CFP last date
22 April 2024
Call for Paper
May Edition
IJCA solicits high quality original research papers for the upcoming May edition of the journal. The last date of research paper submission is 22 April 2024

Submit your paper
Know more
The week's pick
Responsive image
Enhancing Privacy Preservation: Multi-Attribute Protection with P-Sensitive K-Anonymity

Twinkle Patel Kiran Amin
Random Articles
Reseach Article

Object Oriented Software Metrics and Quality Assessment: Current State of the Art

by Amjan Shaik, Dr. C. R. K. Reddy, Dr. A. Damodaram
journal cover thumbnail

International Journal of Computer Applications
Foundation of Computer Science (FCS), NY, USA
Volume 37 - Number 11
Year of Publication: 2012
Authors: Amjan Shaik, Dr. C. R. K. Reddy, Dr. A. Damodaram
10.5120/4728-6911

Amjan Shaik, Dr. C. R. K. Reddy, Dr. A. Damodaram . Object Oriented Software Metrics and Quality Assessment: Current State of the Art. International Journal of Computer Applications. 37, 11 ( January 2012), 6-15. DOI=10.5120/4728-6911

@article{ 10.5120/4728-6911,
author = { Amjan Shaik, Dr. C. R. K. Reddy, Dr. A. Damodaram },
title = { Object Oriented Software Metrics and Quality Assessment: Current State of the Art },
journal = { International Journal of Computer Applications },
issue_date = { January 2012 },
volume = { 37 },
number = { 11 },
month = { January },
year = { 2012 },
issn = { 0975-8887 },
pages = { 6-15 },
numpages = {9},
url = { https://ijcaonline.org/archives/volume37/number11/4728-6911/ },
doi = { 10.5120/4728-6911 },
publisher = {Foundation of Computer Science (FCS), NY, USA},
address = {New York, USA}
}
%0 Journal Article
%1 2024-02-06T20:24:02.656025+05:30
%A Amjan Shaik
%A Dr. C. R. K. Reddy
%A Dr. A. Damodaram
%T Object Oriented Software Metrics and Quality Assessment: Current State of the Art
%J International Journal of Computer Applications
%@ 0975-8887
%V 37
%N 11
%P 6-15
%D 2012
%I Foundation of Computer Science (FCS), NY, USA
Abstract

Necessity for a Productive software has been culminating and Object-Oriented Design technique is providing solution to this as it is the most powerful mechanism for developing proficient software systems. It is helpful not only in declining the cost but also in the development of high quality software systems. Software developers require accurate metrics for developing efficient software system. Object-Oriented Metrics plays a significant role pertaining to this aspect because of their importance in the development of successful software applications. In this paper Assessment of the current state of the art in Metrics and Object-Oriented Software System Quality is done. Further it contains short descriptive taxonomy of the Object-Oriented Design and Metrics.

References
  1. B. Delatte, M. Heitz, and J. F. Muller, HOOD Reference Manual 3.1, Masson, Paris, 1993.
  2. B. Unger and L. Prechelt, The impact of inheritance depth on maintenance tasks – Detailed description and evaluation of two experimental replications, Technical Report, Karlsruhe University: Karlsruhe, Germany, 1998.
  3. F. B. Abreu and R. Carapua, “Candidate Metric for OOS within taxonomy framework, Journal of System & Softwrae, Vol. 26, No. 1, July 1994.
  4. F. B. Abreu, “The MOOD Metrics Set”, In Proc. ECOOP’95, Workshop on Metrics, 1995.
  5. G. Booch, Object-oriented analysis and design, Benjamin-Cummings, U.S.A, pp.107-215, 1994.
  6. G. Poels and G. Dedene, DISTANCE: A Framework for Software Measure Construction, Research Report DTEW9937, Dept. Applied Economics, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium, 1999, pp 46.
  7. G. Poelsand and G. Dedene, “Evaluating the Effect of Inheritance on the Modifiability of Object-Oriented Business Domain Models”, 5th European Conference on Software Maintenance and Reengineering (CSMR 2001), Lisbon, Portugal, 2001, pp. 20-29.
  8. H. Sneed, Encapsulating Legacy Software for Reuse in Client/Server Sstem, In proceedings of WCRE-96, IEEE press, 1996, Monterey.
  9. I. Jacobson, Object-Oriented Software Engineering, Addison-Wesley, 1992 .
  10. J. Bansiya and C.G. Davis, “A Hierarchical Model for Object-Oriented Design Quality Assessment”, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, Vol. 28, No. 1, 2002.
  11. J. Daly, A. Brooks, J. Miller, M. Roper and M. Wood, “An Empirical Study Evaluating Depth of Inheritance on Maintainability of Object- Oriented Software”, Empirical Software Engineering, Vol. 1, No. 2, 1996, pp. 109-132.
  12. J. M. Bieman, and B. K. Kang, “Measuring Design-Level Cohesion”, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, Vol. 24, No. 2, pp. 111- 124, 1998.
  13. J. Pinson Lewis and Richard S. Wiener, An Introduction to Objectoriented Programming and Smalltalk, Addison- Wesley pp 49-60, 1988.
  14. J. Rumbaugh, M. Blaha, W. Lorensen, F. Eddy, and W. Premerlani, Object-Oriented Modeling and Design, Prentice-Hall, 1991
  15. L. C. Briand, S. Morasca and V. Basili, “Property-Based Software Engineering Measurement”, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, Vol. 22, No. 6, pp. 68-86, 1996.
  16. L. C. Briand, J. W. Daly, V. Porter, and J. Wust, A Comprehensive Empirical Validation of Product Measures for Object-Oriented Systems. Technical Report, ISERN-98-07, 1998.
  17. L. C. Briand, J. W. Daly and J. Wust, “A Unified Framework for Coupling Measurement in Object-Oriented Systems”, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, Vol. 25, No. 1, pp. 91–121, 1999.
  18. L. C. Briand, J. W. Daly, V. Porter, and J. Wust, “Exploring the Relationships Between Design Measures and Software Quality in Object Oriented Systems”, Journal of Systems and Software, Vol. 51, No. 3, pp. 245-273, 2000.
  19. L. C. Briand and J. Wust, “The Impact of Design Properties on Development Cost in Object-Oriented Systems”, Proc. 7th Int’l Software Metrics Symposium (METRICS 01), IEEE CS Press, 2001.
  20. L. C. Briand, W. L. Melo and J. Wust, “Assessing the Applicability of Fault Proneness Models Across Object-Oriented Software Projects”, IEEE transactions on Software Engineering, Vol. 28, No. 7, 2002.
  21. L. H. Rosenberg and L. Hyatt, “Software Quality Metrics for Object- Oriented Environments”, Crosstalk Jounal, 1997.
  22. L. Prechelt, B. Unger, M. Philippsen and W. Tichy, “A controlled experiment on inheritance depth as a cost factor for code maintenance”, The Journal of Systems and Software, Vol. 65, 2003, pp. 115-126.
  23. M. Alshayeb, and M. Li, “An Empirical Validation of Object-Oriented Metrics in Two Different Iterative Software Processes”, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering archive, Vol. 29, 2003, pp.1043 – 1049.
  24. M. Cartwright, An Empirical view of inheritance, Information and Software Technology, Vol. 40, No. 4, 1998, pp. 795-799.
  25. M. El Wakil, A. El Bastawissi, M. Boshra and A. Fahmy, Object- Oriented Design Quality Models – A Survey and Comparison. 2nd International Conference on Informatics and Systems, 2004.
  26. M. G. Bocco, M. Piattini and C. Calero, “A Survey of Metrics for UML Class Diagrams”, Journal of Object Technology, Vol. 4, 2005, pp. 59- 92.
  27. M. Lorenz and J. Kidd, Object-Oriented Software Metrics, Prentice Hall, 1994.
  28. M. Tang, M. Kao and M. Chen, An Empirical Study on Object-Oriented Metrics, 6th IEEE International Symposium on Software Metrics, 1998.
  29. N. E. Fenton and S. L. Peeger, Software Metrics: A Rigorous and Practical Approach, PWS Publishing Company, Boston, Massachusetts, USA, 1997.
  30. P. Coad and E. Yourdon, Object-Oriented Analysis, Yourdon Press, Prentice Hall, New Jersey, 1990.
  31. P. Coad and E. Yourdon, Object-Oriented Design, Yourdon Press, Prentice Hall, New Jersey, 1991.
  32. R. Harrison, S. Counsell and R. Nithi, “Experimental Assessment of the Effect of Inheritance on the Maintainability of Object-Oriented Systems”, The Journal of Systems and Software, Vol. 52, 2000, pp. 173- 179.
  33. R. Harrison, S. Counsell and V. Reuben, “An Evaluation of the MOOD Set of Object-Oriented Software Metrics”, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, Vol. 24, No. 6, pp. 491-496, 1998.
  34. R. Subramanya and M. S. Krishnan, “Empirical of CK Metrics for Object-Oriented Design Complexity: Implication for Software Defects”, IEEE Transaction on Software Engineering, Vol. 29, 2003, pp. 297-310.
  35. R. W. Selby and V. R. Vasili, “Analyzing Error-Prone Systems Structure”, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, Vol. 17, 1991, pp. 141-152.
  36. R. Wirfs-brock, B. Wilkerson, and L. Weiner, Designing Object- Oriented Software, Prentice-Hall, 1990.
  37. S. R. Chidamber and C. F. Kemerer, “A Metrics Suite for Object Oriented Design,” IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, Vol. 20, No. 6, pp. 476–493, 1994.
  38. S. R. Chidamber, D. P. Darcy, and C. F. Kemerer, “Managerial Use of Metrics for Object-Oriented Software: An Exploratory Analysis”, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, Vol. 24, No. 8, pp. 629-637, 1998.
  39. T. Reenskaug, E. Andersen A. Berre, A. Hurlen, A. Landmark, O. Lehne, E. Nordhagen, E. Ness-Ulseth, G. Oftedal, A. Skaar, and P. Stenslet , “OORASS: seamless support for the creation and maintenance of object oriented systems”, Journal of Object Oriented Programming, Vol. 5, No. 6, 1992, pp. 7-41.
  40. The Object Agency, A comparison of Object–Oriented Development Methodologies, 1996. http://www.toa.com.
  41. V. R. Basili, L. C. Briand, and W.L. Melo, “A Validation of Object- Oriented Design Metrics as Quality Indicators”. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, Vol. 22, No. 10, pp. 751-761, 1996.
  42. W. Li, and S. Henry, “Object-Oriented Metrics that Predict Maintainability”. Journal ofSystems and Software, Vol. 23, No. 2, pp. 111-122, 1993.
  43. W. Li, “Another Metric Suite for Object Oriented Programming”, The Journal of Systems and Software, Vol. 44, No. 2, pp. 155-162, 1998.
  44. Jie Xu, Danny Ho, Luiz Fernando Capretz, “An Empirical Validation of Object-Oriented Design Metrics for Fault Prediction,” Journal of Computer Science, Vol: 4, No: 7, pp. 571-577, 2008.
  45. Yuming Zhou, Hareton Leung, “Empirical Analysis of Object-Oriented Design Metrics for Predicting High and Low Severity Faults, “ IEEE transaction on software engineering, Vol. 32, No. 10, pp. 771-789, 2006.
  46. Antoniol G, Fiutem R, Lokan C, “Object-Oriented Function Points: An Empirical Validation,” In Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp: 225-254, 2003.
  47. Y. Zhou, L. Wen, J. Wang, Y. Chen, H. Lu, and B. Xu, “DRC: A Dependence Relationships Based Cohesion Measure for Classes,” Proc. 10th Asia-Pacific Software Eng. Conf., pp. 1-9, 2003.
  48. Ramanath Subramanyam, M.S. Krishnan, “Empirical Analysis of CK Metrics for Object- Oriented Design Complexity: Implications for Software Defects,” IEEE transaction on software engineering, Vol. 29, No. 4, pp. 297-310, 2003.
  49. Hector M. Olague, Letha H. Etzkorn, Sampson Gholston, and Stephen Quattlebaum “Empirical Validation of Three Software Metrics Suites to Predict Fault-Proneness of Object-Oriented Classes Developed Using Highly Iterative or Agile Software Development Processes,” IEEE transaction on software engineering, Vol: 33, No: 6, pp. 402-419, 2007.
  50. Tibor Gyimothy, Rudolf Ferenc, Istvan Siket, “Empirical Validation of Object-Oriented Metrics on Open Source Software for Fault Prediction”, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, Vol. 31, No. 10, October 2005.
  51. Mohammad Alshayeb, Wei Li, "An empirical study of system design instability metric and design evolution in an agile software process”, Journal of Systems and Software, Vol: 74, No: 3, pp: 269 - 274, 2005.
  52. J. Daly, A. Brooks, J. Miller, M. Roper, and M. Wood, “Evaluating Inheritance Depth on the Maintainability of Object-Oriented Software,” Empirical Software Eng. vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 109-132, 1996.
  53. L. Ferna´ndez and R. Pen˜ a, “A Sensitive Metric of Class Cohesion,” Int’l J. Information Theories and Applications, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 82-91, 2006.
  54. B. Kitchenham, S.L. Pfleeger, and N. Fenton, “Towards a Framework for Software Measurement Validation,” IEEE Trans. Software Eng., vol. 21, no. 12, pp. 929-944, Dec. 1995.
  55. A. Marcus, D. Poshyvanyk, and R. Ferenc, “Using the Conceptual Cohesion of Classes for Fault Prediction in Object-Oriented Systems,” IEEE Trans. Software Eng., vol. 34, no. 2, pp. 287-300, Mar./Apr. 2008.
  56. S. Benlarbi, K. El Emam, N. Goel, and S. Rai, “Thresholds for Object-Oriented Measures,” Proc. 11th Int’l Symp. Software Reliability Eng., pp. 24-38, 2000.
  57. K. El Emam, S. Benlarbi, N. Goel, W. Melo, H. Lounis, and S.N. Rai, “The Optimal Class Size for Object-Oriented Software,” IEEE Trans. Software Eng., vol. 28, no. 5, pp. 494-509, May 2002.
  58. K. Ulm, “A Statistical Method for Assessing a Threshold in Epidemiological Studies,” Statistics in Medicine, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 341-349, 1991.
  59. R. Bender, “Quantitative Risk Assessment in Epidemiological Studies Investigating Threshold Effects,” Biometrical J., vol. 41, no. 3, pp. 305-319, 1999.
  60. R. Strnisa, P. Sewell, and M. Parkinson, “The Java Module System: Core Design and Semantic Definition,” Proc. ACM SIGPLAN Conf. Object-Oriented Programming Systems, Languages and Applications, vol. 42, no. 10, pp. 499-514, 2007.
  61. S. Sarkar, G.M. Rama, and A.C. Kak, “API-Based and Information- Theoretic Metrics for Measuring the Quality of Software Modularization,” IEEE Trans. Software Eng., vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 14-32, Jan. 2007.
  62. Z. Chen, B. Xu, and Y. Zhou, “Measuring Class Cohesion Based on Dependence Analysis,” J. Science and Technology, vol. 19, no. 6, pp. 859-866, 2004.
  63. C.J. Coppick and T.J. Cheatham, “Software Metrics for Object- Oriented Systems,” Proc. ACM Ann. Computer Science Conf., pp. 317-322, 1992.
  64. M.H. Halstead, Elements of Software Science. Elsevier, 1977.
  65. T.J. McCabe and A.H. Watson, “Software Complexity,” Crosstalk, J. Defense Software Eng., vol. 7, no. 12, pp. 5-9, Dec. 1994.
  66. F. Brito e Abreu and R. Carapuca, “Candidate Metrics for Object- Oriented Software within a Taxonomy Framework,” J. Systems and Software, vol. 26, pp. 87-96, 1994.
  67. J.-Y. Chen and J.-F. Lum, “A New Metric for Object-Oriented Design,” Information of Software Technology, vol. 35, pp. 232-240, 1993.
  68. Y.-S. Lee, B.-S. Liang, and F.-J. Wang, “Some Complexity Metrics for Object-Oriented Programs Based on Information Flow,” Proc. Sixth IEEE Int’l Conf. Computer Systems and Software Eng., pp. 302- 310, 1993.
  69. L.C. Briand and J. Wust, “Empirical Studies of Quality Models in Object-Oriented Systems,” Advances in Computers, pp. 97-166, Academic Press, 2002.
  70. L.C. Briand, J. Wust, J. Daly, and V. Porter, “Exploring the Relationship between Design Measures and Software Quality in Object-Oriented Systems,” J. System and Software, vol. 51, no. 3, pp. 245-273, 2000.
  71. L.C. Briand, J. Wu¨ st, and H. Lounis, “Replicated Case Studies for Investigating Quality Factors in Object-Oriented Designs,” Empirical Software Eng., vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 11-58, 2001.
  72. B. Henderson-Sellers, Object-Oriented Metrics: Measures of Complexity. Prentice Hall, 1996.
  73. L.C. Briand, S. Morasca, and V.R. Basili, “Defining and Validating Measures for Object-Based High-Level Design,” IEEE Trans. Software Eng., vol. 25, no. 5, pp. 722-743, Sept./Oct. 1999.
  74. L.C. Briand, J. Daly, and J. Wuest, “A Unified Framework for Cohesion Measurement in Object-Oriented Systems,” Empirical Software Eng.—An Int’l J., vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 65-113, 1998.
  75. F.B. e Abreu, M. Goulao, and R. Estevers, “Towards the Design Quality Evaluation of OO Software Systems,” Proc. Fifth Int’l Conf. Software Quality, 1995.
  76. C. Bonja and E. Kidanmariam, “Metrics for Class Cohesion and Similarity between Methods,” Proc. 44th Ann. ACM Southeast Regional Conf., pp. 91-95, 2006.
  77. S. Counsell, S. Swift, and J. Crampton, “The Interpretation and Utility of Three Cohesion Metrics for Object-Oriented Design,” ACM Trans. Software Eng. and Methodology, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 123- 149, 2006.
  78. J. Bansiya, L. Etzkorn, C. Davis, and W. Li, “A Class Cohesion Metric for Object-Oriented Designs,” J. Object Oriented Program, vol. 11, no. 8, pp. 47-52, 1999.
  79. S. Counsell, E. Mendes, S. Swift, and A. Tucker, “Evaluation of an Object-Oriented Cohesion Metric through Hamming Distances,” Technical Report BBKCS-02-10, Birkbeck College, Univ. of London, 2002.
  80. M.D. Ghassemi and R.R. Mourant, “Evaluation of Coupling in the Context of Java Interfaces,” Proc. ACM SIGPLAN Conf. Object- Oriented Programming Systems, Languages and Applications, pp. 47- 48, 2000.
  81. M. Hitz and B. Montazeri, “Chidamber and Kemerers Metrics Suite: A Measurement Theory Perspective,” IEEE Trans. Software Eng., vol. 22, pp. 267-271, 1996.
  82. N. Churcher and M. Shepperd, “Comments on “A Metrics Suite for Object-Oriented Design”,” IEEE Trans. Software Eng., vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 263-265, Mar. 1995.
  83. R.K. Bandi, V.K. Vaishnavi, and D.E. Turk, “Predicting Maintenance Performance Using Object-Oriented Design Complexity Metrics,” IEEE Trans. Software Eng., vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 77-86, Jan. 2003.
  84. L. Etzkorn, C. Davis, and W. Li, “A Practical Look at the Lack of Cohesion in Methods Metrics,” J. Object Oriented Programming, vol. 11, no. 5, pp. 27-34, 1998.
  85. J. Al Dallal and L. Briand, “A Precise Method-Method Interaction- Based Cohesion Metric for Object-Oriented Classes,” ACM Trans. Software Eng. and Methodology, vol. 20, no. 6, Nov. 2011.
  86. H. Kabaili, R.K. Keller, and F. Lustman, “Cohesion as Changeability Indicator in Object-Oriented Systems,” Proc. Fifth European Conf. Software Maintenance and Reengineering, pp. 39-46, 2001.
  87. P. Oman and J. Hagemeister, “Constructing and Testing of Polynomials Predicting Software Maintainability,” J. Systems and Software, vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 251-266, Mar. 1994.
  88. M. Dagpinar and J.H. Jahnke, “Predicting Maintainability with Object-Oriented Metrics—An Empirical Comparison,” Proc. 10th Working Conf. Reverse Eng., p. 155, 2003.
  89. R. Marinescu, “Detecting Design Flaws via Metrics in Object Oriented Systems,” Proc. 39th Int’l Conf. and Exhibition on Technology of Object-Oriented Languages and Systems, pp. 173-182, 2001.
  90. B. Lague, D. Proulx, E.M. Merlo, J. Mayrand, and J. Hudepohl, “Assessing the Benefits of Incorporating Function Clone Detection in a Development Process,” Proc. Int’l Conf. Software Maintenance, 1997.
  91. K. Kontogiannis, “Evaluating Experiments on the Detection of Programming Patterns Using Software Metrics,” Proc. Working Conf. Reverse Eng., pp. 44-54, 1997.
  92. K. Aggarwal, Y. Singh, A. Kaur, and R. Malhotra, “Investigating Effect of Design Metrics on Fault Proneness in Object- Oriented Systems,” J. Object Technology, vol. 6, no. 10, pp. 127- 123, 2007.
  93. J. Al Dallal, “A Design-Based Cohesion Metric for Object-Oriented Classes,” Proc. Int’l Conf. Computer and Information Science and Eng., Nov. 2007.
  94. ] J. Al Dallal, “Software Similarity-Based Functional Cohesion Metric,” IET Software, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 46-57, 2009.
  95. J. Al Dallal, “Mathematical Validation of Object-Oriented Class Cohesion Metrics,” Int’l J. Computer Science, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 45-52, 2010.
  96. J. Al Dallal and L. Briand, “An Object-Oriented High-Level Design-Based Class Cohesion Metric,” Information and Software Technology, vol. 52, no. 12, pp. 1216-1221, 2010.
  97. R. Barker and E. Tempero, “A Large-Scale Empirical Comparison of Object-Oriented Cohesion Metrics,” Proc. 14th Asia-Pacific Software Eng. Conf., pp. 414-421, 2007.
  98. F. Simon, F. Steinbruckner, and C. Lewerentz, “Metrics Based Refactoring,” Proc. Fifth European Conf. Software Maintenance and Reengineering, pp. 30-38, 2001.
  99. M.M. Carey and G.C. Gannod, “Recovering Concepts from Source Code with Automated Concept Identification,” Proc. 15th IEEE Int’l Conf. Program Comprehension 2007.
Index Terms

Computer Science
Information Sciences

Keywords

System Metrics Model Software Object-Oriented

Powered by PhDFocusTM