[PDF] GESTION DE PROJETS



Previous PDF Next PDF






















[PDF] desjardins assurance invalidité salaire

[PDF] assurance invalidité refuse de payer

[PDF] assurance pret immobilier invalidité permanente

[PDF] delai reponse apres expertise medicale assurance

[PDF] expertise médicale accident du travail fonction pu

[PDF] fiche de procédure type

[PDF] modèle courrier comité médical supérieur

[PDF] comment se passe une expertise médicale

[PDF] modèle lettre commission de réforme

[PDF] exemple de procédure administrative

[PDF] rôle des délégués du personnel en commission de ré

[PDF] déclaration de valeur déménagement pdf

[PDF] déclaration de valeur déménagement demeco

[PDF] modèle déclaration de valeur

[PDF] déclaration de valeur transport

TypeAECF

Autonome2,401,052,500,38

Couplé3,001,122,500,35

Embarqué3,601,202,500,32

Départementd'informatique,Facultédessciences,UniversitédeSherbrooke,Québec¢Situationinitiale—Développement100%—Échéanciernoncontraint(NS:nominalschedule)¢A=2,94B=0,91¢C=3,67D=0,28¢EM(effortmultiplier)—pourmodulerl'effort¢SF(scalefactor)—pourmodulerladurée2020-02-1013GP031:Estimationdel'effort(v102c)-LucLavoieCOCOMOII-SITUATION"INITIALE»Réf.: [a], extraits des pages 9-15

Version 2.1 1

© 1995 - 2000 Center for Software Engineering, USC

1. Introduction

1.1 Overview

This manual presents two models, the Post-Architecture and Early Design models. These two models are used in the development of Application Generator, System Integration, or Infrastructure developments [Boehm et al. 2000]. The Post-Architecture is a detailed model that is used once the project is ready to develop and sustain a fielded system. The system should have a life-cycle architecture package, which provides detailed information on cost driver inputs, and enables more accurate cost estimates. The Early Design model is a high-level model that is used to explore of architectural alternatives or incremental development strategies. This level of detail is consistent with the general level of information available and the general level of estimation accuracy needed. The Post-Architecture and Early Design models use the same approach for product sizing (including reuse) and for scale factors. These will be presented first. Then, the Post-Architecture model will be explained followed by the Early Design model.

1.2 Nominal-Schedule Estimation Equations

Both the Post-Architecture and Early Design models use the same functional form to estimate the amount of effort and calendar time it will take to develop a software project. These nominal-schedule (NS) formulas exclude the cost driver for Required Development Schedule, SCED. The full formula is given in Section 3. The amount of effort in person-months, PM NS , is estimated by the formula: 5 1j j n 1i i E NS

SF0.01BE where

EMSizeAPM

Eq . 1

The amount of calendar time, TDEV

NS , it will take to develop the product is estimated by the formula:

B)(E0.2D

SF01.00.2DF where

PMCTDEV

5 1j j F NSNS

Eq . 2

The value of n, the number of effort multipliers, EM i , is 16 for the Post-Architecture model effort multipliers, EM i , and 6 for the Early Design model. SF j stands for the exponential scale factors. The values of A, B, EM 1 , ..., EM 16 , SF 1 , ..., and SF 5 for the COCOMO II.2000 Post-Architecture model are obtained by calibration to the actual parameters and effort values for the 161 projects currently in the COCOMO II database. The values of C and D for the

Version 2.1 1

© 1995 - 2000 Center for Software Engineering, USC

1. Introduction

1.1 Overview

This manual presents two models, the Post-Architecture and Early Design models. These two models are used in the development of Application Generator, System Integration, or Infrastructure developments [Boehm et al. 2000]. The Post-Architecture is a detailed model that is used once the project is ready to develop and sustain a fielded system. The system should have a life-cycle architecture package, which provides detailed information on cost driver inputs, and enables more accurate cost estimates. The Early Design model is a high-level model that is used to explore of architectural alternatives or incremental development strategies. This level of detail is consistent with the general level of information available and the general level of estimation accuracy needed. The Post-Architecture and Early Design models use the same approach for product sizing (including reuse) and for scale factors. These will be presented first. Then, the Post-Architecture model will be explained followed by the Early Design model.

1.2 Nominal-Schedule Estimation Equations

Both the Post-Architecture and Early Design models use the same functional form to estimate the amount of effort and calendar time it will take to develop a software project. These nominal-schedule (NS) formulas exclude the cost driver for Required Development Schedule, SCED. The full formula is given in Section 3. The amount of effort in person-months, PM NS , is estimated by the formula: 5 1j j n 1i i E NS

SF0.01BE where

EMSizeAPM

Eq . 1

The amount of calendar time, TDEV

NS , it will take to develop the product is estimated by the formula:

B)(E0.2D

SF01.00.2DF where

PMCTDEV

5 1j j F NSNS

Eq . 2

The value of n, the number of effort multipliers, EM i , is 16 for the Post-Architecture model effort multipliers, EM i , and 6 for the Early Design model. SF j stands for the exponential scale factors. The values of A, B, EM 1 , ..., EM 16 , SF 1 , ..., and SF 5 for the COCOMO II.2000 Post-Architecture model are obtained by calibration to the actual parameters and effort values for the 161 projects currently in the COCOMO II database. The values of C and D for the

Départementd'informatique,Facultédessciences,UniversitédeSherbrooke,Québec2020-02-10GP031:Estimationdel'effort(v102c)-LucLavoie16COCOMOII-SF(LAMATRICE)Réf.: [a], extraits des pages 18

Version 2.1 18

© 1995 - 2000 Center for Software Engineering, USC

Table 10. Scale Factor Values, SF

j , for COCOMO II Models Scale

Factors

Very Low

Low

Nominal

High

Very High

Extra High

PREC thoroughly unpreceden ted largely unpreceden ted somewhat unpreceden ted generally familiar largely familiar thoroughly familiar SF j

6.20 4.96 3.72 2.48 1.24 0.00

FLEX rigorous occasional relaxation some relaxation general conformity some conformity general goals SF j

5.07 4.05 3.04 2.03 1.01 0.00

RESL little (20%) some (40%) often (60%) generally (75%) mostly (90%) full (100%) SF j

7.07 5.65 4.24 2.83 1.41 0.00

TEAM very difficult interactions some difficult interactions basically cooperative interactions largely cooperative highly cooperative seamless interactions SF j

5.48 4.38 3.29 2.19 1.10 0.00

The estimated Equivalent Process Maturity Level (EPML) or PMAT

SW-CMM

Level 1

Lower

SW-CMM

Level 1

Upper

SW-CMM

Level 2

SW-CMM

Level 3

SW-CMM

Level 4

SW-CMM

Level 5

SF j : 7.80 6.24 4.68 3.12 1.56 0.00 The two scale factors, Precedentedness and Flexibility largely capture the differences between the Organic, Semidetached, and Embedded modes of the original COCOMO model [Boehm 1981]. Table 11 and Table 12 reorganize [Boehm 1981; Table 6.3] to map its project features onto the Precedentedness and Development Flexibility scales. These tables can be used as a more in depth explanation for the PREC and FLEX rating scales given in Table 10.

3.1.1 Precedentedness (PREC )

If a product is similar to several previously developed projects, then the precedentedness is high.

Table 11. Precedentedness Rating Levels

Feature Very Low Nominal / High E xtra High

Organizational understanding of product

objectives

General Considerable T horough

Experience in working with related software

systems

Moderate Considerable Extensive

Concurrent development of associated new

hardware and operational procedures

Extensive Moder ate Some

Départementd'informatique,Facultédessciences,UniversitédeSherbrooke,Québec2020-02-1022GP031:Estimationdel'effort(v102c)-LucLavoieCOCOMOII-EM:SYNTHÈSE(1/3)*** voir tableau complémentaire ***

Version 2.1 75

© 1995 - 2000 Center for Software Engineering, USC Cost

Drivers

Very Low

Low

Nominal

High

Very High

Extra High

SITE:

Collo-

cation

International Multi-city and

multi- company

Multi-city or

multi- company

Same city or

metro area Same building or complex Fully collocated SITE: Com- muni- cation

Some phone,

mail

Individual

phone, FAX

Narrow-band

email

Wide-band

electronic communica- tion.

Wide-band

elect. comm, occasional video conf.

Interactive

multimedia SCED

75% of

nominal

85% of

nominal

100% of

nominal

130% of

nominal

160% of

nominal

8.3 COCOMO II Version Parameter Values

8.3.1 COCOM O II.2000 Calibration

The following table, Table 62, shows the COCOMO II.2000 calibrated values for Post- Architecture scale factors and effort multipliers. Table 62. COCOMO II 2000 Calib rated Post-Architecture Model Values

Baseline Effort Constants: A = 2.94; B = 0.91

Baseline Schedule Constants: C = 3.67; D = 0.28

Driver Symbol VL L N H VH XH

PREC SF

1

6.20 4.96 3.72 2.48 1.24 0.00

FLEX SF

2

5.07 4.05 3.04 2.03 1.01 0.00

RESL SF

3

7.07 5.65 4.24 2.83 1.41 0.00

TEAM SF

4

5.48 4.38 3.29 2.19 1.10 0.00

PMAT SF

5

7.80 6.24 4.68 3.12 1.56 0.00

RELY EM

1

0.82 0.92 1.00 1.10 1.26

DATA EM

2

0.90 1.00 1.14 1.28

CPLX EM

3

0.73 0.87 1.00 1.17 1.34 1.74

RUSE EM

4

0.95 1.00 1.07 1.15 1.24

DOCU EM

5

0.81 0.91 1.00 1.11 1.23

TIME EM

6

1 .00 1.11 1.29 1.63

STOR EM

7

1 .00 1.05 1.17 1.46

PVOL EM

8

0.87 1.00 1.15 1.30

ACAP EM

9

1.42 1.19 1.00 0.85 0.71

PCAP EM

10

1.34 1.15 1.00 0.88 0.76

PCON EM

11

1.29 1.12 1.00 0.90 0.81

APEX EM

12

1.22 1.10 1.00 0.88 0.81

PLEX EM

13

1.19 1.09 1.00 0.91 0.85

LTEX EM

14

1.20 1.09 1.00 0.91 0.84

TOOL EM

15

1.17 1.09 1.00 0.90 0.78

SITE EM

16

1.22 1.09 1.00 0.93 0.86 0.80

SCED EM

17

1.43 1.14 1.00 1.00 1.00

Version 2.1 27

© 1995 - 2000 Center for Software Engineering, USC

Table 19. Component Complexi ty Ratings Levels

Control

Operations

Computational

Operations

Device-

dependent

Operations

Data

Management

Operations

User Interface

Management

Operations

Very Low

Straight-line

code with a few non-nested structured programming operators: DOs,

CASEs, IF-

THEN-ELSEs.

Simple module

composition via procedure calls or simple scripts.

Evaluation of

simple expressions: e.g., A=B+C*(D- E)

Simple read,

write statements with simple formats.

Simple arrays in

main memory.

Simple COTS-

DB queries,

updates.

Simple input

forms, report generators. Low

Straightforward

nesting of structured programming operators.

Mostly simple

predicates

Evaluation of

moderate-level expressions: e.g.,

D=SQRT(B**2-

4.*A*C)

No cognizance

needed of particular processor or I/O device characteristics.

I/O done at

GET/PUT level.

Single file

subsetting with no data structure changes, no edits, no intermediate files.

Moderately

complex COTS-

DB queries,

updates.

Use of simple

graphic user interface (GUI) builders.

Nominal

Mostly simple

nesting. Some intermodule control.

Decision tables.

Simple callbacks

or message passing, including middleware- supported distributed processing

Use of standard

math and statistical routines. Basic matrix/vector operations.

I/O processing

includes devicequotesdbs_dbs43.pdfusesText_43