1. Effort Estimation In WBS,one can estimate effort (micro-level) but needed to know: –Size of the deliverable –Productivity of resource in producing that deliverable Effort = Size / Productivity e.g. Effort = 500 loc / (100 loc/person-day) = 5 person-days

2. Effort Estimation (in General) Has been an “art” for a long time because –many parameters to consider –unclear of relative importance of the parameters –unknown inter-relationship among the parameters –unknown metrics for the parameters Historically, project managers –consulted others with past experiences –drew analogy from projects with “similar” characteristics –broke the projects down to components and used past history of workers who have worked on “similar” components; then combined the estimates For example? What if you are new at this and have no dependable contacts ?

3. General (MACRO) Model There have been many proposed models for estimation of effort in software. They all have a similar general form: – Effort ≡ (product size) & (other influencing factors) or more formally – Effort = [a + (b * ((Size)**c))] * [PROD(f’s)] where : –Size is the estimated size of the project in loc or function points –a, b, c, are coefficients derived from past data and curve fitting »a = base cost to do business regardless of size »b = fixed marginal cost per unit of change of size »c = nature of influence of size on cost –f’s are a set of additional factors, besides Size, that are deemd important –PROD (f’s) is the “multiplicative product” of the f’s

4. COCOMO (macro) Estimating Technique Developed by Barry Boehm in early 1980’s who had a long history with TRW and government projects (initially LOC based) Later modified into COCOMO II in the mid-1990’s (FP included for size, besides LOC) Included process activities : –Product Design –Detailed Design –Code and Unit Test –Integration and Test Utilized by some but many people still rely on experience and/or own company proprietary data. (some use COCOMO as a companion estimate) Note that requirements gathering and spec. are not included

5. Basic Form for Effort Effort = A * B * (size ** C) or more “generally” – Effort = [A * (size**C)] * [B ] –Effort is in “person-months” –A = scaling coefficient –B = coefficient based on 15 parameters –C = a scaling factor for process –Size = delivered source lines of code in “KLOC”

6. Basic form for Time Time = D * (Effort ** E) –Time = total number of “calendar months” –D = A constant scaling factor for schedule –E = a coefficient to describe the potential parallelism in managing software development Past experiences indicate that “time estimate” has usually been more than actual

7. COCOMO I Originally based on 56 projects Reflecting 3 modes of projects –Organic : less complex and flexible process –Semidetached : average complexity project –Embedded : complex, real-time defense projects

8. 3 Modes are Based on 8 Characteristics A. Team’s understanding of the project objective B. Team’s experience with similar or related project C. Project’s needs to conform with established requirements D. Project’s needs to conform with established interfaces E. Project developed with “new” operational environments F. Project’s need for new technology, architecture, etc. G. Project’s need for schedule integrity H. Project’s size range

9. Understand requirement Exp. w/similar project Conform w/req. Conform w/int. New oper. env. New tech/meth. Schedule int. Size

10. COCOMO I For the basic forms: –Effort = A * B *(size ** C) –Time = D * (Effort ** E) Organic : A = 3.2 ; C = 1.05 ; D= 2.5; E =.38 Semidetached : A = 3.0 ; C= 1.12 ; D= 2.5; E =.35 Embedded : A = 2.8 ; C = 1.2 ; D= 2.5; E =.32

11. Coefficient B Coefficient B is an effort adjustment factor based on 15 parameters which varied from very low, low, nominal, high, very high to extra high B = product (15 parameters) –Product attributes: Required Software Reliability :.75 ;.88; 1.00; 1.15; 1.40; Database Size : ;.94; 1.00; 1.08; 1.16; Product Complexity :. 70 ;.85; 1.00; 1.15; 1.30; 1.65 –Computer Attributes Execution Time Constraints : ; ; 1.00; 1.11; 1.30; 1.66 Main Storage Constraints : ; ; 1.00; 1.06; 1.21; 1.56 Virtual Machine Volatility : ;.87; 1.00; 1.15; 1.30; Computer Turnaround time : ;.87; 1.00; 1.07; 1.15;

12. Coefficient B (cont.) Personnel attributes Analyst Capabilities : 1.46 ; 1.19; 1.00;.86;.71; Application Experience : 1.29; 1.13; 1.00;.91;.82; Programmer Capability : 1.42; 1.17; 1.00;.86;.70; Virtual Machine Experience : 1.21; 1.10; 1.00;.90; ; Programming lang. Exper. : 1.14; 1.07; 1.00;.95; ; Project attributes Use of Modern Practices : 1.24; 1.10; 1.00;.91;.82; Use of Software Tools : 1.24; 1.10; 1.00;.91;.83; Required Develop schedule : 1.23; 1.08; 1.00; 1.04; 1.10;

13. An example Consider an averag e(semidetached) project of 10Kloc: –Effort = 3.0 * B * (10** 1.12) = 3 * 1 * 13.2 = 39.6 pm –Where B = 1.0 (all nominal) –Time = 2.5 *( 39.6 **.35) = 2.5 * 3.6 = 9 months –This requires an additional 8% more effort and 36% more schedule time if we include product plan and requirements: Effort = 39.6 + (39.6 *.08) = 39.6 + 3.16 = 42.76 pm Time = 9 + (9 *.36) = 9 +3.24 = 12.34 months Any problem?

14. Try another example Go through the assessment of 15 parameters for the effort adjustment factor, B. You may have some concerns : –Are we interpreting each parameter the same way –Do we have a consistent way to assess the range of values for each of the parameters –-How good is my size (loc) estimate?

15. COCOMO II Effort performed at USC with many industrial corporations participating Has a database of over 80 some projects “Early” estimate, preferred to use Function Point instead of LOC for size; “later” estimate may use LOC for size. (loc is harder to estimate without some experience) Coefficient B based on 15 parameters for early estimate is “rolled” up to 7 parameters, and for late estimates use 17 parameters. Scaling factor for process has 6 categories ranging in value from.00 to.05, in increments of.01

16. Function Point A non-LOC based estimator Often used to assess software “size” and “complexity” Started by Albrecht of IBM in late 1970’s

17. Function Point an estimation of “size” LOC as an estimate of “size” has many drawbacks but still used because of physical analogy: –Different programming languages has different loc meaning –Measures source code which is not available until implementation phase; it so hard to estimate during early phases of project

18. FP Utility Where is FP used? –Comparing software in a “normalized fashion” independent of op. system, languages, etc. –Benchmarking and “Projection” based on “size”: size -> effort or cost size -> development schedule size -> defect rate –Outsourcing Negotiation

19. Function Point Provides you a way to estimate the size* of the project based on estimating (items from requirements & high level design): –Inputs –Outputs –Inquiries –Files –Interfaces After getting the size, then --- still need to have an estimate on productivity and other factors to get effort in person-months: – productivity in: function-point/person-month –** *Divide the estimated total project function points by the productivity to get an estimate of person-month or person-days needed.*** Functional/Transaction related Data related

20. Function Point (FP) Computation Composed of 5 “Primary Factors” –Inputting items (external input items from user or another application) –Outputting items (external outputs such as reports, messages, screens – not each data item) –Inquiry (a query that results in a response of one or more data) –Master and logical files (internal file or data structure or data table) –External interfaces (data or sets of data sent to external devices, applications, etc.) And a “complexity level index” matrix : SimpleAverage Complex Input Output Inquiry Logical files Interface 346 4 57 3 46 71015 5 7 10

21. Function Point Computation (cont.) 1.Initial Function Point : – ∑ (# of Primary Factor (i) x Complexity Level Index for i) 2.There are 14 more “Degree of Influences” ( 0 to 5 scale) : data communications distributed data processing performance criteria heavy hardware utilization high transaction rate online data entry end user efficiency on-line update complex computation reusability ease of installation ease of operation portability maintainability

22. Function Point Computation (cont.) Define Technical Complexity Factor (TCF): – TCF =.65 + (.01 x DI ) – where DI = ∑ ( influence factor values) So note that.65 < TCF < 1.35 Function Point (FP) = Initial FP x TCF

23. What’s one Function Point? Do you have any experience in converting say -- --- 35 function points to effort in person months? Is there any standard conversion factor that you may use? –In IBM, during 90s, about 20 function points to 1 person month of effort (this was back in late 1990’s - -- may be more productive now).