数学模型和软件可靠性不同的数学是否适合软件生命周期的所有阶段?

M. Krasich
{"title":"数学模型和软件可靠性不同的数学是否适合软件生命周期的所有阶段?","authors":"M. Krasich","doi":"10.1109/RAM.2017.7889761","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Software reliability, its predictions and data analyses are mostly based on the number of faults; therefore fault mitigation and reliability growth achieved by mitigation of number of faults. The usual results are the final failure frequency of the delivered mature software. The early reliability prediction is needed at the beginning of the development phase to estimate reliability of the software and its effect of the product it is a part of. Since the discrete number of faults are expected to be observed and mitigated, the non-homogenous Poisson probability distribution comes as the preferred mathematical tool. In the case where during development process no reliability growth was achieved, the same mathematics would just yield parameters which would indicate no reliability changes or, in the worst case, reliability degradation (the growth parameter equal or greater than one). Krasich-Peterson model (patent pending) and Musa original model when used for early predictions are very similar except the first assumes power law fitting of the mitigated faults, whilst the latter model assumes constant rate of failure mitigation. Since the early reliability predictions use assumptions for function parameters derived from quality level of the software inspection, testing, and improvement process and also on the software size, complexity, its use profile, the single way of validating those assumptions and the parameters derived from them is to apply the same mathematics to the reliability estimation of software for early predictions covering its lifecycle. Regardless of what mathematical model is applied, for continuity and for meaningful conclusions and decisions regarding software reliability as well as the future use of such information on other projects, one method type of counting (discrete) distribution should be applied in the same organization throughout the software lifecycle. An additional benefit of such consistency is the ability to compare not only software development and use phases but to compare the different software development and quality and test practices.","PeriodicalId":138871,"journal":{"name":"2017 Annual Reliability and Maintainability Symposium (RAMS)","volume":"1112 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Mathematical models and software reliability can different mathematics fit all phases of SW lifecycle?\",\"authors\":\"M. Krasich\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/RAM.2017.7889761\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Software reliability, its predictions and data analyses are mostly based on the number of faults; therefore fault mitigation and reliability growth achieved by mitigation of number of faults. The usual results are the final failure frequency of the delivered mature software. The early reliability prediction is needed at the beginning of the development phase to estimate reliability of the software and its effect of the product it is a part of. Since the discrete number of faults are expected to be observed and mitigated, the non-homogenous Poisson probability distribution comes as the preferred mathematical tool. In the case where during development process no reliability growth was achieved, the same mathematics would just yield parameters which would indicate no reliability changes or, in the worst case, reliability degradation (the growth parameter equal or greater than one). Krasich-Peterson model (patent pending) and Musa original model when used for early predictions are very similar except the first assumes power law fitting of the mitigated faults, whilst the latter model assumes constant rate of failure mitigation. Since the early reliability predictions use assumptions for function parameters derived from quality level of the software inspection, testing, and improvement process and also on the software size, complexity, its use profile, the single way of validating those assumptions and the parameters derived from them is to apply the same mathematics to the reliability estimation of software for early predictions covering its lifecycle. Regardless of what mathematical model is applied, for continuity and for meaningful conclusions and decisions regarding software reliability as well as the future use of such information on other projects, one method type of counting (discrete) distribution should be applied in the same organization throughout the software lifecycle. An additional benefit of such consistency is the ability to compare not only software development and use phases but to compare the different software development and quality and test practices.\",\"PeriodicalId\":138871,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2017 Annual Reliability and Maintainability Symposium (RAMS)\",\"volume\":\"1112 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2017 Annual Reliability and Maintainability Symposium (RAMS)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/RAM.2017.7889761\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2017 Annual Reliability and Maintainability Symposium (RAMS)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/RAM.2017.7889761","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

软件的可靠性,其预测和数据分析大多基于故障的数量;因此,故障的减少和可靠性的提高是通过减少故障数量来实现的。通常的结果是交付的成熟软件的最终故障频率。早期可靠性预测是在开发阶段开始时需要进行的,用于评估软件的可靠性及其对产品的影响。由于期望观察和减轻离散数量的故障,非齐次泊松概率分布成为首选的数学工具。在开发过程中没有实现可靠性增长的情况下,同样的数学将只产生一些参数,这些参数将表明可靠性没有变化,或者在最坏的情况下,可靠性下降(增长参数等于或大于1)。Krasich-Peterson模型(正在申请专利)和Musa原始模型在用于早期预测时非常相似,除了第一个模型假设缓和故障的幂律拟合,而后一个模型假设恒定的故障缓解率。由于早期的可靠性预测使用了从软件检查、测试和改进过程的质量水平以及软件大小、复杂性、使用概况中得出的功能参数的假设,验证这些假设和从中得出的参数的唯一方法是将相同的数学应用于软件的可靠性估计,用于覆盖其生命周期的早期预测。不管应用了什么数学模型,为了关于软件可靠性的连续性和有意义的结论和决策,以及将来在其他项目上使用这些信息,在整个软件生命周期中,应该在同一个组织中应用一种计数(离散)分布的方法类型。这种一致性的另一个好处是,不仅可以比较软件开发和使用阶段,还可以比较不同的软件开发、质量和测试实践。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Mathematical models and software reliability can different mathematics fit all phases of SW lifecycle?
Software reliability, its predictions and data analyses are mostly based on the number of faults; therefore fault mitigation and reliability growth achieved by mitigation of number of faults. The usual results are the final failure frequency of the delivered mature software. The early reliability prediction is needed at the beginning of the development phase to estimate reliability of the software and its effect of the product it is a part of. Since the discrete number of faults are expected to be observed and mitigated, the non-homogenous Poisson probability distribution comes as the preferred mathematical tool. In the case where during development process no reliability growth was achieved, the same mathematics would just yield parameters which would indicate no reliability changes or, in the worst case, reliability degradation (the growth parameter equal or greater than one). Krasich-Peterson model (patent pending) and Musa original model when used for early predictions are very similar except the first assumes power law fitting of the mitigated faults, whilst the latter model assumes constant rate of failure mitigation. Since the early reliability predictions use assumptions for function parameters derived from quality level of the software inspection, testing, and improvement process and also on the software size, complexity, its use profile, the single way of validating those assumptions and the parameters derived from them is to apply the same mathematics to the reliability estimation of software for early predictions covering its lifecycle. Regardless of what mathematical model is applied, for continuity and for meaningful conclusions and decisions regarding software reliability as well as the future use of such information on other projects, one method type of counting (discrete) distribution should be applied in the same organization throughout the software lifecycle. An additional benefit of such consistency is the ability to compare not only software development and use phases but to compare the different software development and quality and test practices.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Reliability study on high-k bi-layer dielectrics Contracting for system availability under fleet expansion: Redundancy allocation or spares inventory? Risk modeling of variable probability external initiating events Human reliability assessments: Using the past (Shuttle) to predict the future (Orion) Uniform analysis of fault trees through model transformations
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1