The Community for Technology Leaders
RSS Icon
Subscribe
Issue No.04 - July-Aug. (2012 vol.29)
pp: 16-18
Marcos Kalinowski , Kali Software
David N. Card , Det Norske Veritas
Guilherme H. Travassos , Federal University of Rio de Janeiro
ABSTRACT
Default causal analysis (DCA) or defect prevention is required by higher-maturity-level software development processes such as the Brazilian Software Process Improvement Reference Model and Capability Maturity Model Integration. The authors ask and answer questions about implementing it in lower-maturity organizations. In the related web extra entitled “Evidence-Based Guidelines on Defect Causal Analysis,” authors Marcos Kalinowski, David N. Card, and Guilherme H. Travassos discuss the basics of research protocol.
INDEX TERMS
software process improvement, default causal analysis, DCA, defect prevention
CITATION
Marcos Kalinowski, David N. Card, Guilherme H. Travassos, "Evidence-Based Guidelines to Defect Causal Analysis", IEEE Software, vol.29, no. 4, pp. 16-18, July-Aug. 2012, doi:10.1109/MS.2012.72
REFERENCES
1. H. Petrosky, To Engineer is Human; The Role of Failure in Successful Design, St. Martin's Press, 1985.
2. B.A. Kitchenham, T. Dybå, and M. J⊘rgensen, “Evidence Based Software Engineering,” Proc. Int'l Conf. Software Eng. (ICSE 04), IEEE CS, 2004, pp. 273–281.
3. R.G. Mays, “Applications of Defect Prevention in Software Development,” IEEE J. Selected Areas in Communications, vol. 8, no. 2, 1990, pp. 164–168.
4. O. Dangerfield et al., “Defect Causal Analysis: A Report from the Field,” Proc. Int'l Conf. Software Quality (ICSQ 92), Am. Soc. Quality Control, 1992.
5. R.B. Grady, “Software Failure Analysis for High-Return Process Improvement Decisions,” Hewlett-Packard J., vol. 47, no. 4, 1996, pp. 15–24.
6. P. Jalote and N. Agrawal, “Using Defect Analysis Feedback for Improving Quality and Productivity in Iterative Software Development,” Proc. ITI (Information Technology Interfaces) 3rd Int'l Conf. Information and Comm. Technology (ICICT 05), IEEE, 2005, pp. 701–713.
7. J. Biolchini et al., Systematic Review in Software Engineering, tech. report ES 679/05-PESC/COPPE/UFRJ, Federal Univ. of Rio de Janeiro, 2005; www.cos.ufrj.br/uploadfileses67905.pdf.
8. D. Card, “Defect Causal Analysis Drives Down Error Rates,” IEEE Software, vol. 10, no. 4, 1993, pp. 98–99.
9. M. Leszak, D. Perry, and D. Stoll, “A Case Study in Root Cause Defect Analysis,” Proc. Int'l Conf. Software Eng (ICSE 00), ACM, 2000, pp. 428–437.
10. C.L. Jones, “A Process-Integrated Approach to Defect Prevention, IBM Systems J., vol. 24, no. 2, 1985, pp. 150–67.
11. M. McDonald,R. Musson, and R. Smith, The Practical Guide to Defect Prevention: Techniques to Meet the Demand for More Reliable Software, Microsoft Press, 2008.
12. L. Damm and L. Lundberg, “Companywide Implementation of Metrics for Early Software Fault Detection,” Proc. Int'l Conf. Software Eng. (ICSE 07), IEEE CS, 2007, pp. 560–570.
13. IEEE Std. 1044-2009, Classification for Software Anomalies, IEEE, 2010.
14. J.H. Hayes et al., “A Case History of International Space Station Requirement Faults,” Proc. 11th IEEE Int'l Conf. Complex Computer Systems (ICECCS 06), IEEE CS, 2006, pp. 17–26.
15. K. Ishikawa, Guide to Quality Control, 2nd ed., Asian Productivity Org., 1982.
16. T. Nakashima et al., “Analysis of Software Bug Causes and Its Prevention,” Information and Software Technology, vol. 41, no. 15, 1999, pp. 1059–1068.
630 ms
(Ver 2.0)

Marketing Automation Platform Marketing Automation Tool