The Correspondence between Software Quality Models and Technical Debt Estimation Approaches MTD 2014 - Victoria Isaac Griffith, Derek Reimanis, Clemente Izurieta Zadia Codabux, Ajay Deo, Byron Williams Software Engineering Laboratory (SEL) Department of Computer Science and Department of Computer Science Engineering Montana State University Mississippi State University 1
Technical Debt Estimation Approaches Marinescu’s SonarQube Nugroho et TDPlugin Method al’s Method Schmid’s CAST’s Not currently Currently Method Method implemented Implemented In Tools SQALE Schmid’s Chin et al’s Method Method Method How do each of these methods represent the relationship between Quality and Technical Debt? MTD 2014 - Victoria 2
Quality Models QMOOD SIG SQUALE Maintainability Model COLUMBUS QUAMOCO MTD 2014 - Victoria 3
Technical Debt and Quality • We selected those methods we considered most widely available or accessible SonarQube Marinescu’s TDPlugin Method ? QMOOD CAST’s Method (3 variants) • and a quality model which we were sure none of the methods employed MTD 2014 - Victoria 4
Research Questions 1.1 What is the strength of the relationship between technical debt estimates and quality attributes? 1.2 How does the strength of each relationship compare? H 1,1 : There is a relationship between each technical debt estimate and each quality attribute MTD 2014 - Victoria 5
Research Questions 2.1 What is the estimated effect of a change in the technical debt estimate on each of the quality attributes? H 2,1 : There is a relationship between each technical debt estimate and each quality attribute when accounting for differences between systems MTD 2014 - Victoria 6
Method 10 Systems with 10 Versions each between 25 and 250 KLOC Infusion JEdit FindBugs (Marinescu’s) Understand Apache Ant Apache PMD Cayenne SonarQube Apache JFreeChart (TD Plugin) Collections JHotDraw PMD/FindBugs Jruby Proguard (Cast Method) TDE1: TD Plugin Reusability TDE2a: Cast 1 Flexibility TDE2b: Cast 2 Analysis Understandability TDE2c: Cast 3 Functionality TDE3: Marinescu Extendibility Effectiveness MTD 2014 - Victoria 7
Kendall’s τ Correlation Analysis Technical Debt Estimates Quality Sonar CAST 1 CAST 2 CAST 3 Marinescu Reusability 0.7146 0.6483 0.6636 0.5059 0.2206 Flexibility 0.2538 0.1908 0.1481 0.0955 0.012 Understandability -0.715 -0.658 -0.673 -0.506 -0.219 Effectiveness 0.2522 0.1964 0.1554 0.0988 0.0156 Functionality 0.6846 0.6175 0.6363 0.4748 0.1948 Extendibility 0.2805 0.211 0.1805 0.1105 -0.03 MTD 2014 - Victoria 8
Correlation Matrix 0e+00 6e+05 0 100000 0 2000 0 1000 5 15 TDE1 0e+00 0.80 0.74 0.62 0.27 0.71 0.68 0.25 0.28 0.25 -0.72 TDE2a 0e+00 0.87 0.55 0.22 0.65 0.62 0.20 0.21 0.19 -0.66 6e+05 TDE2b 0e+00 0.58 0.17 0.66 0.64 0.16 0.18 0.15 -0.67 150000 TDE2c 0.25 0.51 0.47 0.10 0.11 0.10 -0.51 0 TDE3 20 0.22 0.19 0.02 0.01 -0.22 -0.03 3000 0 Reusability 0.96 0.27 0.33 0.26 -0.99 0 0 Understan -2500 -0.95 -0.27 -0.33 -0.26 1500 Functiona 0.24 0.32 0.24 0 Effectiven 8 0.81 0.91 4 15 Extendibili 0.86 5 Flexibility 15 5 0e+00 8e+05 0e+00 4e+05 0 20 40 -2500 -500 4 8 12 5 10 20 MTD 2014 - Victoria 9
MLR Analysis Technical Debt Estimate Sonar CAST 1 CAST 2 CAST 3 Marinescu Quality Reusability Flexibility -1.701e-05 Understandability Effectiveness 1.508546e-13 Functionality Extendibility MTD 2014 - Victoria 10
Threats to Validity • Content -> QMOOD and TD Estimation Methods • External -> Case Study • Construct -> QMOOD MTD 2014 - Victoria 11
Conclusions • Results suggest that these techniques do not represent the relationship between quality (as measured by QMOOD) and TD • Suggests further analysis of methods should be conducted • Suggests practitioners should consider evaluating technical debt estimation techniques against their quality measurement approach MTD 2014 - Victoria 12
Practical Implications • Although many tools are based on the same theoretical models, their formulaic calculations and aggregation rules are different • Although many tools are based on ISO 9126, many are not. • Reporting of remediation is done in different scales • It is dangerous to use closed tools without understanding the underlying quality model they implement MTD 2014 - Victoria 13
Aspirational Goal for our Community Can we come together and agree on a common standard for these practical models and their respective implementations? MTD 2014 - Victoria 14
Future Work SonarQube Marinescu’s TDPlugin Method SQALE ? Nugroho Schmid’s CAST’s COLUMBUS QMOOD et al’s Method Method Method SIG Maintainability Model Chin et SQALE al’s Method Method MTD 2014 - Victoria 15
Thank you. Are there any questions? MTD 2014 - Victoria 16
Recommend
More recommend
