University of Southern California Center for Systems and Software Engineering Building Cost Estimating Relationships for Acquisition Decision Support Brad.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Estimation using COCOMO More Science, Less Art. COCOMO History COCOMO History Constructive Cost Model Dr. Barry Boehm TRW in 1970s COCOMO
Advertisements

A Sizing Framework for DoD Software Cost Analysis Raymond Madachy, NPS Barry Boehm, Brad Clark and Don Reifer, USC Wilson Rosa, AFCAA
Copyright 2000, Stephan Kelley1 Estimating User Interface Effort Using A Formal Method By Stephan Kelley 16 November 2000.
Cocomo II Constructive Cost Model [Boehm] Sybren Deelstra.
University of Southern California Center for Systems and Software Engineering ©USC-CSSE1 Ray Madachy, Ricardo Valerdi USC Center for Systems and Software.
USC 21 st International Forum on Systems, Software, and COCOMO Cost Modeling Nov 2006 University of Southern California Center for Software Engineering.
University of Southern California Center for Systems and Software Engineering Next-Generation Software Sizing and Costing Metrics Workshop Report Wilson.
University of Southern California Center for Software Engineering CSE USC COSYSMO: Constructive Systems Engineering Cost Model Barry Boehm, USC CSE Annual.
Some Experience With COSYSMOR At Lockheed Martin
University of Southern California Center for Systems and Software Engineering Productivity Data Analysis and Issues Brad Clark, Thomas Tan USC CSSE Annual.
University of Southern California Center for Software Engineering C S E USC Using COCOMO for Software Decisions - from COCOMO II Book, Section 2.6, 6.5.
University of Southern California Center for Systems and Software Engineering An Investigation on Domain-Based Effort Distribution Thomas Tan 26 th International.
University of Southern California Center for Systems and Software Engineering A Tractable Approach to Handling Software Productivity Domains Thomas Tan.
COCOMO II Calibration Brad Clark Software Metrics Inc. Don Reifer Reifer Consultants Inc. 22nd International Forum on COCOMO and Systems / Software Cost.
University of Southern California Center for Systems and Software Engineering 1 © USC-CSSE Unified CodeCounter (UCC) with Differencing Functionality Marilyn.
University of Southern California Center for Systems and Software Engineering © 2010, USC-CSSE 1 COCOMO II Maintenance Model Upgrade Vu Nguyen, Barry Boehm.
Introduction Wilson Rosa, AFCAA CSSE Annual Research Review March 8, 2010.
University of Southern California Center for Systems and Software Engineering Assessing the IDPD Factor: Quality Management Platform Project Thomas Tan.
COSYSMO Reuse Extension 22 nd International Forum on COCOMO and Systems/Software Cost Modeling November 2, 2007 Ricardo ValerdiGan Wang Garry RoedlerJohn.
SOFTWARE PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND COST ESTIMATION © University of LiverpoolCOMP 319slide 1.
USC 21 st International Forum on Systems, Software, and COCOMO Cost Modeling Nov 2006 University of Southern California Center for Software Engineering.
COCOMO II Database Brad Clark Center for Software Engineering Annual Research Review March 11, 2002.
University of Southern California Center for Systems and Software Engineering Software Cost Estimation Metrics Manual 26 th International Forum on COCOMO.
University of Southern California Center for Systems and Software Engineering © 2009, USC-CSSE 1 Reuse and Maintenance Estimation Vu Nguyen March 17, 2009.
University of Southern California Center for Software Engineering CSE USC 9/14/05 1 COCOMO II: Airborne Radar System Example Ray Madachy
University of Southern California Center for Systems and Software Engineering AFCAA Database and Metrics Manual Ray Madachy, Brad Clark, Barry Boehm, Thomas.
SRDR Data Analysis Workshop Summary Brad Clark Ray Madachy Thomas Tan 25th International Forum on COCOMO and Systems/Software Cost Modeling November 5,
UNCLASSIFIED Schopenhauer's Proof For Software: Pessimistic Bias In the NOSTROMO Tool (U) Dan Strickland Dynetics Program Software Support
University of Southern California Center for Systems and Software Engineering ©USC-CSSE1 Ray Madachy USC Center for Systems and Software Engineering
Software Efforts at the NRO Cost Group 21 st International Forum on COCOMO and Software Cost Modeling November 8, 2006.
University of Southern California Center for Systems and Software Engineering © 2009, USC-CSSE 1 An Analysis of Changes in Productivity and COCOMO Cost.
University of Southern California Center for Systems and Software Engineering Domain-Driven Software Cost Estimation Wilson Rosa (Air Force Cost Analysis.
Information System Economics Software Project Cost Estimation.
COCOMO-SCORM: Cost Estimation for SCORM Course Development
Chapter 6 : Software Metrics
Lecture 4 Software Metrics
University of Southern California Center for Software Engineering C S E USC Using COCOMO for Software Decisions - from COCOMO II Book, Section 2.6 Barry.
University of Southern California Center for Software Engineering C S E USC Using COCOMO for Software Decisions - from COCOMO II Book, Section 2.6 Barry.
Project Estimation Model By Deepika Chaudhary. Factors for estimation Initial estimates may have to be made on the basis of a high level user requirements.
©Ian Sommerville 2004Software Engineering, 7th edition. Chapter 26 Slide 1 Software cost estimation 2.
SFWR ENG 3KO4 Slide 1 Management of Software Engineering Chapter 8: Fundamentals of Software Engineering C. Ghezzi, M. Jazayeri, D. Mandrioli.
University of Southern California Center for Systems and Software Engineering © 2010, USC-CSSE 1 Trends in Productivity and COCOMO Cost Drivers over the.
Estimation using COCOMO
Function Points Synthetic measure of program size used to estimate size early in the project Easier (than lines of code) to calculate from requirements.
Estimating “Size” of Software There are many ways to estimate the volume or size of software. ( understanding requirements is key to this activity ) –We.
Effort Estimation In WBS,one can estimate effort (micro-level) but needed to know: –Size of the deliverable –Productivity of resource in producing that.
Proposed Metrics Definition Highlights Raymond Madachy Naval Postgraduate School CSSE Annual Research Review March 8, 2010.
CP – Cost Analytics and Parametric Estimation Directorate UNCLASSIFIED Approved for Public Release 15-MDA-8479 (10 November 15) My Dad Is Bigger Than Your.
University of Southern California Center for Systems and Software Engineering Reducing Estimation Uncertainty with Continuous Assessment: Tracking the.
University of Southern California Center for Systems and Software Engineering Software Metrics Unification and Productivity Domain Workshop Summary Brad.
The COCOMO model An empirical model based on project experience. Well-documented, ‘independent’ model which is not tied to a specific software vendor.
University of Southern California Center for Systems and Software Engineering A Tractable Approach to Handling Software Productivity Domains Thomas Tan.
Center for Systems and Software Engineering DoD Software Resource Data Reports (SRDRs) and Cost Data Analysis Workshop Summary Brad Clark University of.
COCOMO Software Cost Estimating Model Lab 4 Demonstrator : Bandar Al Khalil.
1 Agile COCOMO II: A Tool for Software Cost Estimating by Analogy Cyrus Fakharzadeh Barry Boehm Gunjan Sharman SCEA 2002 Presentation University of Southern.
SOFTWARE PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND COST ESTIMATION
COCOMO III Workshop Summary
Productivity Data Analysis and Issues
Metrics and Terms SLOC (source lines of code)
An Empirical Study of Requirements-to-Code Elaboration Factors
SOFTWARE PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND COST ESTIMATION
SLOC and Size Reporting
COCOMO Model Basic.
Using COCOMO for Software Decisions - from COCOMO II Book, Section 2
Using COCOMO for Software Decisions - from COCOMO II Book, Section 2
Chapter 5: Software effort estimation- part 2
COCOMO 2 COCOMO 81 was developed with the assumption that a waterfall process would be used and that all software would be developed from scratch. Since.
Multi-Build Software Cost Estimation Using COINCOMO
Center for Software and Systems Engineering,
Using COCOMO for Software Decisions - from COCOMO II Book, Section 2
Presentation transcript:

University of Southern California Center for Systems and Software Engineering Building Cost Estimating Relationships for Acquisition Decision Support Brad Clark, Ray Madachy, Thomas Tan, & Barry Boehm Wilson Rosa, Sponsor

University of Southern California Center for Systems and Software Engineering 25th International Forum on COCOMO and Systems/Software Cost Modeling22 Topics Research problem and objectives Data challenges and resolution Results Future work Project led by the Air Force Cost Analysis Agency (AFCAA) working with service cost agencies, and assisted by University of Southern California and Naval Postgraduate School November 3, 2010

University of Southern California Center for Systems and Software Engineering 25th International Forum on COCOMO and Systems/Software Cost Modeling3 Problem For many years, there have been efforts to collect data from multiple projects and organizations –Data Analysis Center for Software (DACS) –Software Engineering Information Repository (SEIR) –International Software Benchmarking Standards Group (ISBSG) –Large Aerospace Mergers (Attempts to create company-wide databases) –USAF Mosemann Initiative (Lloyd Mosemann Asst. Sec. USAF) –USC CSSE COCOMO II repository –DoD Software Resources Data Report (SRDR) Purpose: to derive estimating relationships and benchmarks for size, cost, productivity and quality All have faced common challenges such as data definitions, completeness and integrity November 3, 2010

University of Southern California Center for Systems and Software Engineering 25th International Forum on COCOMO and Systems/Software Cost Modeling4 Data Analysis Cost = a * X b Research Objectives Using SRDR data, improve the quality and consistency of estimating methods across cost agencies and program offices through guidance, standardization, and knowledge sharing. –Characterize different Application Domains and Operating Environments within DoD –Analyze collected data for simple Cost Estimating Relationships (CER) within each domain –Develop rules-of-thumb for missing data Make collected data useful to oversight and management entities Data RecordsCERs November 3, 2010

University of Southern California Center for Systems and Software Engineering SRDR Raw Data (520 observations) 25th International Forum on COCOMO and Systems/Software Cost Modeling5 PM = 1.67 * KSLOC 0.66 November 3, 2010

University of Southern California Center for Systems and Software Engineering Data Conditioning Segregate data Normalize sizing data (predictor) Normalize effort data (response) Address multi-build data 25th International Forum on COCOMO and Systems/Software Cost Modeling6November 3, 2010

University of Southern California Center for Systems and Software Engineering 25th International Forum on COCOMO and Systems/Software Cost Modeling77 SRDR Data Segmentation November 3, 2010

University of Southern California Center for Systems and Software Engineering 25th International Forum on COCOMO and Systems/Software Cost Modeling8 Communication Domain Analysis-1 EnvironmentExamplesBrief Definition Fixed Ground Computing facilities Command and Control centers Tactical Information centers Communication centers Manned and unmanned fixed, stationary land sites (buildings) with access to external power sources, backup power sources, physical access to systems, regular upgrades and maintenance to hardware and software, support for multiple users. Possible noisy environment. DomainExamplesBrief Definition Communications Radios Microwave controller Large telephone switching systems Network management Software that controls the transmission and receipt of voice, data, digital and video information. The software operates in real-time or in pseudo real-time. Environment: Fixed ground, mobile ground, manned and unmanned airborne, or unmanned space. November 3, 2010

University of Southern California Center for Systems and Software Engineering 25th International Forum on COCOMO and Systems/Software Cost Modeling9 Mission Management Analysis-1 EnvironmentExamplesBrief Definition Avionics Fixed-wing aircraft Helicopters Manned airborne platforms. Software that is complex and runs in real-time in embedded computer systems. It must often operates under interrupt control to process timelines in the nanoseconds. DomainExamplesBrief Definition Mission Management Operational Flight Program Mission Computer Flight Control Software Software that enables and assists the operator in performing mission management activities including scheduling activities based on vehicle, operational and environmental priorities. Environment: Mobile ground, avionics or manned space. November 3, 2010

University of Southern California Center for Systems and Software Engineering Normalizing Size Normalize the SLOC counting method to Logical SLOC –Physical SLOC count converted to Logical SLOC count by programming language –Non-comment SLOC count converted to Logical SLOC count by programming language Convert Auto-Generated SLOC convert to Equivalent SLOC (ESLOC) –Use AAF formula: (DM% * 0.4) + (CM% * 0.3) + (IM% * 0.3) –DM = CM = 0; IM = 100 Convert Reused SLOC to ESLOC with AAF formula –DM = CM = 0; IM = 100 Convert Modified SLOC to ESLOC –Use AAF formula: (DM% * 0.4) + (CM% * 0.3) + (IM% * 0.3 –Default values: Low – Mean – High based on 90% confidence interval Create Equivalent SLOC count and scale to thousands (K) to derive EKSLOC (New + Auto-Gen+ Reused+ Modifed) / 1000 = EKSLOC Remove all records with an EKSLOC below th International Forum on COCOMO and Systems/Software Cost Modeling10November 3, 2010

University of Southern California Center for Systems and Software Engineering 25th International Forum on COCOMO and Systems/Software Cost Modeling11 SLOC Count Conversion Experiment 11 Logical SLOC = * NCSS Count R 2 = Logical SLOC = * NCSS Count R 2 = November 3, 2010

University of Southern California Center for Systems and Software Engineering 25th International Forum on COCOMO and Systems/Software Cost Modeling12 SLOC Count Conversion Factors Data Count Total Line to Logical NCSS to Logical Ada C/C C# Java Perl PHP Overall For example, (C++ NCSS SLOC Count) * 0.61 = (C++ Logical SLOC Count) November 3, 2010

University of Southern California Center for Systems and Software Engineering Convert Modified Size to ESLOC Use AAF formula: (DM% * 0.4) + (CM% * 0.3) + (IM% * 0.3) Problems with missing DM, CM & IM in SRDR data Program interviews provided parameters for some records For missing data, use records that have data in all fields to derive recommended values for missing data 25th International Forum on COCOMO and Systems/Software Cost Modeling13 November 3, 2010

University of Southern California Center for Systems and Software Engineering Convert Modified Size to ESLOC Communication Domain (18 observations) Mission Management (19 observations) 25th International Forum on COCOMO and Systems/Software Cost Modeling14 DM%CM%IM% Median Low 90% CL Mean High 90% CL DM%CM%IM% Median100 Low 90% CL Mean High 90% CL November 3, 2010

University of Southern California Center for Systems and Software Engineering Normalizing Effort Labor hours are reported for 7 categories: –Software Requirements –Software Architecture (including Detailed Design) –Software Code (including Unit Testing) –Software Integration and Test –Software Qualification Test –Software Developmental Test & Evaluation –Other (Mgt, QA, CM, PI, etc.) Create effort distribution percentages for records that have hours in requirements, architecture, code, integration and qualification test phases (developmental test evaluation and other phases may or may not be blank) Fill in missing hours using effort distribution table Currently don’t use Developmental Test and Other hours 25th International Forum on COCOMO and Systems/Software Cost Modeling15November 3, 2010

University of Southern California Center for Systems and Software Engineering Distribution Percentages Communication (27 observations) Mission Management (16 observations) 25th International Forum on COCOMO and Systems/Software Cost Modeling16 Req’t%Arch%Code%I&T%QT% Median Low 90% CL Mean High 90% CL Req’t%Arch%Code%I&T%QT% Median Low 90% CL Mean High 90% CL November 3, 2010

University of Southern California Center for Systems and Software Engineering Multi-Build Data 25th International Forum on COCOMO and Systems/Software Cost Modeling17November 3, 2010

University of Southern California Center for Systems and Software Engineering 25th International Forum on COCOMO and Systems/Software Cost Modeling18 One More: Team Experience SRDR Data Definition –Report the percentage of project personnel in each category –Highly Experienced in the domain (three or more years of experience) –Nominally Experienced in the project domain (one to three years of experience) –Entry-level Experienced (zero to one year of experience) Need to include Team Experience (TXP) in CERs to estimate cost After analyzing the data, the following quantitative values are assigned: –Highly experienced: 0.60 –Nominally experienced: 1.00 –Entry-level experienced: 1.30 November 3, 2010

University of Southern California Center for Systems and Software Engineering Data Conditioning Results 25th International Forum on COCOMO and Systems/Software Cost Modeling19 Just Kidding! November 3, 2010

University of Southern California Center for Systems and Software Engineering 25th International Forum on COCOMO and Systems/Software Cost Modeling20 Five Phases PM = 6.35 * EKSLOC R 2 = 0.86 Five Phases PM = 6.35 * EKSLOC R 2 = 0.86 November 3, 2010

University of Southern California Center for Systems and Software Engineering 25th International Forum on COCOMO and Systems/Software Cost Modeling21 Three Phases PM = 3.8 * EKSLOC R 2 = 0.88 Three Phases PM = 3.8 * EKSLOC R 2 = 0.88 November 3, 2010

University of Southern California Center for Systems and Software Engineering 25th International Forum on COCOMO and Systems/Software Cost Modeling22 Five Phases PM = 5.06 * EKSLOC 1.22 R 2 = Five Phases PM = 5.06 * EKSLOC 1.22 R 2 = November 3, 2010

University of Southern California Center for Systems and Software Engineering 25th International Forum on COCOMO and Systems/Software Cost Modeling23 Three Phases PM = 3.47 * EKSLOC 1.19 R 2 = Three Phases PM = 3.47 * EKSLOC 1.19 R 2 = November 3, 2010

University of Southern California Center for Systems and Software Engineering 25th International Forum on COCOMO and Systems/Software Cost Modeling24 Simple Cost Estimating Relationships Notes: CER: Cost Estimating Relationship PM: Person Months (152 labor hours / month) EKSLOC: Equivalent Thousands of Source Lines of Code R2: Correlation Coefficient that ranges for 0 to 1 Bias: Average percentage error that estimate is above/below actual value CommunicationsMission Management CER PM = 3.8 * EKSLOC 0.95 * TXPPM = 3.47 * EKSLOC 1.19 * TXP # Data Pts 2636 EKSLOC Range 4.8 to to 201 R2R November 3, 2010

University of Southern California Center for Systems and Software Engineering 25th International Forum on COCOMO and Systems/Software Cost Modeling25 Conclusion Workshop: Thursday from 8:00 AM to 2:50 PM Come find out –How to use the information to construct an estimate –Next steps and schedule –Conclusions about this approach Discussion on how the SRDR may change –We made recommendations for improvements We will also discuss ranking Application Domains by order of productivity November 3, 2010

University of Southern California Center for Systems and Software Engineering 25th International Forum on COCOMO and Systems/Software Cost Modeling26 Questions? For more information, contact: Wilson Rosa Or Brad Clark Or Ray Madachy November 3, 2010