Software Quality Measurement: A Framework for Counting Problems and Defects
William A. Florac
Abstract
William A. Florac
Abstract
This report presents mechanisms for describing and specifying two software measures-software problems and defects-used to understand and predict software product quality and software process efficacy. We propose a framework that integrates and gives structure to the discovery, reporting, and measurement of software problems and defects found by the primary problem and defect finding activities. Based on the framework, we identify and organized measurable attributes common to these activities. We show how to use the attributes with checklists and supporting forms to communicate the definitions and specifications for problem and defect measurements. We illustrate how the checklist and supporting forms can be used to reduce the misunderstandings of measurement results and can be applied to address the information needs of different users.
OpenAlex reports 80 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
This report presents mechanisms for describing and specifying two software measures-software problems and defects-used to understand and predict software product quality and software process efficacy. We propose a framework that integrates and gives structure to the discovery, reporting, and measurement of software problems and defects found by the primary problem and defect finding activities. Based on the framework, we identify and organized measurable attributes common to these activities. We show how to use the attributes with checklists and supporting forms to communicate the definitions and specifications for problem and defect measurements. We illustrate how the checklist and supporting forms can be used to reduce the misunderstandings of measurement results and can be applied to address the information needs of different users.
Key concepts: Computer science, Quality (philosophy), Software, Software quality, Software engineering, Programming language, Software development, Physics