Cocomo Model In Software Engineering Tutorial Point

3- Cost reduction: Since software engineering aims to provide cost-effective software. Lily allen full discography torrent. Especially those originated from Barry Boehm's famous COCOMO models. An alternative to direct KSLOC estimating is through function points, then use. The COCOMO II Suite of Software Cost Estimation Models Barry - The COCOMO II Suite. Center for Software.

  1. Features Of Cocomo Model
Cocomo cost model

Features Of Cocomo Model

Software engineering tutorial pdfCocomo Model In Software Engineering Tutorial Point
  1. Amadeus (1994),Amadeus Measurement System User's Guide, Version 2.3a, Amadeus Software Research, Inc., Irvine, CA.Google Scholar
  2. Banker, R., R. Kauffman, and R. Kumar (1994), “An Empirical Test of Object-Based Output Measurement Metrics in a Computer Aided Software Engineering (CASE) Environment”,Journal of Management Information Systems, to appear.Google Scholar
  3. Banker, R., H. Chang, and C. Kemerer (1994a), “Evidence on Economics of Scale in Software Development”,Information and Software Technology, to appear.Google Scholar
  4. Behrens, C. (1983), “Measuring the Productivity of Computer Systems Development Activities with Function Points”,IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, November.Google Scholar
  5. Boehm, B. (1981),Software Engineering Economics, Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  6. Boehm, B. (1983), “The Hardware/Software Cost Ratio: Is It a Myth?”Computer 16, 3, pp. 78–80.Google Scholar
  7. Boehm, B. (1985), “COCOMO: Answering the Most Frequent Questions”, InProceedings, First COCOMO Users' Group Meeting, Wang Institute, Tyngsboro, MA.Google Scholar
  8. Boehm, B. (1989),Software Risk Management, IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos, CA.Google Scholar
  9. Boehm, B., T. Gray, and T. Seewaldt (1984), “Prototyping vs. Specifying: A Multi-Project Experiment”,IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, May, 133–145.Google Scholar
  10. Boehm, B., and W. Royce (1989), “Ada COCOMO and the Ada Process Model”,Proceedings, Fifth COCOMO Users' Group Meeting, Software Engineering Institute, Pittsburgh, PA.Google Scholar
  11. Chidamber, S., and C. Kemerer (1994), “A Metrics Suite for Object Oriented Design”,IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, to appear.Google Scholar
  12. Computer Science and Telecommunications Board (CSTB) National Research Council (1993),Computing Professionals: Changing Needs for the 1990's, National Academy Press, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  13. Devenny, T. (1976), “An Exploratory Study of Software Cost Estimating at the Electronic Systems Division”, Thesis No. GSM/SM/765-4, Air Force Institute of Technology, Dayton, OH.Google Scholar
  14. Gerlich, R., and U. Denskat (1994), “A Cost Estimation Model for Maintenance and High Reuse”,Proceedings, ESCOM 1994, Ivrea, Italy.Google Scholar
  15. Goethert, W., E. Bailey, and M. Busby (1992), “Software Effort and Schedule Measurement: A Framework for Counting Staff Hours and Reporting Schedule Information”, CMU/SEI-92-TR-21, Software Engineering Institute, Pittsburgh, PA.Google Scholar
  16. Goudy, R. (1987), “COCOMO-Based Personnel Requirements Model”,Proceedings, Third COCOMO Users' Group Meeting, Software Engineering Institute, Pittsburgh, PA.Google Scholar
  17. IFPUG (1994),IFPUG Function Point Counting Practices: Manual Release 4.0, International Function Point Users' Group, Westerville, OH.Google Scholar
  18. Kauffman, R. and R. Kumar (1993), “Modeling Estimation Expertise in Object Based ICASE Environments”, Stern School of Business Report, New York University.Google Scholar
  19. Kemerer, C. (1987), “An Empirical Validation of Software Cost Estimation Models”,Communications of the ACM, 416–429.Google Scholar
  20. Kominski, R. (1991),Computer Use in the United States: 1989, Current Population Reports, Series P-23, No. 171, U.S. Bureau of the Census, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  21. Kunkler, J. (1983), “A Cooperative Industry Study on Software Development/Maintenance Productivity”, Xerox Corporation, Xerox Square — XRX2 52A, Rochester, NY 14644, Third Report.Google Scholar
  22. Miyazaki, Y. and K. Mori (1985), “COCOMO Evaluation and Tailoring”,Proceedings, ICSE 8, IEEE-ACM-BCS, London, pp. 292–299.Google Scholar
  23. Parikh, G. and N. Zvegintzov (1983), “The World of Software Maintenance”,Tutorial on Software Maintenance, IEEE Computer Society Press, pp. 1–3.Google Scholar
  24. Park, R. (1992), “Software Size Measurement: A Framework for Counting Source Statements”, CMU/SEI-92-TR-20, Software Engineering Institute, Pittsburgh, PA.Google Scholar
  25. Park, R., W. Goethert, and J. Webb (1994), “Software Cost and Schedule Estimating: A Process Improvement Initiative”, CMU/SEI-94-TR-03, Software Engineering Institute, Pittsburgh, PA.Google Scholar
  26. Paulk, M., B. Curtis, M. Chrissis, and C. Weber (1993), Capability Maturity Model for Software, Version 1.1”, CMU/SEI-93-TR-24, Software Engineering Institute, Pittsburgh, PA.Google Scholar
  27. Pfleeger, S. (1991), “Model of Software Effort and Productivity”,Information and Software Technology 33, 3, 224–231.Google Scholar
  28. Royce, W. (1990), “TRW's Ada Process Model for Incremental Development of Large Software Systems,Proceedings, ICSE 12, Nice, France.Google Scholar
  29. Ruhl, M. and M. Gunn (1991), “Software Reengineering: A Case Study and Lessons Learned”, NIST Special Publication 500-193, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  30. Selby, R. (1988), “Empirically Analyzing Software Reuse in a Production Environment”, InSoftware Reuse: Emerging Technology, W. Tracz, Ed., IEEE Computer Society Press, pp. 176–189.Google Scholar
  31. Selby, R., A Porter, D. Schmidt, and J. Berney (1991), “Metric-Driven Analysis and Feedback Systems for Enabling Empirically Guided Software Development”,Proceedings of the Thirteenth International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE 13), Austin, TX, pp. 288–298.Google Scholar
  32. Silvestri, G. and J. Lukasiewicz (1991), “Occupational Employment Projections”,Monthly Labor Review 114, 11, 64–94.Google Scholar
  33. SPR (1993), “Checkpoint User's Guide for the Evaluator”, Software Productivity Research, Inc., Burlington, MA.Google Scholar