Effect of Different UML Diagrams to Evaluate the Size Metric for Different Software Projects

Effect of Different UML Diagrams to Evaluate the Size Metric for Different Software Projects

Preety Verma Dhaka

Contact

Dr. Amita Sharma

Contact

α Jayoti Vidyapeeth Women's University

Effect of Different UML Diagrams to Evaluate the Size Metric for Different Software Projects

Article Fingerprint

ReserarchID

CSTSDE58971

Effect of Different UML Diagrams to Evaluate the Size Metric for Different Software Projects Banner

AI TAKEAWAY

Connecting with the Eternal Ground

Abstract

In Software Engineering, an important activity is measuring of the Software in different ways. For Measuring the Software, appropriate metrics are needed. Using Software metrics we are able to attain the various qualitative and quantitative aspects of Software. To measure the Software in terms of quality, size, efforts, efficiency, and reliability, performance etc. we have different metrics available in Software Engineering and it has been an area of interest for the various researchers. Measures of specific attributes of the process, project and product are used to compute Software metrics. This work proposes a similar approach of measuring software using various UML diagrams and applied Software size metric to evaluate the size of the Software. This paper discusses the proposed approach using two different case studies and their source codes. This paper discusses the different results obtained using different perspectives of the Software size metric measurements and maintainability of the Software.

References

19 Cites in Article

Reference Format

Pressman Roger (2005). Software Engineering" Sixth Edition.
Rumbaugh James,Ivar Jacobson,Booch Grady (2008). The Unified Modeling Language User Guide.
Rumbaugh James,Jacobson Ivar,Booch Grady (2008). The Unified Modeling Language User Guide.
Rumbaugh James,Jacobson Ivar,Booch Grady (2008). The Unified Modeling Language User Guide.
Patrick Jacobson Magnus Christerson,Gunnar Jonsson,Overgaard (2008). Object-oriented Software Engineering.
Yi Tong (2004). A Comparison of Metrics for UML Class Diagrams.
Li Wei,Et (2003). An Empirical Validation of Object-Oriented Metrics in Two Different Iterative Software Processes.
Mitchell Aine (2003). Toward a definition of run-time object-oriented metrics.
M Xenos (2000). Object-oriented metrics -a survey.
. Arasimhan Lakshmi (2009). Evaluation of a Suite of Metrics for Component Based Software Engineering (CBSE).
Amjan Shaik (2010). Metrics for Object Oriented Design Software Systems: A Survey.
Jahan Vafaei,Et A New Method Software Size Estimation based on UML Metrics.
Chen Yue,Boehm Barry An Empirical Study of eServices Product UML Sizing Metrics.
Linda Edith,P (2011). Metrics for Component based Measurement Tools.
Subramanyam Ramanath (2003). Empirical Analysis of CK Metrics for Object-oriented Design Complexity: Implications for Software Defects.
P Tegarden,David Effectiveness of Traditional Software Metrics for Object-Oriented Systems.
Doban Orysolya Cost Estimation Driven Software Development Process.
Lavazza Luigi (2008). Using Function Point in the Estimation of Real-Time Software: an Experience.
Chidamber Managerial use of metrics for Object-oriented software: an exploratory analysis.

Download References

Funding

No external funding was declared for this work.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

No ethics committee approval was required for this article type.

Data Availability

Not applicable for this article.

How to Cite This Article

Preety Verma Dhaka. 2016. \u201cEffect of Different UML Diagrams to Evaluate the Size Metric for Different Software Projects\u201d. Global Journal of Computer Science and Technology - C: Software & Data Engineering GJCST-C Volume 15 (GJCST Volume 15 Issue C8): .

More Citation Formats

Select Citation Style:

Download Citation

Download Article

GJCST Volume 15 Issue C8
Pg. 1- 8

Explore Journals Explore Volume Read This Issue

Journal Specifications

Crossref Journal DOI 10.17406/gjcst

Print ISSN 0975-4350

e-ISSN 0975-4172

Keywords

Not Found

Classification

D.2.2 D.2.3

Submission ReceivedDecember 8, 2014
Peer Review Double Blind
Handling Editor
Accepted January 1, 2015
Published January 15, 2015

Version of record

v1.2

Issue date

January 18, 2016

Language

Experiance in AR

Explore published articles in an immersive Augmented Reality environment. Our platform converts research papers into interactive 3D books, allowing readers to view and interact with content using AR and VR compatible devices.

View in VR

Read in 3D

Your published article is automatically converted into a realistic 3D book. Flip through pages and read research papers in a more engaging and interactive format.

View in 3D

Article Matrices

Total Score: 107

Country: India

Subject: Global Journal of Computer Science and Technology - C: Software & Data Engineering

Authors: Preety Verma Dhaka, Dr. Amita Sharma (PhD/Dr. count: 1)

View Count (all-time): 255

Total Views (Real + Logic): 7793

Total Downloads (simulated): 1894

Publish Date: 2016 01, Mon

Monthly Totals (Real + Logic):

Month 1: 32 views
Month 2: 39 views
Month 3: 56 views
Month 4: 46 views
Month 5: 61 views
Month 6: 36 views
Month 7: 34 views
Month 8: 33 views
Month 9: 50 views
Month 10: 32 views
Month 11: 33 views
Month 12: 24 views
Month 13: 22 views
Month 14: 20 views
Month 15: 26 views
Month 16: 30 views
Month 17: 24 views
Month 18: 40 views
Month 19: 24 views
Month 20: 43 views
Month 21: 33 views
Month 22: 19 views
Month 23: 26 views
Month 24: 37 views
Month 25: 29 views
Month 26: 48 views
Month 27: 34 views
Month 28: 21 views
Month 29: 38 views
Month 30: 44 views
Month 31: 31 views
Month 32: 42 views
Month 33: 31 views
Month 34: 25 views
Month 35: 32 views
Month 36: 21 views
Month 37: 31 views
Month 38: 39 views
Month 39: 41 views
Month 40: 31 views
Month 41: 15 views
Month 42: 38 views
Month 43: 23 views
Month 44: 34 views
Month 45: 26 views
Month 46: 34 views
Month 47: 31 views
Month 48: 32 views
Month 49: 25 views
Month 50: 25 views
Month 51: 24 views
Month 52: 39 views
Month 53: 29 views
Month 54: 48 views
Month 55: 14 views
Month 56: 25 views
Month 57: 33 views
Month 58: 45 views
Month 59: 43 views
Month 60: 21 views
Month 61: 14 views
Month 62: 25 views
Month 63: 37 views
Month 64: 25 views
Month 65: 23 views
Month 66: 35 views
Month 67: 26 views
Month 68: 30 views
Month 69: 30 views
Month 70: 44 views
Month 71: 33 views
Month 72: 13 views
Month 73: 21 views
Month 74: 31 views
Month 75: 15 views
Month 76: 31 views
Month 77: 42 views
Month 78: 32 views
Month 79: 36 views
Month 80: 44 views
Month 81: 43 views
Month 82: 30 views
Month 83: 24 views
Month 84: 17 views
Month 85: 24 views
Month 86: 23 views
Month 87: 20 views
Month 88: 22 views
Month 89: 24 views
Month 90: 21 views
Month 91: 27 views
Month 92: 34 views
Month 93: 22 views
Month 94: 19 views
Month 95: 38 views
Month 96: 20 views
Month 97: 23 views
Month 98: 44 views
Month 99: 15 views
Month 100: 28 views
Month 101: 17 views
Month 102: 25 views
Month 103: 30 views
Month 104: 40 views
Month 105: 29 views
Month 106: 27 views
Month 107: 28 views
Month 108: 43 views
Month 109: 29 views
Month 110: 26 views
Month 111: 23 views
Month 112: 23 views
Month 113: 33 views
Month 114: 45 views
Month 115: 20 views
Month 116: 20 views
Month 117: 24 views
Month 118: 23 views
Month 119: 33 views
Month 120: 40 views
Month 121: 15 views
Month 122: 32 views
Month 123: 57 views
Month 124: 24 views

Total Views: 7793

Total Downloads: 1894

2026 Trends

Published Article

Our website is actively being updated, and changes may occur frequently. Please clear your browser cache if needed. For feedback or error reporting, please email [email protected]