CFP last date
20 January 2025
Call for Paper
February Edition
IJCA solicits high quality original research papers for the upcoming February edition of the journal. The last date of research paper submission is 20 January 2025

Submit your paper
Know more
The week's pick
Responsive image
SFLA-Based Line Balancing and Task Optimization in Master-Slave Controlled Hanger Transportation Systems for Garment Production

Duc Hoang Nguyen
Random Articles
Reseach Article

Release Policy, Change-Point Concept, and Effort Control through Discrete-Time Imperfect Software Reliability Modelling

by Omar Shatnawi, P.K. Kapur, Mohd Taib Shatnawi
journal cover thumbnail

International Journal of Computer Applications
Foundation of Computer Science (FCS), NY, USA
Volume 137 - Number 11
Year of Publication: 2016
Authors: Omar Shatnawi, P.K. Kapur, Mohd Taib Shatnawi
10.5120/ijca2016908879

Omar Shatnawi, P.K. Kapur, Mohd Taib Shatnawi . Release Policy, Change-Point Concept, and Effort Control through Discrete-Time Imperfect Software Reliability Modelling. International Journal of Computer Applications. 137, 11 ( March 2016), 17-25. DOI=10.5120/ijca2016908879

@article{ 10.5120/ijca2016908879,
author = { Omar Shatnawi, P.K. Kapur, Mohd Taib Shatnawi },
title = { Release Policy, Change-Point Concept, and Effort Control through Discrete-Time Imperfect Software Reliability Modelling },
journal = { International Journal of Computer Applications },
issue_date = { March 2016 },
volume = { 137 },
number = { 11 },
month = { March },
year = { 2016 },
issn = { 0975-8887 },
pages = { 17-25 },
numpages = {9},
url = { https://ijcaonline.org/archives/volume137/number11/24318-2016908879/ },
doi = { 10.5120/ijca2016908879 },
publisher = {Foundation of Computer Science (FCS), NY, USA},
address = {New York, USA}
}
%0 Journal Article
%1 2024-02-06T23:38:05.171352+05:30
%A Omar Shatnawi
%A P.K. Kapur
%A Mohd Taib Shatnawi
%T Release Policy, Change-Point Concept, and Effort Control through Discrete-Time Imperfect Software Reliability Modelling
%J International Journal of Computer Applications
%@ 0975-8887
%V 137
%N 11
%P 17-25
%D 2016
%I Foundation of Computer Science (FCS), NY, USA
Abstract

Nonhomogeneous Poisson process based software reliability models play an important role in developing software systems and enhancing the performance of computer software. As software reliability grows on the basis of the execution of computer test runs. Nonhomogeneous Poisson process type of discrete-time software reliability models, or difference equations, is more realistic and often provides better fit than their continuous-time counterparts. Since discrete-time model conserves the properties of the continuous-time model, the estimation of its parameter would be simpler and more accurate. In this paper, we explore the importance of testing resource and imperfect debugging phenomenon consideration in software reliability growth modeling. The resultant model is very useful for the reliability analysis as the measure of reliability is computed considering the distribution of testing-effort, influence of the testing efficiency and the changes of the testing process. Using the resultant model, testing-effort control, change-point concept and optimal release policy have also been investigated. Therefore, this paper thus provides a new insight into development of discrete-time modelling in software reliability engineering, that could be of immense help to the software project manager in monitoring and controlling the testing process closely and effectively allocating the resources in order to reduce the testing cost and to meet the given reliability requirements.

References
  1. Tassey, G. 2002. The economic impacts of inadequate infrastructure for software testing. Technical Report RTI Project Number 7007.011, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD, USA.
  2. Kapur, P.K., Pham, H., Gupta, A. and Jha, P.C. 2011. Software Reliability Assessment with OR Applications. Springer-Verlag, London.
  3. Musa, J.D., Iannino, A. and Okumoto, K. 1978. Software Reliability. McGraw-Hill, New York.
  4. Yamada, S. 2014. Software Reliability Modeling: Fundamentals and Applications, Springer, Japan.
  5. Yamada, S. and Osaki S. 1985. Discrete software reliability growth models. Applied Stochastic Models and Data Analysis, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 65–77.
  6. Shatnawi, O. 2009. Discrete time NHPP models for software reliability growth phenomenon. International Arab Journal of Information Technology, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 124–131.
  7. Shatnawi, O. 2009. Discrete time modelling in software reliability engineering: A unified approach. International Journal of Computer Systems Science and Engineering, vol 24, no. 6, pp. 391–398.
  8. Kapur, P.K., Aggarwal, A.G., Shatnawi, O. and Kumar, R. 2010. On the development of unified scheme for discrete software reliability growth modeling. International Journal of Reliability, Quality and Safety Engineering, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 245–260.
  9. Shatnawi, O. An integrated framework for developing discrete-time modelling in software reliability engineering. Quality and Reliability Engineering International, 2016, in press.
  10. Putnam, L.H. 1978. A general empirical solution to the macro software sizing and estimating problem. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 345–361.
  11. Yamada, S., Ohtera, H. and Narihisa, H. 1986. Software reliability growth models with testing effort. IEEE Transactions on Reliability, vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 19–23.
  12. Yamada, S., Hishitani, J. and Osaki, S. 1991. Test-effort dependent software reliability measurement. International Journal of Systems Science, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 73–83.
  13. Yamada, S., Hishitani, J. and Osaki, S. 1993. Software reliability growth model with Weibull testing effort: a model and application. IEEE Transactions on Reliability, vol. 42, no. 1, pp. 100–106.
  14. Bokhari, M.U. and Ahmad, N. 2006. Analysis of software reliability growth models: the case of log-logistic test-effort function. In: Proceedings 7th IASTED International Conference on Modeling and Simulation, Montreal, QC, Canada, pp. 540–545.
  15. Kapur P.K., Goswami, D.N. and Gupta, A. 2004. A software reliability growth model with testing effort dependent learning function for distributed systems. International Journal Reliability, Quality and Safety Engineering, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 365–377.
  16. Kuo, S.Y, Huang, C.Y. and Lyu, M.R. 2001. Framework for modeling software reliability, using various testing-efforts and fault-detection rates. IEEE Transactions on Reliability, vol. 50, no. 3, pp. 310–320.
  17. Huang, C.Y. 2005. Performance analysis of software reliability growth models with testing effort and change-point. Journal of Systems and Software, vol. 76, no. 2, pp. 181–194.
  18. Huang, C.Y. 2005. Cost reliability optimal release policy for software reliability models incorporating improvements in testing efficiency. Journal of Systems and Software, vol. 77, no. 2, pp. 139–155.
  19. Huang, C.Y. and Lyu, M.R. 2005. Optimal release time for software systems considering cost, testing-effort and test efficiency. IEEE Transactions on Reliability, vol. 54, no. 4, pp. 583–591.
  20. Shatnawi, O. 2013. Testing-effort dependent software reliability model for distributed systems. International Journal of Distributed Systems and Technologies, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 1-14.
  21. Kapur, P.K., Shatnawi, O., Jha, P.C. and Bardhan, A.K. 2004. Software testing-effort control and release time problem. In: Proceedings of the International Conference of the Association of Asia-Pacific OR Societies within IFORS, New Delhi, pp. 247-256.
  22. Kapur, P.K. and Bardhan, A.K. 2002. Testing effort control through software reliability modelling. International Journal of Modelling and Simulation, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 90–96.
  23. Kapur, P.K., Gupta, A., Shatnawi, O. and Yadavalli, V.S.S. 2006. Testing-effort control problem using flexible software reliability growth model with change-point. International Journal of Performability Engineering, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 245–262.
  24. Rommelfanger, H.J. 2004. The advantages of fuzzy optimization models in practical use. Fuzzy Optimization and Decision Making, vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 295–309
  25. Lyu, M.R. 1996. Handbook of Software Reliability Engineering. McGraw-Hill, New York.
  26. Xie, M. 1991. Software Reliability Modelling. World Scientific, Singapore.
  27. Pham, H. 2000. Software Reliability. Springer-Verlag, New York.
  28. Kapur, P.K., Garg, B. and Kumar, S. 1999. Contributions to Hardware and Software Reliability. World Scientific, Singapore.
  29. Kapur, P.K., Gupta, D., Gupta, A. and Jha, P.C. 2008. Effect of introduction of fault and imperfect debugging on release time. Journal of Ratio Mathematica, vol. 18, pp. 62–90.
  30. Kapur, P.K., Xie, M., Garg, R.B. and Jha, A.K. 1994. A discrete software reliability growth model with testing effort. In: Proceedings 1st International Conference on Software Testing, Reliability and Quality Assurance, 21–22 December 1994, New Delhi, pp 16–20.
  31. Kapur, P.K., Shatnawi, O. and Yadavalli, V.S.S. 2006. A discrete NHPP model for software reliability growth with imperfect fault debugging and fault generation. International Journal of Performability Engineering, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 351–368.
  32. Shatnawi, O. 2014. Measuring commercial software operational reliability: an interdisciplinary modelling approach. Eksploatacja i Niezawodność - Maintenance and Reliability, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 585–594.
  33. Jones C. Applied Software Measurement. 3rd ed. McGraw-Hill, 2008.
  34. Kapur, P.K, Pham, H., Anand, S. and Yadav K. 2011. A unified approach for developing software reliability growth models in the presence of imperfect debugging and error generation. IEEE Transactions on Reliability, vol. 60, no. 1, pp. 331–340.
  35. Zhao, M. 1993. Change-point problems in software and hardware reliability, Communications in Statistics-Theory and Methods, vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 757–768.
  36. Shyur, H.J. 2003. A stochastic software reliability model with imperfect-debugging and change-point, Journal of Systems and Software, vol. 66, no. 2, pp. 135-141.
  37. Chang, Y.P. 2001. Estimation of parameters for nonhomogeneous Poisson process software reliability with change-point model, Communications in Statistics- Simulation and Computation, vol. 30, no. 3, pp. 623-635.
  38. Wang, Z. and Wang J. 2005. Parameter estimation of some NHPP software reliability models with change-point, Communications in Statistics- Simulation and Computation, vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 121-134.
  39. Goswami, D.N., Khatri, S.K. and Kapur, R. 2007. Discrete software reliability growth modeling for errors of different severity incorporating change-point concept. International Journal of Automation and Computing, vol. 4, vol. 4, pp. 395–405.
  40. Okumoto, K. and Goel, A.L. 1980. Optimum release time for software systems based on reliability and cost criteria. Journal of Systems and Software, vol. 1, pp. 315–318.
  41. Yamada, S. and Osaki, S .1987. Optimal software release policies with simultaneous cost and reliability requirements. European Journal of Operational Research, vol 31, no. 1, pp. 46–51.
  42. Xie, M. and Yang, B. 2003. A study of the effect of imperfect debugging on software development cost. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. 29, no. 5, pp. 471–473.
  43. Ohba, M. and Chou, X.M. 1989. Does imperfect debugging effect software reliability growth. In: Proceedings 11th international conference of software engineering, pp. 237–244.
  44. Kapur, P.K. and Garg, R.B. 1990. Optimal software release policies for software reliability growth models under imperfect debugging. Operations Research / Recherché Operationanelle, vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 295–305.
  45. Kapur, P.K., Khatri, S.K., Tickoo, A. and Shatnawi, O. 2014. Release time determination depending on number of test runs using multi attribute utility theory. International Journal of Systems Assurance Engineering and Management, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 186–194.
Index Terms

Computer Science
Information Sciences

Keywords

Software reliability software testing imperfect debugging nonhomogeneous Poisson process change-point effort control software release policy.

Powered by PhDFocusTM