Are Size Measures Better Than Expert Judgment? An Industrial Case Study on Requirements Volatility

A. Loconsole, J. Börstler
{"title":"Are Size Measures Better Than Expert Judgment? An Industrial Case Study on Requirements Volatility","authors":"A. Loconsole, J. Börstler","doi":"10.1109/APSEC.2007.28","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Expert judgment is a common estimation approach in industry. However, there is very little research on the accuracy of expert judgment outside the area of effort estimation. In this paper, we present an industrial case study investigating subjective and objective measures of requirementss volatility. Data was collected in retrospect for all use cases of a medium-size software project. In addition, we determined subjective volatility by interviewing developers and managers of the project. Our data analysis show that structural measures perform better than expert judgment in estimating the total number of changes to use case based requirements. These results confirm results from a previous case study by the authors and suggest that project managers should not rely on expert judgment alone for decision making.","PeriodicalId":273688,"journal":{"name":"14th Asia-Pacific Software Engineering Conference (APSEC'07)","volume":"52 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2007-12-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"14th Asia-Pacific Software Engineering Conference (APSEC'07)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/APSEC.2007.28","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

Expert judgment is a common estimation approach in industry. However, there is very little research on the accuracy of expert judgment outside the area of effort estimation. In this paper, we present an industrial case study investigating subjective and objective measures of requirementss volatility. Data was collected in retrospect for all use cases of a medium-size software project. In addition, we determined subjective volatility by interviewing developers and managers of the project. Our data analysis show that structural measures perform better than expert judgment in estimating the total number of changes to use case based requirements. These results confirm results from a previous case study by the authors and suggest that project managers should not rely on expert judgment alone for decision making.
尺寸测量比专家判断更好吗?需求波动的工业案例研究
专家判断是工业上常用的一种评估方法。然而,在工作量估算领域之外,关于专家判断准确性的研究很少。在本文中,我们提出了一个工业案例研究,调查了需求波动的主观和客观度量。在回顾中收集了中型软件项目的所有用例的数据。此外,我们通过采访项目的开发人员和管理人员来确定主观波动性。我们的数据分析显示,在估计基于用例的需求的变更总数方面,结构度量比专家判断表现得更好。这些结果证实了作者先前案例研究的结果,并建议项目经理不应该仅仅依靠专家判断来做决策。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信