IJMECS Vol. 6, No. 10, 8 Oct. 2014
Cover page and Table of Contents: PDF (size: 579KB)
Full Text (PDF, 579KB), PP.49-56
Views: 0 Downloads: 0
(QoS) Quality of Service, (QoP) Quality of Perception, (QoE) Quality of Experience, (CSE) Cleanroom Software Engineering, (SDLC) Software Development life Cycle
Pioneering ideas from the software engineering discipline have factually affected every sphere of life. Agile software development approach has been promoted since its commencement and stipulates strategies that improve the quality of software product. To consummate fast and reliable development processes, several agile approaches are charted and are quite popular. For quality improvement and to achieve defect free system, the concept of Cleanroom Software Engineering (CSE) is ingrained into agile development life cycle. For embedding users concerns, it is important to distinguish three approaches to quality: Quality of Service (QoS), User-perceived QoP, and Quality of Experience (QoE). QoS is technology centered approach, so by using Incremental Planning of CSE, it shall facilitate the customer’s clarification of system requirements and will control the technical complexity. Usage Specification and Usage Modelling will be used during the Certification phase of CSE which will help to achieve QoP and QoE, being user centered approaches. Results collected from Survey conducted, explains above mentioned factors improvement.
Sana e Zainab, Munazza Jannisar, Ali Javed, "Improving Quality of Perception (QoP), Quality of Experience (QoE), and Quality of Service (QoS) in agile development using Cleanroom Software Engineering (CSE)", IJMECS, vol.6, no.10, pp.49-56, 2014. DOI:10.5815/ijmecs.2014.10.07
[1]Dyer and Michael, The Cleanroom Approach to Quality software Development, John Wiley and Sons, 1992.
[2]Arezo Nasehi,”A Quantitative Study on Critical Success Factors in Agile Software Development Projects; Case Study IT Company”, University of Boras.
[3]Madu Ratnayake,” The Five Factors of Agile Suitability”a Blog Posted on June 29, 2010.
[4]Subhas C. Misra, Vinod Kumar, and Uma Kumar, “Success Factors of Agile Software Development”, Carleton University, Ottawa, Canada.
[5]Tsun Chow and Dac-Buu Cao, “A survey study of critical success factors in agile software projects” School of Business and Technology, Capella University, Minneapolis, MN 55402, USA.
[6]Zarrin Langari, Anne Banks Pidduck “Quality, Cleanroom and Formal Methods”, School of Computer Science University of Waterloo Waterloo.
[7]Mills, H.D., M.Dyer, and R.C. Linger, “Cleanroom Software Engineering”, IEEE Software, pp19-25, September.1987.
[8]Foreman, John. (1997). Cleanroom Software Engineering Retrieved March 27, 2006.
[9]Richard C. Linger, “Cleanroom Software Engineering for Zero-Defect Software,” 1993 IEEE.
[10]Robert Oshana, “An Industrail Application of Cleanroom Software Engineering Benefits Through Tailoring,” IEEE 31st Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 1998.
[11]Osama Shoaib and Khalid Khan, “Integrating Usability Engineering and Agile Software Development: A Literature Review,” International Conference on Computer Design and Applications, Vol 2, No 34, 2010.
[12]M. Ceschi, A. Silliti, G. Succi and S. S. De Panfilis, “Project Management in Plan-Based and Agile Companies,” IEEE Software, 22(3), 21-27, 2005.
[13]C. Mann and F. Maurer, “A Case Study on the Impact of Scrum on Overtime and Customer Satisfaction,” Proceedings of the Agile Development Conference, 70-79, 2005.
[14]Zarrin Langari and Anne Banks Pidduck, “Quality, Cleanroom and Formal Methods,” ACM 17 May. 2005.
[15]Linger, Richard C., Trammell, Carmen J. (November 1996), Cleanroom Software Engineering: Reference Model, Version 1.0. Retrieved March 27, 2006.
[16]Laurie Williams, A.Gabe Brown, Adam Meltzer and Nachiappan, “Scrum+ Engineering Practices: Experiences of Three Microsoft Teams,” International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement, 2011.
[17]“Agile Software Development and the Factors That Drive Success,” September 2012, Survey Conducted by Forrester Research, Inc.