SlideShare a Scribd company logo
IOSR Journal of Computer Engineering (IOSRJCE)
ISSN: 2278-0661 Volume 4, Issue 6 (Sep.-Oct. 2012), PP 06-12
www.iosrjournals.org
www.iosrjournals.org 6 | P a g e
A Cost Estimation Model For Reuse Based Software Program
Shobha Rani Malik1
, Dr. Saba Hilal2
1
(Lecturer, Technical Edu. Deptt. Haryana and Research Scholar at Lingayas’ University Faridabad, India)
2
(Research Guide, Lingayas’ University Faridabad, India )
Abstract: Reuse reduces total cost of product but it has its value. As per reuse principle, it is not for free, a
reuse program requires a lot of set-up investment as well as additional costs for development and operational
activities but benefits are neither linear nor immediate. The aim of this paper is to evaluate the current state of
art and practice on cost estimation for a software reuse oriented program by extending the pioneering
contribution of other researchers in this direction. A simplified software reuse cost estimation model which
presents where, who, how capital investment is done for a reuse program is suggested with various cost
effecting factors.
Keywords - Cost effecting Factors, Cost Metrics, Software Reuse, Reuse Cost
I. Introduction
It is accepted that to develop a reusable asset is more costly than equivalent custom tailored [1]. Reuse requires
extra cost due to generalization, documentation, additional testing, library support , maintenance , architecture,
design and implementation [2][3]. Software reuse have the same cost and risk features as any financial
investment [4].
1.1 Prerequisites for cost
An organization have to analyze following factors related to cost before implementing a reuse program.
 Cost to implement a reuse program.
 Investment approach
 Cost to sustain the reuse program.
 Time to take to break even reuse investment.
 Expected benefits
1.2 Investment approaches
There are three investment approaches for software reuse process:
 Proactive Investment
This approach tends to require a large initial investment and is preferred in stable domain [5]. Returns on
investment can only be seen when products are developed and maintained .
 Reactive Investment
This is an incremental approach to build reusable components generally used in reengineering and is preferred
in unstable domain [5] .
 Extractive Investment
Combination of Proactive and Reactive approach .
1.3 Cost Factors for Reuse
 Management
This cost is spent to manage a reuse program. Reuse is as much of a technical issue as it is an organizational
one [6].
 Development and implementation
This cost is spent to develop and implement a reusable program.
 Operation
This cost is spent to reuse a component.
 Investment for Support
This cost is spent to support a reuse program such as training and tool acquisition.
A Cost Estimation Model For Reuse Based Software Program
www.iosrjournals.org 7 | P a g e
II. Related Work
Various authors have estimated cost of a reusable component by using cost of component without reuse,
calculated with the help of any approach to estimate cost of software such as algorithmic or function point
analysis[7][8][9][4]. Mostly researcher [9][3][8] have estimated cost of a reusable component on the basis of
size of component (salaries(costs) are according size). In the proposed scheme, a cost estimation model is
suggested for a reuse oriented organization that develops reusable components where costs of reusable
components are double in comparison of costs of similar components for single use and salaries(costs) depend
on time(year) not on size of component. Studies[10][11][7][2][3][12] calculated relative cost writing for reuse
and[2][8][10][11][12] calculated relative cost for reuse, but not estimated the effect of size, strategy,
complexity, standardization, integration, modification, scale and availability on cost, [12] only shows effect of
complexity and modification. Study [1] have mentioned the effect of complexity, modification, scale on cost.
[13] estimated the effect of standardization and [14] estimated the effect of strategy. [15] estimated the effect of
size and [16] also estimated the effect of size including integration, on cost. But none of above estimated the
effect of availability and integration of components on cost. In this research, the effect of availability and
integration of components on cost is estimated as well as almost all above mentioned cost effecting factors are
reviewed by extending and filling the gap left by other studies. We have also reviewed some measurement tools-
metrics and models to estimate costs of a software reuse program.
III. Proposed Work
3.1 Measures for cost estimate of a reuse program.
Generally following metrics and models are used to estimate cost of a reuse program.
 Reusable assets cost=∑ cost of submitted assets [17]
 Cost of development for reuse= The Relative Cost of Writing Reusable Software(RCWR) * (Cost of
development for one-time use) [18 ] [12]
RCWR depends upon - size, strategy, complexity etc. After various studies[10][11][12][2][3][12] we found that
Favro[14 ] suggests maximum range of RCWR=1.0 - 2.2
Poulin[ 2] recommended RCWR==1.5
 Operational cost of a reuse component = Relative Cost of Reuse(RCR) *(Cost of component developed
from scratch) [18 ][12].
RCR depends upon many factors and is proportional to complexity and modification of the reused
component[1 ]. After various studies[2][8][10][11][12] we found that Gaffney and Durek [8 ] suggests
minimum value of RCR=.03 and maximum value of RCR=.4 is suggested by Favaro[ 11] .Poulin[12]
recommended RCR =.2
 Cost application –system = (cost new- code* size new- code) + (cost modify- reused* size modified- code) +
costs reuse –library [19]
In the SPC model [3],
 Cost software -product = cost to develop new + cost of reusing existing software.
3.2 Costs for software reuse.
Both Producer and Consumer have to pay for reuse [1][12][20][13][2][21][22][23][24] as shown in Table1.
Table 1: Producer and Consumer Costs:
Cost Producer Cost Consumer Costs
Development Cost Domain analysis
Modelling /design for reusability
Implementation for reusability
Domain Analysis
Procuring components
Assessing components
Overhead Costs Testing of parts
Creation of repository ( library)
Maintenance of parts
Management of parts
Publication(marketing) of parts
Training of personnel for reusability
Integration
Maintenance
Adaption
Search -Query, Retrieval
Testing Modified components
Fees and royalties
Other Costs Performing cost-benefit analysis
Documenting reusable parts
Making components generic
Cataloguing reusable parts
standardize reusable parts[13]
Performing cost-benefit analysis
A Cost Estimation Model For Reuse Based Software Program
www.iosrjournals.org 8 | P a g e
3.3 costs estimation for a reuse program .
We are estimating cost of a reuse program in a hypothetical scenario of a corporation that starts its
reuse initiative with domain engineering in 2007 developing reusable components as shown in Table2, that are
used in applications internally as shown in Table4, and are also sold externally to corporation for a period of 4
years. The following assumptions are made with respect to this program :
 Cost of the reused components is double as compared to similar components made for single use.
 Salary of employees is fixed, not depending upon size and quantity of components .Overhead cost to make
reusable components is 10 % of salary of employees and all other details are as shown in Table3.
 Cost of purchased component(yi ) that are used in applications is 25% extra of cost of internally developed
component(yi).
 Set-up cost of corporation for reuse program is $3,000 and of application- engineering cycle is $1,000
Table2: Components Details
Year Component Size
2007 X1 5k
2008 X2 10k
2009 X3 15k
2010 X4 20k
Table 3: Salary of Employees
Personnel Initial Salary ($) Increment/y (%)
component
developer for
reuse
1000 15
manager for reuse 800 10
librarian for reuse 700 10
Domain Analyst 800 10
Table 4: Applications Details
Year Application Component used
internally developed
Component used
externally developed
Additional-Code
2008 App(1) X1 O1 2K
2009 App(2) X1,X2 O1,O2 4K
2010 App(3) X1, X2,X3 O1,O2,O3 6K
3.3.1Cost Structure:
Software reuse require investment at different levels from top to bottom with a cyclic cost
approach[9 ] .We are suggesting a cost structure for above said corporation.
Fig 1. Cost Structure
CostCor
Costcomp
CostCor
CostDomain
Assets external to
the corporation
A Cost Estimation Model For Reuse Based Software Program
www.iosrjournals.org 9 | P a g e
3.3.1.1 Component Engg. Cycle Cost :
Costcomp-Engg = ∑ Costcomp , Where
Costcomp-Engg = Component Engg. Cycle Cost
Costcomp = Cost for a single component
Cost for a single component:
Costcomp(yi) = Costdev (yi) + Cost Overhead(yi) , Where
Cost Overhead = Costmgt + Cost Maintenance + Cost Training + CostLibrary + CostPub + CostStd + Cost others
Costcomp = (Costdev + Costmgt + CostLibrary) + (Cost Maintenance + Cost Training + CostPub + CostStd + Cost others )
i,e Component cost(yi)= Personnel Salary(yi) + 10% (Personnel Salary(yi))
Costcomp-Engg = ∑ Costcomp
= $ 13150.36 , Where
Costdev =Development cost of Component
Cost Overhead = Overhead cost of Component
CostStd = Costs of standardizing a Component
3.3.1.2 Domain Engg. Cycle cost :
CostDomain-Engg = SalaryDom-Analyst + Costcomp-Engg
CostDomain-Engg = $ 16863.16
Where CostDomain-Engg = Domain Engg. Cycle cost
SalaryDom-Analyst = Salary of domain analyst
3.3.1.3 Application Engg. Cycle cost:
CostApp -Engg = CostSet-up + ∑CostApp
Where
CostApp -Engg = Cost of Application- Engg. Cycle
CostApp = cost of a application
CostSet-up = costs of training and tool acquisition for reusing components in aplications
CostSet-up = (Cost Training + Costtool-acq)
Cost Training = cost of training of personnel for reusing components in Applications
Costtool-acq = cost of tool acquition for reusing components
in Applications
CostApp = CostAdd-Code + (∑ Costcomp-int + ∑ Costcomp-ext )+ Cost Overhead
All internally developed Components are used as Black- Box reuse and externally developed Components are
used as White- Box reuse . Then
For Black- Box reuse
Cost Overhead = Costintegration + Cost Maintenance + (1-p)*Costsearch + Costacq + Cost others
For White- Box reuse
Cost Overhead = Costintegration + Cost Maintenance + Cost adap + Costfr +Cost others
Take CostOverhead =20% of Cost Scratch for each ( Black- Box and White- Box reuse) i, e RCR = .2,
Cost Scratch = .5*1315.036 =6575.18 (since cost of reused component is double) i, e RCWR = 2,
Salary of developer for additonal-code = 50% developer for reuse
CostApp(i) = [Costcomp-int (I) + Costcomp-int (I-1) + (i-1)*Costcomp-int (i-2) + Costcomp-int (o) + Costcomp-int (o-1) +
(o-1)*Costcomp-int (o-2) ] + [ CostAdd-Code + Cost Overhead ]
∑ CostApp = ∑ ( CostAdd-Code + Cost Overhead + ∑ Costcomp-int + ∑ Costcomp-ext )
∑CostApp = $ 33400.03
CostApp -Engg = 1000+ 33400.03
= $34400.03
Where
Cost Overhead = Overhead cost of the application
Cost Scratch = cost of components without reuse
Cost search = cost of performing a search operation
Costintegration = cost of integrating components
Cost Maintenance = cost of maintaining components
p = probability that the component is found in repository
Costfr = cost of fee and roilites of components that are acquired from externally sources
Cost adapt = cost of adapting components
Cost others = any other cost for reusing components
3.3.1.4 Corporate Engg. Cycle cost :
CostCor-Engg = CostSet-up + CostDomain-Engg + CostApp -Engg - ∑ Costcomp-int
A Cost Estimation Model For Reuse Based Software Program
www.iosrjournals.org 10 | P a g e
CostCor-Engg = 3000+16863.16+$34400.03- 13150.36
=41112.83
Where
CostCor-Engg = Corporate Engg. Cycle cost
3. 4 Cost effecting factors in software reuse scenario .
Cost effecting factors in context of above said corporation:
3.4.1 Availability
We are developing an application of the year 2010 (cost of all components is taken of year 2009 ) considering
that if a component is found in organization ‗s own library it is used as black box component otherwise as
white box ( externally used components). RCR depends upon value of p (probability that a component is found
in repository )- as value of p decreases, number of externally used components increases .So cost of the
application increases since externally used components more costly as well as RCR increases due to increment
in externally used components ( white box components) that require modification . RCR is proportional to
modification of the reused component and may be up to .9 [1]
Graph1. Availability vs. Cost
3.4.2 Strategies
Components from market with lower customization cost, may off set the higher acquisition costs of black-box
reuse (CBD form) [14].But in our model organization itself develops black-box components according its
needs so Search cost and Component price both are reasonable . So black-box reuse is economical.
Graph 2. Strategies vs. Cost
3.4.3. Size
Cost is proportional to Size, is a very useful prediction about cost when variation is desired in size of
reused product.[15] .So size of reused product should be effective since that incorporates reusable component
engineering and integration efforts [16] and ultimately impacts project(application). Integration of components
increases size of project so effect on cost should be predicted since it play a lot in overhead costs.
In our model : Costcomp-X4 : Costcomp-X1 = 1.40695 , Sizecomp-X4 : Sizecomp-X1 = 4
As Sizecomp increases 4 times but Costcomp also increases but 1.40695 times i,e not directly proportional . (1)
If Costintegration is 1% of Cost Overhead per component in Application –Engg Cycle, then
As Number of components increases , Costintegration also increases directly proportional . (2)
As Number of components increases CostAdd-Code also increases but not directly proportional. (3)
0
10000
20000
30000
1 2 3 4
ApplicationCost
Probaility
P
Cost-App
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
Black-box White-box
ApplicationCost
Stratergies
Series1
A Cost Estimation Model For Reuse Based Software Program
www.iosrjournals.org 11 | P a g e
From (1) (2) .(3) We can say that size effects cost of application.
Graph 3. Size Vs. Cost
3.4.4 Scale
Scale of Reuse ranges (1.15-1.75) for Across Projects to Across Multiple product-line [1]. In our model ,
Components are used across projects and program. So cost increases as scale of reuse increases.
3.4.5 Standardization
For better understanding and optimal integration a component should be interface and functionality
standardized for which it have to pay otherwise pay for adaptation and integration[26 ]. As standardization
level of reusable components increases , cost also increases[13].
3.4.6 Failure
Reuse failure mean that either a component is not reused or the cost of reusing exceeds the cost of
developing the component from scratch. Failures in the sense of programmer's time, motivation, accountability
differently effects cost and incentives so it should be minimum.[27 ].
3.4.7 Quality
Quality characteristics demand a lot, perhaps the most costly feature of a reusable software.
3.4.8 Complexity
Complexity of component depends upon its structure that may be monolithic , polylithic , graph, menu
or mask[18].Complexity of reused component reflects both costs- development and operation. RCWR and RCR
are proportional to complexity of the component[1 ].We have taken Complexity as RCWR in component-
Engg. Cycle that reflects Complexity of development and RCR as operation Complexity in Application - Engg.
Cycle. RCWR+ RCR=total Complexity of a reused program.
As Complexity of reused components increases ,cost of component-Engg. Cycle and
ultimately Application - Engg. Cycle also increases almost proportional to Complexity of a reused program
.
Graph 4. Complexity vs. Cost
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
1 2 3 4 5
Cost-Overhead
Cost Integration
Series1
Series2
Series3
0
10000
20000
30000
40000
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Costapplication
Complexity
Cost-App
Complexity
A Cost Estimation Model For Reuse Based Software Program
www.iosrjournals.org 12 | P a g e
IV. Conclusion
Producer as well as user have to pay for a reuse program. Some measures(metrics and models) to
estimate the cost of a reuse program are reviewed. In this research, a simplified and enhanced cost estimation
model is suggested for all cycles of software reuse organization .The Proposed study also results that a
application (project) cost depends upon domain analysis and size , reuse rate ,quantity, availability in repository,
strategy, failure ,standardization of components. Corporate(organization) investment depends upon
infrastructure and number of applications made.
V. Future Work
For cost-benefit analysis of proposed scheme ,we will suggest a benefits-estimate model and further
estimation of economic worth of proposed scheme for organization .
REFERENCES
[1] M.R.V. Chaudron, Software Engineering Economics with special attention to Component-& Reuse-based Software
Engineering,www.win.tue.nl/~mchaudro,Dept. of Mathematics and Computing Science Eindhoven University of Technology,
Based on IBM Systems Jnl, 1993, Vol 32, No, 4
[2] Tracz, Will, Confessions of a Used Program Salesman Institutionalizing Software Reuse, New York: Addison-Wesley Publishing
Company, 1995.
[3] Margano, J. and T. Rhoads,Software Reuse Economics, Cost-Benefit Analysis on a Large Scale Ada Project, In Proceedings,
International Conference on Software Engineering, Melbourne, Australia, 11-15 May 1992: 338-348.
[4] Barnes, B. and T. Bollinger, Making Reuse Cost Effective, IEEE Software, Jan. 1991, 8(l): 13-24.
[5] Jasmine K.S and Dr. R. Vasantha ,Cost Estimation Model For Reuse Based Software Products, Proceedings of the International
Multi Conference of Engineers and Computer Scientists 2008 Vol I IMECS 2008, 19-21 March, 2008, Hong Kong
[6] Jared Fortune and Ricardo Valerdi Los Angeles, Considerations for Successful Reuse in Systems Engineering, University of
Southern California , CA, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA.
[7] Gaffney, J. and R. Cruickshank., ―Productivity Consortium, Reston‖, SPC-TR-88-015 Version 1.0, Software, VA, April 1988.
[8] [Gaffney, J. and T. Durek. Software Reuse —Key to Enhanced Productivity: Some Quantitative Models, Information and Software
Technology, June 1989, 31(5):258-267.
[9] Senta Fowler Chmiel , An Integrated Cost Model for Software Reuse, for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Computer
Science, Dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements to the College of Engineering and Mineral Resources at
West Virginia University, Morgantown, West Virginia,2000
[10] Lim, W. Effects of Reuse on Quality, Productivity and Economics. IEEE Software, September 1994, 11(5): 23-30.
[11] J. A. Favaro, Comparison of Approaches to Reuse Investment Analysis. In Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on
Software Reuse, IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos, CA, 1996, pp.136-145.
[12] Jeffrey S. Poulin, Measuring software reuse, principles, practices, and economic models, Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co.,
Inc., Boston, MA,USA, 1996.
[13] Giancarlo Succi and Francesco Baruchelli , The cost of Standardizing Components for Software Reuse, Supporting Article
,University OF Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada, University DI Trento, Trento, Italy.
[14] By T. Ravichandran and Marcus A. Rothenberge ,Software Reuse Strategies and Component Markets‖, Communications of the
ACM August 2003/Vol.46 No. 8 Pp. 109-114
[15] O. K. Harsh and A. S. M. Sajeev, Component-Based Explicit Software Reuse, Engineering Letters, 13:1, EL_13_1_4 (Advance
online publication: 4 May 2006).
[16] Randall W. Jensen ,Estimating the Cost of Software Reuse, Software Engineering, Inc.
[17] Basili , In the context of the Goal Question Metric , Lin98.
[18] Barry Boehm, Software Reuse Economics, DARPA Workshop, C S E Center for Software Engineering University of Southern
California 1/6/97.
[19] Raymond, G. and D. Hollis, Software Reuse Economics Model ,In Proceedings of Eighth Annual Washington Ada Symposium
Summer SIG Ada Meeting, McLean, VA, June 1991:141-155
[20] J. Poulin, Measuring Software Reusability: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Software Reuse, Advances in
Software Reusability, IEEE, 1994.
[21] D.M. Balda and D.A Gustafson, Cost-estimation models for the reuse and prototype software development, ACM SIGSOFT, pp.
42.
[22] Marcus A. Rothenberger; Derek Nazareth, A COST-BENEFIT-MODEL FOR SYSTEMATIC SOFTWARE REUSE, School of
Business Administration University of Wisconsin – MilwaukeePO Box 742,Milwaukee, WI 53211, USA,E-mail: {rothenb;
derek}@uwm.edu
[23] Dr. Jeffrey S. Poulin, An Agenda for Software Reuse Economics, International Conference on Software Reuse 15 April 2002,
Lockheed Martin Systems Integration,MD 0220 Owego, NY 13827,Tel: (607) 751-6899,Jeffrey.Poulin@lmco.com
[24] Malan R. and Wentzel K. ―Economics of software reuse revisited, Proc. 3rd Irvine Software Symposium, University of California,
Irvine, 30 April,1993 pp.109-21.
[25] Roger S. Pressman, Software Engineering-A practitioner‘s Approach, Fifth edition, McGraw-Hill, 2001.
[26] Nasib S. Gill, Reusability, Issues in Component-Based Development, nsgill2000@yahoo.com, nsgill_2k4@yahoo.com
[27] Robert G. Fichman and Chris F. Kemerer , Incentive Compatibility and Systematic Software Reuse, Appeared in: Journal of
Systems and Software, New York; Apr 27, 2001; Vol. 57, Iss. 1; pg. 45

More Related Content

What's hot

Optimization 1
Optimization 1Optimization 1
Optimization 1
Amit Sharma
 
Lecture # 5 cost estimation i
Lecture # 5 cost estimation iLecture # 5 cost estimation i
Lecture # 5 cost estimation iBich Lien Pham
 
B0342014027
B0342014027B0342014027
B0342014027
inventionjournals
 
Ranking The Refactoring Techniques Based on The External Quality Attributes
Ranking The Refactoring Techniques Based on The External Quality AttributesRanking The Refactoring Techniques Based on The External Quality Attributes
Ranking The Refactoring Techniques Based on The External Quality Attributes
IJRES Journal
 
Life cycle costing
Life cycle costingLife cycle costing
Life cycle costing
Harsh Vardhan
 
Optimal Expenditure and Benefit Cost Based Location, Size and Type of DGs in ...
Optimal Expenditure and Benefit Cost Based Location, Size and Type of DGs in ...Optimal Expenditure and Benefit Cost Based Location, Size and Type of DGs in ...
Optimal Expenditure and Benefit Cost Based Location, Size and Type of DGs in ...
TELKOMNIKA JOURNAL
 
Conference_Paper
Conference_PaperConference_Paper
Conference_PaperPinak Dutta
 
02 software component selection
02 software component selection02 software component selection
02 software component selection
prj_publication
 
IRJET- Application of ABC Analysis for Material Management and Planning a...
IRJET-  	  Application of ABC Analysis for Material Management and Planning a...IRJET-  	  Application of ABC Analysis for Material Management and Planning a...
IRJET- Application of ABC Analysis for Material Management and Planning a...
IRJET Journal
 

What's hot (9)

Optimization 1
Optimization 1Optimization 1
Optimization 1
 
Lecture # 5 cost estimation i
Lecture # 5 cost estimation iLecture # 5 cost estimation i
Lecture # 5 cost estimation i
 
B0342014027
B0342014027B0342014027
B0342014027
 
Ranking The Refactoring Techniques Based on The External Quality Attributes
Ranking The Refactoring Techniques Based on The External Quality AttributesRanking The Refactoring Techniques Based on The External Quality Attributes
Ranking The Refactoring Techniques Based on The External Quality Attributes
 
Life cycle costing
Life cycle costingLife cycle costing
Life cycle costing
 
Optimal Expenditure and Benefit Cost Based Location, Size and Type of DGs in ...
Optimal Expenditure and Benefit Cost Based Location, Size and Type of DGs in ...Optimal Expenditure and Benefit Cost Based Location, Size and Type of DGs in ...
Optimal Expenditure and Benefit Cost Based Location, Size and Type of DGs in ...
 
Conference_Paper
Conference_PaperConference_Paper
Conference_Paper
 
02 software component selection
02 software component selection02 software component selection
02 software component selection
 
IRJET- Application of ABC Analysis for Material Management and Planning a...
IRJET-  	  Application of ABC Analysis for Material Management and Planning a...IRJET-  	  Application of ABC Analysis for Material Management and Planning a...
IRJET- Application of ABC Analysis for Material Management and Planning a...
 

Viewers also liked

O0106395100
O0106395100O0106395100
O0106395100
IOSR Journals
 
E010623639
E010623639E010623639
E010623639
IOSR Journals
 
Spectral Studies of Some Transition Metal Ion complexes with 4-[(E)-(Ferrocen...
Spectral Studies of Some Transition Metal Ion complexes with 4-[(E)-(Ferrocen...Spectral Studies of Some Transition Metal Ion complexes with 4-[(E)-(Ferrocen...
Spectral Studies of Some Transition Metal Ion complexes with 4-[(E)-(Ferrocen...
IOSR Journals
 
O0126291100
O0126291100O0126291100
O0126291100
IOSR Journals
 
Modling of Fault Directivity of 2012 Ahar-Varzaghan Earthquake with Aftershoc...
Modling of Fault Directivity of 2012 Ahar-Varzaghan Earthquake with Aftershoc...Modling of Fault Directivity of 2012 Ahar-Varzaghan Earthquake with Aftershoc...
Modling of Fault Directivity of 2012 Ahar-Varzaghan Earthquake with Aftershoc...
IOSR Journals
 
Literature on safety module for vehicular driver assistance
Literature on safety module for vehicular driver assistance Literature on safety module for vehicular driver assistance
Literature on safety module for vehicular driver assistance
IOSR Journals
 
Analysis of Organophosphate Pesticides Residue on Crops in Abakaliki, Ebonyi ...
Analysis of Organophosphate Pesticides Residue on Crops in Abakaliki, Ebonyi ...Analysis of Organophosphate Pesticides Residue on Crops in Abakaliki, Ebonyi ...
Analysis of Organophosphate Pesticides Residue on Crops in Abakaliki, Ebonyi ...
IOSR Journals
 
M010339598
M010339598M010339598
M010339598
IOSR Journals
 
C0610718
C0610718C0610718
C0610718
IOSR Journals
 
Causes of Delay in Construction of Bridge Girders
Causes of Delay in Construction of Bridge GirdersCauses of Delay in Construction of Bridge Girders
Causes of Delay in Construction of Bridge Girders
IOSR Journals
 
B012630608
B012630608B012630608
B012630608
IOSR Journals
 
M13030598104
M13030598104M13030598104
M13030598104
IOSR Journals
 
A012510113
A012510113A012510113
A012510113
IOSR Journals
 
E1303033137
E1303033137E1303033137
E1303033137
IOSR Journals
 
M012628386
M012628386M012628386
M012628386
IOSR Journals
 
H0955158
H0955158H0955158
H0955158
IOSR Journals
 
A017160104
A017160104A017160104
A017160104
IOSR Journals
 
J010136172
J010136172J010136172
J010136172
IOSR Journals
 
G011114246
G011114246G011114246
G011114246
IOSR Journals
 
C012652430
C012652430C012652430
C012652430
IOSR Journals
 

Viewers also liked (20)

O0106395100
O0106395100O0106395100
O0106395100
 
E010623639
E010623639E010623639
E010623639
 
Spectral Studies of Some Transition Metal Ion complexes with 4-[(E)-(Ferrocen...
Spectral Studies of Some Transition Metal Ion complexes with 4-[(E)-(Ferrocen...Spectral Studies of Some Transition Metal Ion complexes with 4-[(E)-(Ferrocen...
Spectral Studies of Some Transition Metal Ion complexes with 4-[(E)-(Ferrocen...
 
O0126291100
O0126291100O0126291100
O0126291100
 
Modling of Fault Directivity of 2012 Ahar-Varzaghan Earthquake with Aftershoc...
Modling of Fault Directivity of 2012 Ahar-Varzaghan Earthquake with Aftershoc...Modling of Fault Directivity of 2012 Ahar-Varzaghan Earthquake with Aftershoc...
Modling of Fault Directivity of 2012 Ahar-Varzaghan Earthquake with Aftershoc...
 
Literature on safety module for vehicular driver assistance
Literature on safety module for vehicular driver assistance Literature on safety module for vehicular driver assistance
Literature on safety module for vehicular driver assistance
 
Analysis of Organophosphate Pesticides Residue on Crops in Abakaliki, Ebonyi ...
Analysis of Organophosphate Pesticides Residue on Crops in Abakaliki, Ebonyi ...Analysis of Organophosphate Pesticides Residue on Crops in Abakaliki, Ebonyi ...
Analysis of Organophosphate Pesticides Residue on Crops in Abakaliki, Ebonyi ...
 
M010339598
M010339598M010339598
M010339598
 
C0610718
C0610718C0610718
C0610718
 
Causes of Delay in Construction of Bridge Girders
Causes of Delay in Construction of Bridge GirdersCauses of Delay in Construction of Bridge Girders
Causes of Delay in Construction of Bridge Girders
 
B012630608
B012630608B012630608
B012630608
 
M13030598104
M13030598104M13030598104
M13030598104
 
A012510113
A012510113A012510113
A012510113
 
E1303033137
E1303033137E1303033137
E1303033137
 
M012628386
M012628386M012628386
M012628386
 
H0955158
H0955158H0955158
H0955158
 
A017160104
A017160104A017160104
A017160104
 
J010136172
J010136172J010136172
J010136172
 
G011114246
G011114246G011114246
G011114246
 
C012652430
C012652430C012652430
C012652430
 

Similar to A Cost Estimation Model For Reuse Based Software Program

IRJET- Code Reuse & Reusability of the Software
IRJET- Code Reuse & Reusability of the SoftwareIRJET- Code Reuse & Reusability of the Software
IRJET- Code Reuse & Reusability of the Software
IRJET Journal
 
A Survey of Software Reusability
A Survey of Software ReusabilityA Survey of Software Reusability
A Survey of Software Reusability
IJERA Editor
 
Software Reuse: Challenges and Business Success
Software Reuse: Challenges and Business SuccessSoftware Reuse: Challenges and Business Success
Software Reuse: Challenges and Business Success
University of Zurich
 
Enhancing the Software Effort Prediction Accuracy using Reduced Number of Cos...
Enhancing the Software Effort Prediction Accuracy using Reduced Number of Cos...Enhancing the Software Effort Prediction Accuracy using Reduced Number of Cos...
Enhancing the Software Effort Prediction Accuracy using Reduced Number of Cos...
IRJET Journal
 
A Methodology To Manage Victim Components Using Cbo Measure
A Methodology To Manage Victim Components Using Cbo MeasureA Methodology To Manage Victim Components Using Cbo Measure
A Methodology To Manage Victim Components Using Cbo Measure
ijseajournal
 
A METRICS -BASED MODEL FOR ESTIMATING THE MAINTENANCE EFFORT OF PYTHON SOFTWARE
A METRICS -BASED MODEL FOR ESTIMATING THE MAINTENANCE EFFORT OF PYTHON SOFTWAREA METRICS -BASED MODEL FOR ESTIMATING THE MAINTENANCE EFFORT OF PYTHON SOFTWARE
A METRICS -BASED MODEL FOR ESTIMATING THE MAINTENANCE EFFORT OF PYTHON SOFTWARE
ijseajournal
 
IRJET- Life Cycle Cost Analysis of a Residential Building
IRJET-  	  Life Cycle Cost Analysis of a Residential BuildingIRJET-  	  Life Cycle Cost Analysis of a Residential Building
IRJET- Life Cycle Cost Analysis of a Residential Building
IRJET Journal
 
An Approach to Calculate Reusability in Source Code Using Metrics
An Approach to Calculate Reusability in Source Code Using MetricsAn Approach to Calculate Reusability in Source Code Using Metrics
An Approach to Calculate Reusability in Source Code Using Metrics
IJERA Editor
 
A Novel Optimization towards Higher Reliability in Predictive Modelling towar...
A Novel Optimization towards Higher Reliability in Predictive Modelling towar...A Novel Optimization towards Higher Reliability in Predictive Modelling towar...
A Novel Optimization towards Higher Reliability in Predictive Modelling towar...
IJECEIAES
 
Comparison of available Methods to Estimate Effort, Performance and Cost with...
Comparison of available Methods to Estimate Effort, Performance and Cost with...Comparison of available Methods to Estimate Effort, Performance and Cost with...
Comparison of available Methods to Estimate Effort, Performance and Cost with...
International Journal of Engineering Inventions www.ijeijournal.com
 
A Model To Compare The Degree Of Refactoring Opportunities Of Three Projects ...
A Model To Compare The Degree Of Refactoring Opportunities Of Three Projects ...A Model To Compare The Degree Of Refactoring Opportunities Of Three Projects ...
A Model To Compare The Degree Of Refactoring Opportunities Of Three Projects ...
acijjournal
 
A MODEL TO COMPARE THE DEGREE OF REFACTORING OPPORTUNITIES OF THREE PROJECTS ...
A MODEL TO COMPARE THE DEGREE OF REFACTORING OPPORTUNITIES OF THREE PROJECTS ...A MODEL TO COMPARE THE DEGREE OF REFACTORING OPPORTUNITIES OF THREE PROJECTS ...
A MODEL TO COMPARE THE DEGREE OF REFACTORING OPPORTUNITIES OF THREE PROJECTS ...
acijjournal
 
International Journal of Computational Engineering Research(IJCER)
 International Journal of Computational Engineering Research(IJCER)  International Journal of Computational Engineering Research(IJCER)
International Journal of Computational Engineering Research(IJCER)
ijceronline
 
Reusability Framework for Cloud Computing
Reusability Framework for Cloud ComputingReusability Framework for Cloud Computing
Reusability Framework for Cloud Computing
Dr Sukhpal Singh Gill
 
Repair and Replacement Strategy for Optimizing Cost and Time of Warranty Proc...
Repair and Replacement Strategy for Optimizing Cost and Time of Warranty Proc...Repair and Replacement Strategy for Optimizing Cost and Time of Warranty Proc...
Repair and Replacement Strategy for Optimizing Cost and Time of Warranty Proc...
TELKOMNIKA JOURNAL
 
Maintenance
MaintenanceMaintenance
Maintenance
gourav kottawar
 

Similar to A Cost Estimation Model For Reuse Based Software Program (20)

IRJET- Code Reuse & Reusability of the Software
IRJET- Code Reuse & Reusability of the SoftwareIRJET- Code Reuse & Reusability of the Software
IRJET- Code Reuse & Reusability of the Software
 
A Survey of Software Reusability
A Survey of Software ReusabilityA Survey of Software Reusability
A Survey of Software Reusability
 
Software Reuse: Challenges and Business Success
Software Reuse: Challenges and Business SuccessSoftware Reuse: Challenges and Business Success
Software Reuse: Challenges and Business Success
 
50120130405029
5012013040502950120130405029
50120130405029
 
Enhancing the Software Effort Prediction Accuracy using Reduced Number of Cos...
Enhancing the Software Effort Prediction Accuracy using Reduced Number of Cos...Enhancing the Software Effort Prediction Accuracy using Reduced Number of Cos...
Enhancing the Software Effort Prediction Accuracy using Reduced Number of Cos...
 
A Methodology To Manage Victim Components Using Cbo Measure
A Methodology To Manage Victim Components Using Cbo MeasureA Methodology To Manage Victim Components Using Cbo Measure
A Methodology To Manage Victim Components Using Cbo Measure
 
A METRICS -BASED MODEL FOR ESTIMATING THE MAINTENANCE EFFORT OF PYTHON SOFTWARE
A METRICS -BASED MODEL FOR ESTIMATING THE MAINTENANCE EFFORT OF PYTHON SOFTWAREA METRICS -BASED MODEL FOR ESTIMATING THE MAINTENANCE EFFORT OF PYTHON SOFTWARE
A METRICS -BASED MODEL FOR ESTIMATING THE MAINTENANCE EFFORT OF PYTHON SOFTWARE
 
IRJET- Life Cycle Cost Analysis of a Residential Building
IRJET-  	  Life Cycle Cost Analysis of a Residential BuildingIRJET-  	  Life Cycle Cost Analysis of a Residential Building
IRJET- Life Cycle Cost Analysis of a Residential Building
 
An Approach to Calculate Reusability in Source Code Using Metrics
An Approach to Calculate Reusability in Source Code Using MetricsAn Approach to Calculate Reusability in Source Code Using Metrics
An Approach to Calculate Reusability in Source Code Using Metrics
 
D502023439
D502023439D502023439
D502023439
 
D502023439
D502023439D502023439
D502023439
 
A Novel Optimization towards Higher Reliability in Predictive Modelling towar...
A Novel Optimization towards Higher Reliability in Predictive Modelling towar...A Novel Optimization towards Higher Reliability in Predictive Modelling towar...
A Novel Optimization towards Higher Reliability in Predictive Modelling towar...
 
Comparison of available Methods to Estimate Effort, Performance and Cost with...
Comparison of available Methods to Estimate Effort, Performance and Cost with...Comparison of available Methods to Estimate Effort, Performance and Cost with...
Comparison of available Methods to Estimate Effort, Performance and Cost with...
 
A Model To Compare The Degree Of Refactoring Opportunities Of Three Projects ...
A Model To Compare The Degree Of Refactoring Opportunities Of Three Projects ...A Model To Compare The Degree Of Refactoring Opportunities Of Three Projects ...
A Model To Compare The Degree Of Refactoring Opportunities Of Three Projects ...
 
A MODEL TO COMPARE THE DEGREE OF REFACTORING OPPORTUNITIES OF THREE PROJECTS ...
A MODEL TO COMPARE THE DEGREE OF REFACTORING OPPORTUNITIES OF THREE PROJECTS ...A MODEL TO COMPARE THE DEGREE OF REFACTORING OPPORTUNITIES OF THREE PROJECTS ...
A MODEL TO COMPARE THE DEGREE OF REFACTORING OPPORTUNITIES OF THREE PROJECTS ...
 
International Journal of Computational Engineering Research(IJCER)
 International Journal of Computational Engineering Research(IJCER)  International Journal of Computational Engineering Research(IJCER)
International Journal of Computational Engineering Research(IJCER)
 
Reusability Framework for Cloud Computing
Reusability Framework for Cloud ComputingReusability Framework for Cloud Computing
Reusability Framework for Cloud Computing
 
Repair and Replacement Strategy for Optimizing Cost and Time of Warranty Proc...
Repair and Replacement Strategy for Optimizing Cost and Time of Warranty Proc...Repair and Replacement Strategy for Optimizing Cost and Time of Warranty Proc...
Repair and Replacement Strategy for Optimizing Cost and Time of Warranty Proc...
 
ncaca2016
ncaca2016ncaca2016
ncaca2016
 
Maintenance
MaintenanceMaintenance
Maintenance
 

More from IOSR Journals

A011140104
A011140104A011140104
A011140104
IOSR Journals
 
M0111397100
M0111397100M0111397100
M0111397100
IOSR Journals
 
L011138596
L011138596L011138596
L011138596
IOSR Journals
 
K011138084
K011138084K011138084
K011138084
IOSR Journals
 
J011137479
J011137479J011137479
J011137479
IOSR Journals
 
I011136673
I011136673I011136673
I011136673
IOSR Journals
 
G011134454
G011134454G011134454
G011134454
IOSR Journals
 
H011135565
H011135565H011135565
H011135565
IOSR Journals
 
F011134043
F011134043F011134043
F011134043
IOSR Journals
 
E011133639
E011133639E011133639
E011133639
IOSR Journals
 
D011132635
D011132635D011132635
D011132635
IOSR Journals
 
C011131925
C011131925C011131925
C011131925
IOSR Journals
 
B011130918
B011130918B011130918
B011130918
IOSR Journals
 
A011130108
A011130108A011130108
A011130108
IOSR Journals
 
I011125160
I011125160I011125160
I011125160
IOSR Journals
 
H011124050
H011124050H011124050
H011124050
IOSR Journals
 
G011123539
G011123539G011123539
G011123539
IOSR Journals
 
F011123134
F011123134F011123134
F011123134
IOSR Journals
 
E011122530
E011122530E011122530
E011122530
IOSR Journals
 
D011121524
D011121524D011121524
D011121524
IOSR Journals
 

More from IOSR Journals (20)

A011140104
A011140104A011140104
A011140104
 
M0111397100
M0111397100M0111397100
M0111397100
 
L011138596
L011138596L011138596
L011138596
 
K011138084
K011138084K011138084
K011138084
 
J011137479
J011137479J011137479
J011137479
 
I011136673
I011136673I011136673
I011136673
 
G011134454
G011134454G011134454
G011134454
 
H011135565
H011135565H011135565
H011135565
 
F011134043
F011134043F011134043
F011134043
 
E011133639
E011133639E011133639
E011133639
 
D011132635
D011132635D011132635
D011132635
 
C011131925
C011131925C011131925
C011131925
 
B011130918
B011130918B011130918
B011130918
 
A011130108
A011130108A011130108
A011130108
 
I011125160
I011125160I011125160
I011125160
 
H011124050
H011124050H011124050
H011124050
 
G011123539
G011123539G011123539
G011123539
 
F011123134
F011123134F011123134
F011123134
 
E011122530
E011122530E011122530
E011122530
 
D011121524
D011121524D011121524
D011121524
 

Recently uploaded

FIDO Alliance Osaka Seminar: Passkeys at Amazon.pdf
FIDO Alliance Osaka Seminar: Passkeys at Amazon.pdfFIDO Alliance Osaka Seminar: Passkeys at Amazon.pdf
FIDO Alliance Osaka Seminar: Passkeys at Amazon.pdf
FIDO Alliance
 
Microsoft - Power Platform_G.Aspiotis.pdf
Microsoft - Power Platform_G.Aspiotis.pdfMicrosoft - Power Platform_G.Aspiotis.pdf
Microsoft - Power Platform_G.Aspiotis.pdf
Uni Systems S.M.S.A.
 
GraphSummit Singapore | Enhancing Changi Airport Group's Passenger Experience...
GraphSummit Singapore | Enhancing Changi Airport Group's Passenger Experience...GraphSummit Singapore | Enhancing Changi Airport Group's Passenger Experience...
GraphSummit Singapore | Enhancing Changi Airport Group's Passenger Experience...
Neo4j
 
Elevating Tactical DDD Patterns Through Object Calisthenics
Elevating Tactical DDD Patterns Through Object CalisthenicsElevating Tactical DDD Patterns Through Object Calisthenics
Elevating Tactical DDD Patterns Through Object Calisthenics
Dorra BARTAGUIZ
 
20240607 QFM018 Elixir Reading List May 2024
20240607 QFM018 Elixir Reading List May 202420240607 QFM018 Elixir Reading List May 2024
20240607 QFM018 Elixir Reading List May 2024
Matthew Sinclair
 
FIDO Alliance Osaka Seminar: FIDO Security Aspects.pdf
FIDO Alliance Osaka Seminar: FIDO Security Aspects.pdfFIDO Alliance Osaka Seminar: FIDO Security Aspects.pdf
FIDO Alliance Osaka Seminar: FIDO Security Aspects.pdf
FIDO Alliance
 
UiPath Test Automation using UiPath Test Suite series, part 5
UiPath Test Automation using UiPath Test Suite series, part 5UiPath Test Automation using UiPath Test Suite series, part 5
UiPath Test Automation using UiPath Test Suite series, part 5
DianaGray10
 
Monitoring Java Application Security with JDK Tools and JFR Events
Monitoring Java Application Security with JDK Tools and JFR EventsMonitoring Java Application Security with JDK Tools and JFR Events
Monitoring Java Application Security with JDK Tools and JFR Events
Ana-Maria Mihalceanu
 
PHP Frameworks: I want to break free (IPC Berlin 2024)
PHP Frameworks: I want to break free (IPC Berlin 2024)PHP Frameworks: I want to break free (IPC Berlin 2024)
PHP Frameworks: I want to break free (IPC Berlin 2024)
Ralf Eggert
 
Why You Should Replace Windows 11 with Nitrux Linux 3.5.0 for enhanced perfor...
Why You Should Replace Windows 11 with Nitrux Linux 3.5.0 for enhanced perfor...Why You Should Replace Windows 11 with Nitrux Linux 3.5.0 for enhanced perfor...
Why You Should Replace Windows 11 with Nitrux Linux 3.5.0 for enhanced perfor...
SOFTTECHHUB
 
By Design, not by Accident - Agile Venture Bolzano 2024
By Design, not by Accident - Agile Venture Bolzano 2024By Design, not by Accident - Agile Venture Bolzano 2024
By Design, not by Accident - Agile Venture Bolzano 2024
Pierluigi Pugliese
 
Uni Systems Copilot event_05062024_C.Vlachos.pdf
Uni Systems Copilot event_05062024_C.Vlachos.pdfUni Systems Copilot event_05062024_C.Vlachos.pdf
Uni Systems Copilot event_05062024_C.Vlachos.pdf
Uni Systems S.M.S.A.
 
Securing your Kubernetes cluster_ a step-by-step guide to success !
Securing your Kubernetes cluster_ a step-by-step guide to success !Securing your Kubernetes cluster_ a step-by-step guide to success !
Securing your Kubernetes cluster_ a step-by-step guide to success !
KatiaHIMEUR1
 
DevOps and Testing slides at DASA Connect
DevOps and Testing slides at DASA ConnectDevOps and Testing slides at DASA Connect
DevOps and Testing slides at DASA Connect
Kari Kakkonen
 
GraphSummit Singapore | Graphing Success: Revolutionising Organisational Stru...
GraphSummit Singapore | Graphing Success: Revolutionising Organisational Stru...GraphSummit Singapore | Graphing Success: Revolutionising Organisational Stru...
GraphSummit Singapore | Graphing Success: Revolutionising Organisational Stru...
Neo4j
 
The Future of Platform Engineering
The Future of Platform EngineeringThe Future of Platform Engineering
The Future of Platform Engineering
Jemma Hussein Allen
 
Removing Uninteresting Bytes in Software Fuzzing
Removing Uninteresting Bytes in Software FuzzingRemoving Uninteresting Bytes in Software Fuzzing
Removing Uninteresting Bytes in Software Fuzzing
Aftab Hussain
 
The Art of the Pitch: WordPress Relationships and Sales
The Art of the Pitch: WordPress Relationships and SalesThe Art of the Pitch: WordPress Relationships and Sales
The Art of the Pitch: WordPress Relationships and Sales
Laura Byrne
 
Pushing the limits of ePRTC: 100ns holdover for 100 days
Pushing the limits of ePRTC: 100ns holdover for 100 daysPushing the limits of ePRTC: 100ns holdover for 100 days
Pushing the limits of ePRTC: 100ns holdover for 100 days
Adtran
 
FIDO Alliance Osaka Seminar: Overview.pdf
FIDO Alliance Osaka Seminar: Overview.pdfFIDO Alliance Osaka Seminar: Overview.pdf
FIDO Alliance Osaka Seminar: Overview.pdf
FIDO Alliance
 

Recently uploaded (20)

FIDO Alliance Osaka Seminar: Passkeys at Amazon.pdf
FIDO Alliance Osaka Seminar: Passkeys at Amazon.pdfFIDO Alliance Osaka Seminar: Passkeys at Amazon.pdf
FIDO Alliance Osaka Seminar: Passkeys at Amazon.pdf
 
Microsoft - Power Platform_G.Aspiotis.pdf
Microsoft - Power Platform_G.Aspiotis.pdfMicrosoft - Power Platform_G.Aspiotis.pdf
Microsoft - Power Platform_G.Aspiotis.pdf
 
GraphSummit Singapore | Enhancing Changi Airport Group's Passenger Experience...
GraphSummit Singapore | Enhancing Changi Airport Group's Passenger Experience...GraphSummit Singapore | Enhancing Changi Airport Group's Passenger Experience...
GraphSummit Singapore | Enhancing Changi Airport Group's Passenger Experience...
 
Elevating Tactical DDD Patterns Through Object Calisthenics
Elevating Tactical DDD Patterns Through Object CalisthenicsElevating Tactical DDD Patterns Through Object Calisthenics
Elevating Tactical DDD Patterns Through Object Calisthenics
 
20240607 QFM018 Elixir Reading List May 2024
20240607 QFM018 Elixir Reading List May 202420240607 QFM018 Elixir Reading List May 2024
20240607 QFM018 Elixir Reading List May 2024
 
FIDO Alliance Osaka Seminar: FIDO Security Aspects.pdf
FIDO Alliance Osaka Seminar: FIDO Security Aspects.pdfFIDO Alliance Osaka Seminar: FIDO Security Aspects.pdf
FIDO Alliance Osaka Seminar: FIDO Security Aspects.pdf
 
UiPath Test Automation using UiPath Test Suite series, part 5
UiPath Test Automation using UiPath Test Suite series, part 5UiPath Test Automation using UiPath Test Suite series, part 5
UiPath Test Automation using UiPath Test Suite series, part 5
 
Monitoring Java Application Security with JDK Tools and JFR Events
Monitoring Java Application Security with JDK Tools and JFR EventsMonitoring Java Application Security with JDK Tools and JFR Events
Monitoring Java Application Security with JDK Tools and JFR Events
 
PHP Frameworks: I want to break free (IPC Berlin 2024)
PHP Frameworks: I want to break free (IPC Berlin 2024)PHP Frameworks: I want to break free (IPC Berlin 2024)
PHP Frameworks: I want to break free (IPC Berlin 2024)
 
Why You Should Replace Windows 11 with Nitrux Linux 3.5.0 for enhanced perfor...
Why You Should Replace Windows 11 with Nitrux Linux 3.5.0 for enhanced perfor...Why You Should Replace Windows 11 with Nitrux Linux 3.5.0 for enhanced perfor...
Why You Should Replace Windows 11 with Nitrux Linux 3.5.0 for enhanced perfor...
 
By Design, not by Accident - Agile Venture Bolzano 2024
By Design, not by Accident - Agile Venture Bolzano 2024By Design, not by Accident - Agile Venture Bolzano 2024
By Design, not by Accident - Agile Venture Bolzano 2024
 
Uni Systems Copilot event_05062024_C.Vlachos.pdf
Uni Systems Copilot event_05062024_C.Vlachos.pdfUni Systems Copilot event_05062024_C.Vlachos.pdf
Uni Systems Copilot event_05062024_C.Vlachos.pdf
 
Securing your Kubernetes cluster_ a step-by-step guide to success !
Securing your Kubernetes cluster_ a step-by-step guide to success !Securing your Kubernetes cluster_ a step-by-step guide to success !
Securing your Kubernetes cluster_ a step-by-step guide to success !
 
DevOps and Testing slides at DASA Connect
DevOps and Testing slides at DASA ConnectDevOps and Testing slides at DASA Connect
DevOps and Testing slides at DASA Connect
 
GraphSummit Singapore | Graphing Success: Revolutionising Organisational Stru...
GraphSummit Singapore | Graphing Success: Revolutionising Organisational Stru...GraphSummit Singapore | Graphing Success: Revolutionising Organisational Stru...
GraphSummit Singapore | Graphing Success: Revolutionising Organisational Stru...
 
The Future of Platform Engineering
The Future of Platform EngineeringThe Future of Platform Engineering
The Future of Platform Engineering
 
Removing Uninteresting Bytes in Software Fuzzing
Removing Uninteresting Bytes in Software FuzzingRemoving Uninteresting Bytes in Software Fuzzing
Removing Uninteresting Bytes in Software Fuzzing
 
The Art of the Pitch: WordPress Relationships and Sales
The Art of the Pitch: WordPress Relationships and SalesThe Art of the Pitch: WordPress Relationships and Sales
The Art of the Pitch: WordPress Relationships and Sales
 
Pushing the limits of ePRTC: 100ns holdover for 100 days
Pushing the limits of ePRTC: 100ns holdover for 100 daysPushing the limits of ePRTC: 100ns holdover for 100 days
Pushing the limits of ePRTC: 100ns holdover for 100 days
 
FIDO Alliance Osaka Seminar: Overview.pdf
FIDO Alliance Osaka Seminar: Overview.pdfFIDO Alliance Osaka Seminar: Overview.pdf
FIDO Alliance Osaka Seminar: Overview.pdf
 

A Cost Estimation Model For Reuse Based Software Program

  • 1. IOSR Journal of Computer Engineering (IOSRJCE) ISSN: 2278-0661 Volume 4, Issue 6 (Sep.-Oct. 2012), PP 06-12 www.iosrjournals.org www.iosrjournals.org 6 | P a g e A Cost Estimation Model For Reuse Based Software Program Shobha Rani Malik1 , Dr. Saba Hilal2 1 (Lecturer, Technical Edu. Deptt. Haryana and Research Scholar at Lingayas’ University Faridabad, India) 2 (Research Guide, Lingayas’ University Faridabad, India ) Abstract: Reuse reduces total cost of product but it has its value. As per reuse principle, it is not for free, a reuse program requires a lot of set-up investment as well as additional costs for development and operational activities but benefits are neither linear nor immediate. The aim of this paper is to evaluate the current state of art and practice on cost estimation for a software reuse oriented program by extending the pioneering contribution of other researchers in this direction. A simplified software reuse cost estimation model which presents where, who, how capital investment is done for a reuse program is suggested with various cost effecting factors. Keywords - Cost effecting Factors, Cost Metrics, Software Reuse, Reuse Cost I. Introduction It is accepted that to develop a reusable asset is more costly than equivalent custom tailored [1]. Reuse requires extra cost due to generalization, documentation, additional testing, library support , maintenance , architecture, design and implementation [2][3]. Software reuse have the same cost and risk features as any financial investment [4]. 1.1 Prerequisites for cost An organization have to analyze following factors related to cost before implementing a reuse program.  Cost to implement a reuse program.  Investment approach  Cost to sustain the reuse program.  Time to take to break even reuse investment.  Expected benefits 1.2 Investment approaches There are three investment approaches for software reuse process:  Proactive Investment This approach tends to require a large initial investment and is preferred in stable domain [5]. Returns on investment can only be seen when products are developed and maintained .  Reactive Investment This is an incremental approach to build reusable components generally used in reengineering and is preferred in unstable domain [5] .  Extractive Investment Combination of Proactive and Reactive approach . 1.3 Cost Factors for Reuse  Management This cost is spent to manage a reuse program. Reuse is as much of a technical issue as it is an organizational one [6].  Development and implementation This cost is spent to develop and implement a reusable program.  Operation This cost is spent to reuse a component.  Investment for Support This cost is spent to support a reuse program such as training and tool acquisition.
  • 2. A Cost Estimation Model For Reuse Based Software Program www.iosrjournals.org 7 | P a g e II. Related Work Various authors have estimated cost of a reusable component by using cost of component without reuse, calculated with the help of any approach to estimate cost of software such as algorithmic or function point analysis[7][8][9][4]. Mostly researcher [9][3][8] have estimated cost of a reusable component on the basis of size of component (salaries(costs) are according size). In the proposed scheme, a cost estimation model is suggested for a reuse oriented organization that develops reusable components where costs of reusable components are double in comparison of costs of similar components for single use and salaries(costs) depend on time(year) not on size of component. Studies[10][11][7][2][3][12] calculated relative cost writing for reuse and[2][8][10][11][12] calculated relative cost for reuse, but not estimated the effect of size, strategy, complexity, standardization, integration, modification, scale and availability on cost, [12] only shows effect of complexity and modification. Study [1] have mentioned the effect of complexity, modification, scale on cost. [13] estimated the effect of standardization and [14] estimated the effect of strategy. [15] estimated the effect of size and [16] also estimated the effect of size including integration, on cost. But none of above estimated the effect of availability and integration of components on cost. In this research, the effect of availability and integration of components on cost is estimated as well as almost all above mentioned cost effecting factors are reviewed by extending and filling the gap left by other studies. We have also reviewed some measurement tools- metrics and models to estimate costs of a software reuse program. III. Proposed Work 3.1 Measures for cost estimate of a reuse program. Generally following metrics and models are used to estimate cost of a reuse program.  Reusable assets cost=∑ cost of submitted assets [17]  Cost of development for reuse= The Relative Cost of Writing Reusable Software(RCWR) * (Cost of development for one-time use) [18 ] [12] RCWR depends upon - size, strategy, complexity etc. After various studies[10][11][12][2][3][12] we found that Favro[14 ] suggests maximum range of RCWR=1.0 - 2.2 Poulin[ 2] recommended RCWR==1.5  Operational cost of a reuse component = Relative Cost of Reuse(RCR) *(Cost of component developed from scratch) [18 ][12]. RCR depends upon many factors and is proportional to complexity and modification of the reused component[1 ]. After various studies[2][8][10][11][12] we found that Gaffney and Durek [8 ] suggests minimum value of RCR=.03 and maximum value of RCR=.4 is suggested by Favaro[ 11] .Poulin[12] recommended RCR =.2  Cost application –system = (cost new- code* size new- code) + (cost modify- reused* size modified- code) + costs reuse –library [19] In the SPC model [3],  Cost software -product = cost to develop new + cost of reusing existing software. 3.2 Costs for software reuse. Both Producer and Consumer have to pay for reuse [1][12][20][13][2][21][22][23][24] as shown in Table1. Table 1: Producer and Consumer Costs: Cost Producer Cost Consumer Costs Development Cost Domain analysis Modelling /design for reusability Implementation for reusability Domain Analysis Procuring components Assessing components Overhead Costs Testing of parts Creation of repository ( library) Maintenance of parts Management of parts Publication(marketing) of parts Training of personnel for reusability Integration Maintenance Adaption Search -Query, Retrieval Testing Modified components Fees and royalties Other Costs Performing cost-benefit analysis Documenting reusable parts Making components generic Cataloguing reusable parts standardize reusable parts[13] Performing cost-benefit analysis
  • 3. A Cost Estimation Model For Reuse Based Software Program www.iosrjournals.org 8 | P a g e 3.3 costs estimation for a reuse program . We are estimating cost of a reuse program in a hypothetical scenario of a corporation that starts its reuse initiative with domain engineering in 2007 developing reusable components as shown in Table2, that are used in applications internally as shown in Table4, and are also sold externally to corporation for a period of 4 years. The following assumptions are made with respect to this program :  Cost of the reused components is double as compared to similar components made for single use.  Salary of employees is fixed, not depending upon size and quantity of components .Overhead cost to make reusable components is 10 % of salary of employees and all other details are as shown in Table3.  Cost of purchased component(yi ) that are used in applications is 25% extra of cost of internally developed component(yi).  Set-up cost of corporation for reuse program is $3,000 and of application- engineering cycle is $1,000 Table2: Components Details Year Component Size 2007 X1 5k 2008 X2 10k 2009 X3 15k 2010 X4 20k Table 3: Salary of Employees Personnel Initial Salary ($) Increment/y (%) component developer for reuse 1000 15 manager for reuse 800 10 librarian for reuse 700 10 Domain Analyst 800 10 Table 4: Applications Details Year Application Component used internally developed Component used externally developed Additional-Code 2008 App(1) X1 O1 2K 2009 App(2) X1,X2 O1,O2 4K 2010 App(3) X1, X2,X3 O1,O2,O3 6K 3.3.1Cost Structure: Software reuse require investment at different levels from top to bottom with a cyclic cost approach[9 ] .We are suggesting a cost structure for above said corporation. Fig 1. Cost Structure CostCor Costcomp CostCor CostDomain Assets external to the corporation
  • 4. A Cost Estimation Model For Reuse Based Software Program www.iosrjournals.org 9 | P a g e 3.3.1.1 Component Engg. Cycle Cost : Costcomp-Engg = ∑ Costcomp , Where Costcomp-Engg = Component Engg. Cycle Cost Costcomp = Cost for a single component Cost for a single component: Costcomp(yi) = Costdev (yi) + Cost Overhead(yi) , Where Cost Overhead = Costmgt + Cost Maintenance + Cost Training + CostLibrary + CostPub + CostStd + Cost others Costcomp = (Costdev + Costmgt + CostLibrary) + (Cost Maintenance + Cost Training + CostPub + CostStd + Cost others ) i,e Component cost(yi)= Personnel Salary(yi) + 10% (Personnel Salary(yi)) Costcomp-Engg = ∑ Costcomp = $ 13150.36 , Where Costdev =Development cost of Component Cost Overhead = Overhead cost of Component CostStd = Costs of standardizing a Component 3.3.1.2 Domain Engg. Cycle cost : CostDomain-Engg = SalaryDom-Analyst + Costcomp-Engg CostDomain-Engg = $ 16863.16 Where CostDomain-Engg = Domain Engg. Cycle cost SalaryDom-Analyst = Salary of domain analyst 3.3.1.3 Application Engg. Cycle cost: CostApp -Engg = CostSet-up + ∑CostApp Where CostApp -Engg = Cost of Application- Engg. Cycle CostApp = cost of a application CostSet-up = costs of training and tool acquisition for reusing components in aplications CostSet-up = (Cost Training + Costtool-acq) Cost Training = cost of training of personnel for reusing components in Applications Costtool-acq = cost of tool acquition for reusing components in Applications CostApp = CostAdd-Code + (∑ Costcomp-int + ∑ Costcomp-ext )+ Cost Overhead All internally developed Components are used as Black- Box reuse and externally developed Components are used as White- Box reuse . Then For Black- Box reuse Cost Overhead = Costintegration + Cost Maintenance + (1-p)*Costsearch + Costacq + Cost others For White- Box reuse Cost Overhead = Costintegration + Cost Maintenance + Cost adap + Costfr +Cost others Take CostOverhead =20% of Cost Scratch for each ( Black- Box and White- Box reuse) i, e RCR = .2, Cost Scratch = .5*1315.036 =6575.18 (since cost of reused component is double) i, e RCWR = 2, Salary of developer for additonal-code = 50% developer for reuse CostApp(i) = [Costcomp-int (I) + Costcomp-int (I-1) + (i-1)*Costcomp-int (i-2) + Costcomp-int (o) + Costcomp-int (o-1) + (o-1)*Costcomp-int (o-2) ] + [ CostAdd-Code + Cost Overhead ] ∑ CostApp = ∑ ( CostAdd-Code + Cost Overhead + ∑ Costcomp-int + ∑ Costcomp-ext ) ∑CostApp = $ 33400.03 CostApp -Engg = 1000+ 33400.03 = $34400.03 Where Cost Overhead = Overhead cost of the application Cost Scratch = cost of components without reuse Cost search = cost of performing a search operation Costintegration = cost of integrating components Cost Maintenance = cost of maintaining components p = probability that the component is found in repository Costfr = cost of fee and roilites of components that are acquired from externally sources Cost adapt = cost of adapting components Cost others = any other cost for reusing components 3.3.1.4 Corporate Engg. Cycle cost : CostCor-Engg = CostSet-up + CostDomain-Engg + CostApp -Engg - ∑ Costcomp-int
  • 5. A Cost Estimation Model For Reuse Based Software Program www.iosrjournals.org 10 | P a g e CostCor-Engg = 3000+16863.16+$34400.03- 13150.36 =41112.83 Where CostCor-Engg = Corporate Engg. Cycle cost 3. 4 Cost effecting factors in software reuse scenario . Cost effecting factors in context of above said corporation: 3.4.1 Availability We are developing an application of the year 2010 (cost of all components is taken of year 2009 ) considering that if a component is found in organization ‗s own library it is used as black box component otherwise as white box ( externally used components). RCR depends upon value of p (probability that a component is found in repository )- as value of p decreases, number of externally used components increases .So cost of the application increases since externally used components more costly as well as RCR increases due to increment in externally used components ( white box components) that require modification . RCR is proportional to modification of the reused component and may be up to .9 [1] Graph1. Availability vs. Cost 3.4.2 Strategies Components from market with lower customization cost, may off set the higher acquisition costs of black-box reuse (CBD form) [14].But in our model organization itself develops black-box components according its needs so Search cost and Component price both are reasonable . So black-box reuse is economical. Graph 2. Strategies vs. Cost 3.4.3. Size Cost is proportional to Size, is a very useful prediction about cost when variation is desired in size of reused product.[15] .So size of reused product should be effective since that incorporates reusable component engineering and integration efforts [16] and ultimately impacts project(application). Integration of components increases size of project so effect on cost should be predicted since it play a lot in overhead costs. In our model : Costcomp-X4 : Costcomp-X1 = 1.40695 , Sizecomp-X4 : Sizecomp-X1 = 4 As Sizecomp increases 4 times but Costcomp also increases but 1.40695 times i,e not directly proportional . (1) If Costintegration is 1% of Cost Overhead per component in Application –Engg Cycle, then As Number of components increases , Costintegration also increases directly proportional . (2) As Number of components increases CostAdd-Code also increases but not directly proportional. (3) 0 10000 20000 30000 1 2 3 4 ApplicationCost Probaility P Cost-App 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000 Black-box White-box ApplicationCost Stratergies Series1
  • 6. A Cost Estimation Model For Reuse Based Software Program www.iosrjournals.org 11 | P a g e From (1) (2) .(3) We can say that size effects cost of application. Graph 3. Size Vs. Cost 3.4.4 Scale Scale of Reuse ranges (1.15-1.75) for Across Projects to Across Multiple product-line [1]. In our model , Components are used across projects and program. So cost increases as scale of reuse increases. 3.4.5 Standardization For better understanding and optimal integration a component should be interface and functionality standardized for which it have to pay otherwise pay for adaptation and integration[26 ]. As standardization level of reusable components increases , cost also increases[13]. 3.4.6 Failure Reuse failure mean that either a component is not reused or the cost of reusing exceeds the cost of developing the component from scratch. Failures in the sense of programmer's time, motivation, accountability differently effects cost and incentives so it should be minimum.[27 ]. 3.4.7 Quality Quality characteristics demand a lot, perhaps the most costly feature of a reusable software. 3.4.8 Complexity Complexity of component depends upon its structure that may be monolithic , polylithic , graph, menu or mask[18].Complexity of reused component reflects both costs- development and operation. RCWR and RCR are proportional to complexity of the component[1 ].We have taken Complexity as RCWR in component- Engg. Cycle that reflects Complexity of development and RCR as operation Complexity in Application - Engg. Cycle. RCWR+ RCR=total Complexity of a reused program. As Complexity of reused components increases ,cost of component-Engg. Cycle and ultimately Application - Engg. Cycle also increases almost proportional to Complexity of a reused program . Graph 4. Complexity vs. Cost 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 1 2 3 4 5 Cost-Overhead Cost Integration Series1 Series2 Series3 0 10000 20000 30000 40000 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Costapplication Complexity Cost-App Complexity
  • 7. A Cost Estimation Model For Reuse Based Software Program www.iosrjournals.org 12 | P a g e IV. Conclusion Producer as well as user have to pay for a reuse program. Some measures(metrics and models) to estimate the cost of a reuse program are reviewed. In this research, a simplified and enhanced cost estimation model is suggested for all cycles of software reuse organization .The Proposed study also results that a application (project) cost depends upon domain analysis and size , reuse rate ,quantity, availability in repository, strategy, failure ,standardization of components. Corporate(organization) investment depends upon infrastructure and number of applications made. V. Future Work For cost-benefit analysis of proposed scheme ,we will suggest a benefits-estimate model and further estimation of economic worth of proposed scheme for organization . REFERENCES [1] M.R.V. Chaudron, Software Engineering Economics with special attention to Component-& Reuse-based Software Engineering,www.win.tue.nl/~mchaudro,Dept. of Mathematics and Computing Science Eindhoven University of Technology, Based on IBM Systems Jnl, 1993, Vol 32, No, 4 [2] Tracz, Will, Confessions of a Used Program Salesman Institutionalizing Software Reuse, New York: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, 1995. [3] Margano, J. and T. Rhoads,Software Reuse Economics, Cost-Benefit Analysis on a Large Scale Ada Project, In Proceedings, International Conference on Software Engineering, Melbourne, Australia, 11-15 May 1992: 338-348. [4] Barnes, B. and T. Bollinger, Making Reuse Cost Effective, IEEE Software, Jan. 1991, 8(l): 13-24. [5] Jasmine K.S and Dr. R. Vasantha ,Cost Estimation Model For Reuse Based Software Products, Proceedings of the International Multi Conference of Engineers and Computer Scientists 2008 Vol I IMECS 2008, 19-21 March, 2008, Hong Kong [6] Jared Fortune and Ricardo Valerdi Los Angeles, Considerations for Successful Reuse in Systems Engineering, University of Southern California , CA, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA. [7] Gaffney, J. and R. Cruickshank., ―Productivity Consortium, Reston‖, SPC-TR-88-015 Version 1.0, Software, VA, April 1988. [8] [Gaffney, J. and T. Durek. Software Reuse —Key to Enhanced Productivity: Some Quantitative Models, Information and Software Technology, June 1989, 31(5):258-267. [9] Senta Fowler Chmiel , An Integrated Cost Model for Software Reuse, for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Computer Science, Dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements to the College of Engineering and Mineral Resources at West Virginia University, Morgantown, West Virginia,2000 [10] Lim, W. Effects of Reuse on Quality, Productivity and Economics. IEEE Software, September 1994, 11(5): 23-30. [11] J. A. Favaro, Comparison of Approaches to Reuse Investment Analysis. In Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Software Reuse, IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos, CA, 1996, pp.136-145. [12] Jeffrey S. Poulin, Measuring software reuse, principles, practices, and economic models, Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc., Boston, MA,USA, 1996. [13] Giancarlo Succi and Francesco Baruchelli , The cost of Standardizing Components for Software Reuse, Supporting Article ,University OF Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada, University DI Trento, Trento, Italy. [14] By T. Ravichandran and Marcus A. Rothenberge ,Software Reuse Strategies and Component Markets‖, Communications of the ACM August 2003/Vol.46 No. 8 Pp. 109-114 [15] O. K. Harsh and A. S. M. Sajeev, Component-Based Explicit Software Reuse, Engineering Letters, 13:1, EL_13_1_4 (Advance online publication: 4 May 2006). [16] Randall W. Jensen ,Estimating the Cost of Software Reuse, Software Engineering, Inc. [17] Basili , In the context of the Goal Question Metric , Lin98. [18] Barry Boehm, Software Reuse Economics, DARPA Workshop, C S E Center for Software Engineering University of Southern California 1/6/97. [19] Raymond, G. and D. Hollis, Software Reuse Economics Model ,In Proceedings of Eighth Annual Washington Ada Symposium Summer SIG Ada Meeting, McLean, VA, June 1991:141-155 [20] J. Poulin, Measuring Software Reusability: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Software Reuse, Advances in Software Reusability, IEEE, 1994. [21] D.M. Balda and D.A Gustafson, Cost-estimation models for the reuse and prototype software development, ACM SIGSOFT, pp. 42. [22] Marcus A. Rothenberger; Derek Nazareth, A COST-BENEFIT-MODEL FOR SYSTEMATIC SOFTWARE REUSE, School of Business Administration University of Wisconsin – MilwaukeePO Box 742,Milwaukee, WI 53211, USA,E-mail: {rothenb; derek}@uwm.edu [23] Dr. Jeffrey S. Poulin, An Agenda for Software Reuse Economics, International Conference on Software Reuse 15 April 2002, Lockheed Martin Systems Integration,MD 0220 Owego, NY 13827,Tel: (607) 751-6899,Jeffrey.Poulin@lmco.com [24] Malan R. and Wentzel K. ―Economics of software reuse revisited, Proc. 3rd Irvine Software Symposium, University of California, Irvine, 30 April,1993 pp.109-21. [25] Roger S. Pressman, Software Engineering-A practitioner‘s Approach, Fifth edition, McGraw-Hill, 2001. [26] Nasib S. Gill, Reusability, Issues in Component-Based Development, nsgill2000@yahoo.com, nsgill_2k4@yahoo.com [27] Robert G. Fichman and Chris F. Kemerer , Incentive Compatibility and Systematic Software Reuse, Appeared in: Journal of Systems and Software, New York; Apr 27, 2001; Vol. 57, Iss. 1; pg. 45