Tuesday, February 9, 2010

Generality and ``W''

To recap, we've demonstrated that ``W'' is capable of sizable median effort and "spread" reductions in software estimation. I've spent more time getting to know what types of datasets and projects ``W'' is proficient at predicting. Here's some new data:



Two new points to make: I played around with the Desharnais dataset and realized the original synthetic projects where making constraints that represented too few historical projects. The new synthetic project simply makes all independent attributes controllable, and gives results in-line with the other synthetic and non-synthetic project.

Second, multiple-goal NASA93 projects are included. The BFC-NASA93 projects seek to minimize the defects, effort, and months as a whole. The reductions are in-line with the effort-only version of this dataset.

Finally, the big generality statement. To make this somewhat easier to read, I've left it in list format with the frequency counts of each attribute value trailing. I'm still working on a more concise way to express this data, one giant table doesn't seem to help.

key: DATASET.project:::attribute=freq count

NASA93.flight:::acap=25
NASA93.flight:::aexp=6
NASA93.flight:::cplx=13
NASA93.flight:::data=14
NASA93.flight:::lexp=8
NASA93.flight:::pcap=9
NASA93.flight:::rely=20
NASA93.flight:::stor=17
NASA93.flight:::turn=6
NASA93.ground:::acap=16
NASA93.ground:::aexp=9
NASA93.ground:::cplx=13
NASA93.ground:::data=20
NASA93.ground:::lexp=7
NASA93.ground:::pcap=7
NASA93.ground:::rely=18
NASA93.ground:::stor=13
NASA93.ground:::time=14
NASA93.osp2:::sced=87
NASA93.osp:::acap=29
NASA93.osp:::aexp=8
NASA93.osp:::cplx=10
NASA93.osp:::sced=12
NASA93.osp:::stor=24
NASA93.osp:::tool=20
BFC-NASA93.flight:::acap=28
BFC-NASA93.flight:::aexp=2
BFC-NASA93.flight:::cplx=7
BFC-NASA93.flight:::data=15
BFC-NASA93.flight:::lexp=2
BFC-NASA93.flight:::pcap=10
BFC-NASA93.flight:::rely=11
BFC-NASA93.flight:::stor=17
BFC-NASA93.flight:::turn=9
BFC-NASA93.ground:::acap=22
BFC-NASA93.ground:::apex=9
BFC-NASA93.ground:::cplx=4
BFC-NASA93.ground:::data=14
BFC-NASA93.ground:::ltex=10
BFC-NASA93.ground:::pcap=8
BFC-NASA93.ground:::rely=10
BFC-NASA93.ground:::stor=14
BFC-NASA93.ground:::time=11
BFC-NASA93.osp2:::sced=109
BFC-NASA93.osp:::acap=43
BFC-NASA93.osp:::aexp=2
BFC-NASA93.osp:::cplx=17
BFC-NASA93.osp:::sced=13
BFC-NASA93.osp:::stor=16
BFC-NASA93.osp:::team=4
BFC-NASA93.osp:::tool=10
ISBSG-clientserver-discretized.proj1:::Norm_PDF_UFP=9
ISBSG-clientserver-discretized.proj1:::Norm_PDR_AFP=11
ISBSG-clientserver-discretized.proj1:::Projected_PDR_UFP=3
ISBSG-clientserver-discretized.proj1:::Reported_PDR_AFP=4
ISBSG-clientserver-discretized.proj1:::Size_Added=5
ISBSG-clientserver-discretized.proj1:::Size_Enquiry=2
ISBSG-clientserver-discretized.proj1:::Size_File=19
ISBSG-clientserver-discretized.proj1:::Size_Input=16
ISBSG-clientserver-discretized.proj1:::Size_Interface=6
ISBSG-clientserver-discretized.proj1:::Size_Output=4
ISBSG-standalone-discretized.proj1:::Adj_FP=1
ISBSG-standalone-discretized.proj1:::Norm_PDF_UFP=14
ISBSG-standalone-discretized.proj1:::Norm_PDR_AFP=15
ISBSG-standalone-discretized.proj1:::Projected_PDR_UFP=4
ISBSG-standalone-discretized.proj1:::Reported_PDR_AFP=5
ISBSG-standalone-discretized.proj1:::Size_Added=5
ISBSG-standalone-discretized.proj1:::Size_Enquiry=1
ISBSG-standalone-discretized.proj1:::Size_File=13
ISBSG-standalone-discretized.proj1:::Size_Input=17
ISBSG-standalone-discretized.proj1:::Size_Interface=4
ISBSG-standalone-discretized.proj1:::Size_Output=4
ISBSG-standalone-discretized.proj2:::Adj_FP=1
ISBSG-standalone-discretized.proj2:::Norm_PDF_UFP=6
ISBSG-standalone-discretized.proj2:::Norm_PDR_AFP=3
ISBSG-standalone-discretized.proj2:::Projected_PDR_UFP=2
ISBSG-standalone-discretized.proj2:::Reported_PDR_AFP=1
ISBSG-standalone-discretized.proj2:::Size_Input=4
ISBSG-standalone-discretized.proj2:::VAF=2
ISBSG-standalone-discretized.proj2:::Work_Effort=33
MAXWELL.proj1:::T01=9
MAXWELL.proj1:::T02=11
MAXWELL.proj1:::T03=8
MAXWELL.proj1:::T04=4
MAXWELL.proj1:::T05=7
MAXWELL.proj1:::T06=3
MAXWELL.proj1:::T07=23
MAXWELL.proj1:::T08=5
MAXWELL.proj1:::T09=4
MAXWELL.proj1:::T10=7
MAXWELL.proj1:::T11=6
MAXWELL.proj1:::T12=5
MAXWELL.proj1:::T13=4
MAXWELL.proj1:::T14=5
MAXWELL.proj1:::T15=4
coc81.allLarge:::acap=4
coc81.allLarge:::aexp=6
coc81.allLarge:::cplx=3
coc81.allLarge:::data=14
coc81.allLarge:::lexp=5
coc81.allLarge:::modp=1
coc81.allLarge:::pcap=4
coc81.allLarge:::rely=22
coc81.allLarge:::sced=4
coc81.allLarge:::stor=14
coc81.allLarge:::time=5
coc81.allLarge:::tool=4
coc81.allLarge:::turn=6
coc81.allLarge:::vexp=13
coc81.allLarge:::virt=1
coc81.flight:::acap=6
coc81.flight:::aexp=21
coc81.flight:::cplx=7
coc81.flight:::data=18
coc81.flight:::lexp=4
coc81.flight:::pcap=1
coc81.flight:::rely=7
coc81.flight:::stor=27
coc81.flight:::turn=19
coc81.ground:::acap=8
coc81.ground:::cplx=7
coc81.ground:::data=30
coc81.ground:::ltex=2
coc81.ground:::pcap=3
coc81.ground:::pmat=2
coc81.ground:::rely=8
coc81.ground:::stor=30
coc81.ground:::time=9
coc81.osp2:::sced=58
coc81.osp:::acap=4
coc81.osp:::aexp=6
coc81.osp:::cplx=20
coc81.osp:::sced=7
coc81.osp:::stor=23
coc81.osp:::tool=9
desharnais-discretized.proj1:::Adjustment=4
desharnais-discretized.proj1:::Entities=2
desharnais-discretized.proj1:::Language=11
desharnais-discretized.proj1:::Length=3
desharnais-discretized.proj1:::ManagerExp=2
desharnais-discretized.proj1:::PointsAjust=6
desharnais-discretized.proj1:::PointsNonAdjust=3
desharnais-discretized.proj1:::TeamExp=1
desharnais-discretized.proj1:::Transactions=1
desharnais-discretized.proj1:::YearEnd=1

These numbers are out of what was returned after 100 runs, so the total counts within one project might not match another. The take-home here is we've able to maintain these large effort reductions even with widely different recommendations both within the same project and across different projects with similar metrics. Some projects such as OSP2 are every stable, only recommending SCED. Others show some distribution favoring a particular attribute, some seem to get by recommending a small subset of attributes.

Closer study is needed of the attributes returned. Right now I'm not looking at the recommended values, just what attribute was chosen.

No comments:

Post a Comment