistakes, Errors, Defects, Copyright M. Smith, ECE, University of Calgary, Canada 2 Basic Concepts  You are building.
CIS-74 Computer Software Quality Assurance Systematic Software Testing Chapter 11: Improving the Testing Process.
1 Software Quality Engineering. 2 Quality Management Models –Tools for helping to monitor and manage the quality of software when it is under development.
Software Engineering Lecture 8: Quality Assurance.
Software Quality Prepared By: Rooshabh Kothari Assistant Professor T & P Co-ordinator CSE/IT Department 1.
Software Engineering 2 Term Project by: Feras Batarseh Nestor Rivera.
Welcome to Software Project Management. CONVENTIONAL SOFTWARE MANAGEMENT The BEST and WORST thing about software is its flexibility. 1.Software development.
by: Er. Manu Bansal Deptt of IT Software Quality Assurance.
Swami NatarajanOctober 1, 2016 RIT Software Engineering Software Metrics Overview.
ISQB Software Testing Section Meeting 10 Dec 2012.
Software Reviews Ashima Wadhwa.
The Value of Managing the Review Process
Testing More In CS430.
Testing and Debugging PPT By :Dr. R. Mall.
Software Quality Engineering
Testing and Inspection Present and Future
Presentation transcript:

1 Defect Removal Effectiveness Kan ch 6 Steve Chenoweth, RHIT Left – Some defects are easier to remove than others. This is the cruise ship Costa Concordia, which partially sank on Jan 14, 2012, just off the rocky coast of the Italian island Giglio, with a ripped hull. 32 people died. The ship was refloated in order to remove it and cut it up for scrap.

2 Quality is two “things” The presence of good things. And, The absence of bad things. In Ch 6, Kan focuses on the latter. In theory, it also covers the former. – You can test for the presence of a feature. If it’s not there, it’s a bad thing.

3 Defect removal Assumption we can do this is based on our philosophy about how things are made: – It can be done right (probably). – We can discover (eventually) if it’s not right. – If we discover that, we can fix it (with a struggle). – Most things we do are worth fixing if you know they are not right.

4 Defect removal effectiveness Has to do with eliminating defects systematically. Also efficiently. Also, before the customer sees them! And, managing our development processes: – There ought to be a way to be more effective or efficient about improving quality. Being good at this could let us develop bigger, more complex products.

5 Inspections / operations A process where we try to eliminate defects. “Testing” itself is unique, among these. – Arguably, it doesn’t “inject” defects. – Just “finds” them so they can be “removed.” Actually, “inspections” are the same way. – But they may be considered “part of” something bigger Like requirements gathering, design, etc.

6 What is removal effectiveness? A ratio – how many we got, out of what we could have achieved: __ Defects found or removed__ * 100% Defects present that we could have So, how do we know what we could have? These = the number eventually found!

7 Related theme – early detection Results of IBM Houston’s “Early detection” program for Space Shuttle software, mid-1980’s.

8 More refined definitions

9 And the process, for each step

10 Kan’s source for a lot of calcs

11 Which gives results like… Unit Test Effectiveness TE(UT) = 332/( ) * 100% = 332/911 * 100% = 36% Defect Removal Effectiveness DRE = ( 3465 – 81 / 3465 ) * 100% = 97.7%

12 A matrix can be useful

13 Or tables showing calcs

14 Kan’s special two-phase model Assumes that: 1.There are only two phases of defect removal. 2.Their effectiveness is the same. Kind of hypothetical!

15 Two-phase model, cntd Definitions: MP = Major problems found before formal testing PTR = Errors found in formal testing or field  = MP/PTR, where  > 1. Q = defects in released software. TD = Total defects over life: MP + PTR + Q.

16 Two-phase model, cntd Model allows you to conclude that: Q = TD /  2 So, for example, in Fig 6.4, if – TD = 34.6 defects / KLOC, and – Q = 0.81 defects / KLOC, then – 0.81 = 34.6 /  2, and –  = 6.5. – “If the effectiveness is the same for the two phases, then the number of defects to be removed by the first phase must be at least 6.5 times the number to be removed by testing in order to achieve the quality target.”

17 Cost effectiveness

18 But, early inspections must be rigorous Fagan’s model 5-step inspection and walkthrough: Overview (for communications and education) Preparation (for education) Inspection (to find errors and to walk through every line of code) Network (to fix errors), and Follow-up (to ensure all fixes are applied correctly)

19 Related to process maturity? Jones’s defect removal rates for different CMM levels: Level 1: 85% Level 2: 89% Level 3: 91% Level 4: 93% Level 5: 95%

20 Kan’s recs for small orgs Defect removal effectiveness bears a direct correlation with quality of field performance. Start with the overall defect removal effectiveness indicator and the test effectiveness indicator. Assess the stability or variations in these across projects and improve them. Compare with industry baselines. Start to examine inspection effectiveness, and loop back for continuous improvement. Use a tracking system to gather data bout defect origins.

21 And, in conclusion… The lead character, Jep, in the movie “The Great Beauty,” considers the disaster that you already considered. It won the 2014 Academy Award for “Best Foreign Film.” Quality.