No Access

Use case repository framework based on machine learning algorithm to analyze the software development estimation with intelligent information systems

R. Lalitha

CSE, Rajalakshmi Institute of Technology, Anna University, Chennai, India

E-mail Address: rlalithar2011@gmail.com

Search for more papers by this author

B. Latha

CSE, Sri Sai Ram Engineering College, Chennai, India

Search for more papers by this author

, and

G. Sumathi

IMS, Sri Venkateswara College of Engineering, Chennai, India

Search for more papers by this author

https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219691319410078Cited by:2 (Source: Crossref)

This article is part of the issue:

Special Issue: Machine Learning Algorithms for Signal Processing
Editors: G. Manogaran, N. Chilamkurti and C.-H. Hsu

Abstract

The success of information system process depends on accuracy of software estimation. Estimation is done at initial phase of software development. It requires a collection of all relevant required information for estimating the software effort. In this paper, a methodology is proposed to maintain a knowledgeable use case repository to store the use cases of various projects in several software project-related domains. This acts as a reference model to compare similar use cases of similar types of projects. The use case points are calculated and using this, schedule estimation and effort estimation of a project are calculated using the formulas of software engineering. These values are compared with the estimated effort and scheduled effort of a new project under development. Apart from these, the effective machine learning technique called neural network is used to measure how accurately the information is processed by use of case repository framework. The proposed machine learning-based use case repository system helps to estimate and analyze the effort using the machine learning algorithms.

Keywords:

AMSC: 68N30, 68U35, 97R50

References

1. A. M. Alakeel, Using fuzzy logic in test case prioritization for regression testing programs with assertions, Sci. World J. 2014 (2014) 9 pp. Web of Science, Google Scholar
2. D. Alrajeh and J. Kramer, Elaborating requirements using model checking and inductive learning, IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 39(3) (2013) 361–383. Web of Science, Google Scholar
3. A. Gionis, H. Mannila, T. Mielikäinen and P. Tsaparas, Assessing data mining results via swap randomization, ACM Trans. Knowl. Discov. Data (TKDD) 1(3) (2007) 167–176, Article No. 14. Google Scholar
4. G. ArunKumar and R. DilliBabu, Design and application of new quality improvement model: Kano lean six sigma for software maintenance project, Arabian J. Sci. Eng. 41(3) (2015) 997–1014. Web of Science, Google Scholar
5. M. Bano, N. Ikram and M. Niazi, Requirements engineering challenges in service oriented software engineering: An exploratory online survey, Int. J. Softw. Eng. 6(2) (2013) 21–43. Google Scholar
6. R. C. Barros, R. Cerri, P. A. Jaskowiak and A. C. P. L. F. Carvalho, A bottom-up oblique decision tree induction algorithm, in Proc. 11th Int. Conf. Intell. Syst. Design Appl. (ISDA 2011), pp. 450–456. https://doi.org/10.1109/ISDA.2011.6121697. ISBN 978-1-4577-1676-8. Google Scholar
7. M. Berkovich, J. M. Leimeister, A. Hoffman and H. Kremer, A requirements data model for product service systems, Requir. Eng. J. 19 (2014) 161–186. Web of Science, Google Scholar
8. R. Cerri and A. C. P. L. F. Carvalho, Hierarchical multilabel classification using top-down label combination and artificial neural networks, in XI SBRN (2010), pp. 253–258. Google Scholar
9. B. Catanzaro, N. Sundaram and K. Keutzer, Fast support vector machine training and classification on graphics processors, in Proc. ICML’08, Int. Conf. Machine Learn. (2008), pp. 104–111. Google Scholar
10. L. Carnevali, L. Ridi and E. Vicario, A quantitative approach to input generation in real time testing of stochastic systems, IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 39(3) (2013) 292–304. Web of Science, Google Scholar
11. J.-L. Chen and F.-J. Wang, Flow analysis of class relationships for object oriented programs, J. Inf. Sci. Eng. 16 (2000) 619–647. Web of Science, Google Scholar
12. W. Cody, J. Kreulen, V. Krishna and W. Spangler, The integration of business intelligence and knowledge management, IBM Systems Journal 41(4) (2002) 697–713. Google Scholar
13. G. Cravo, Workflow modelling and analysis based on the construction of task models, Sci. World J. 2015 (2015), Article ID: 481767. Google Scholar
14. J. Cussens, Bayesian network learning with cutting planes (PDF), in Proc. 27th Conf. Annu. Conf. Uncertain. Artif. Intell. (2011), pp. 153–160, arXiv preprint arXiv:1202.3713. Google Scholar
15. P. Deemer, G. Benefield, C. Larman and B. Vodde, The Scrum Primer: A Lightweight Guide to the Theory and Practice of Scrum (Version 2.0), InfoQ (2012). Google Scholar
16. A. Elgammal and M. El-Sharkawi, Using UML to model web services for automatic composition, Int. J. Softw. Eng. 3(2) (2010) 87–113. Google Scholar
17. D. Ionita, UML in business administration, J. Knowl. Manag. Econ. Inf. Tech. 2011(1) (2010) 1–6. Google Scholar
18. J. Ivar, M. Christerson, P. Jonsson and G. Övergaard, Object-Oriented Software Engineering — A Use Case Driven Approach (Addison-Wesley, 1992). Google Scholar
19. K. Pohl and E. Sikora, COSMOD-RE: Supporting the co-design of requirements and architectural artifacts, in Requirements Engineering Conference, RE’07. 15th IEEE Int. (2007), pp. 258–261. Google Scholar
20. S. Kadayam, New business intelligence: The promise of knowledge management, the ROI of business intelligence (2002), available at www.kmworld.com/publications/whitepapers/KM2/kadayam.pdf. Google Scholar
21. L. Chung and J. do Prado Leite, On non-functional requirements in software engineering conceptual modeling: Foundations and applications, eds. A. Borgida, V. Chaudhri, P. Giorgini and E. Yu, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 5600 (Springer, Berlin, 2009), pp. 363–379, doi:10.1007/978-3-642-02463-4_19. Google Scholar
22. P. Krutchen, Architectural blueprints — The “ $4 + 1$ ” view model of software architecture, IEEE Softw. 12(6) (1995) 42–50. Web of Science, Google Scholar
23. R. C. Barros, M. P. Basgalupp, A. C. P. L. F. Carvalho and A. A. Freitas, A survey of evolutionary algorithms for decision tree induction, To appear in IEEE T SYST MAN CY C, 2011, pp. 1–21. Google Scholar
24. Z. Lian-Zhang and K. Fan-Sheng, Automatic conversion from UML to CPN for software performance evaluation, www.sciencedirect.com (Elseiver, 2011). Google Scholar
25. M. Munoz, J. Mejia and G. P. Gasca Hurtado, A methodology for establishing multi model environments in order to improve organizational software processes, Int. J. Softw. Eng. Knowl. Eng. 24(6) (2014) 909–933. Link, Web of Science, Google Scholar
26. J. Oh, J. Baik and S.-H. Lim, A model independent s/w framework for search based software testing, Sci. World J. (2014), Article ID: 126348. Web of Science, Google Scholar
27. E. M. Olimpiew and H. Gomaa, Model-based testing for applications derived from software product lines, in Advances in Model-based Testing (St. Louis, Missouri, 2005). Google Scholar
28. M. Berkovich, J. Leimeister and H. Krcmar, Requirements engineering for product service systems, Bus. Inform. Syst. Eng. 3(6) (2011) 369–380. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-011-0192-2 Web of Science, Google Scholar
29. S. Pasupathy and R. Bhavani, Analysing the efficiency of program through various OOAD metrics, J. Theor. Appl. Inf. Technol. 61(2) (2014) 346–351. Google Scholar
30. C. T. Pereira, L. I. Martinez and L. M. Favre, Recovering use case diagrams from object oriented code: An MDA based approach, Int. J. Softw. Eng. 5(2) (2012) 3–23. Google Scholar
31. C. Prackweiser, R. Buchmann, W. Grossman and D. Karagiannis, Overcoming heterogeneity in business process modeling with rule based semantic mappings, Int. J. Softw. Eng. Knowl. Eng. 24(8) (2014) 1131–1158. Link, Web of Science, Google Scholar
32. G. Radonic, A review of business intelligence approaches to key business factors in banking, J. Know. Manage 8 (2007) 1–10. Google Scholar
33. V. P. Ranganath and J. Hatcliff, Slicing concurrent Java programs using Indus and Kaveri, Int. J. Softw. Tools Tech. Trans. 9 (2007) 489–504. Google Scholar
34. L. Rosa and A. Lopes, Self management of adaptable component based applications, IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 39(3) (2013) 403–421. Web of Science, Google Scholar
35. E. Shin, Evolution in multiple-view models of software product lines, in Information and Software Engineering, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA (2002). Google Scholar
36. H. Stevan, The annotation game: On Turing (1950) on computing, machinery, and intelligence, in The Turing Test Sourcebook: Philosophical and Methodological Issues in the Quest for the Thinking Computer, eds. R. Epstein and G. Peters (Kluwer, 2008), pp. 1–28. Google Scholar
37. S. K. Swain, D. P. Mohapatra and R. Mall, Test case generation based on use case and sequence diagram, Int. J. Softw. Eng. 3(2) (2010) 21–52. Google Scholar
38. M. R. Vieria, F. J. T. Chino, C. Traina Jr. and A. J. Triana, A visual framework to understand similarity queries and explore data in metric access methods, Int. J. Bus. Intell. Data Mining 5(4) 370–397. Google Scholar
39. G. Wehinger, Banking in a challenging environment: Business models, ethics and approaches towards risks, OECD J. Financ. Mark. Trends 2012/2 (2013) 1–10. Google Scholar