University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering
Towards Model Unification:
Integrating the COCOMO Suite
19th Forum on COCOMO and Software Cost Modeling
Model Unification Tutorial
October 26, 2004
Barry Boehm
Jo Ann Lane
Ricardo Valerdi
Winsor Brown
http://sunset.usc.edu/research/cocomosuite
26 October 2004
COCOMO II Unification Tutorial
©USC-CSE
1
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering
Agenda
• Unification Concepts
– Models of Interest
– Goals
– Previous Unification Work
•
•
•
•
•
Overview of Models
Key Issues
Summary of Unification Analysis Performed to Date
DBA COCOMO Prototype Demo
Next Steps
26 October 2004
COCOMO II Unification Tutorial
©USC-CSE
2
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering
Models of Interest & Owners
COCOMOII*^
Yang
COCOTS^
COQUALMO
Yang
Yang
Valerdi
COPROMO
Brown
iDAVE
Huang
COSYSMO
COSOSIMO
CORADMO
Lane
Brown
COPLIMO
Yang
COPSEMO
Brown
Legend:
Model has been calibrated with historical project data
Model is derived from calibrated models
Model has been calibrated with expert (Delphi) data
*includes Risk Analyzer, Monte Carlo, Security, Agile, and Incremental versions
^includes Early version
26 October 2004
COCOMO II Unification Tutorial
©USC-CSE
3
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering
Unification Goals
• Allow more comprehensive
cost exploration with respect to
– Development decisions
– Investment decisions
– Established project budget and
schedules
– Client negotiations and
requested changes
– Cost, schedule, performance,
and functionality tradeoffs
– Risk management decisions
– Process improvement decisions
26 October 2004
• Affiliate request: Provide a single
unified tool to allow users to
– Specify
• System and software
components comprising the
software system of interest
• Composition and characteristics
of components
– Receive
• A set of comprehensive outputs
for system engineering, software
development, and system-ofsystems integration
• Adjusted using the appropriate
special-purpose extensions
COCOMO II Unification Tutorial
©USC-CSE
4
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering
Previous Unification Work
•
•
•
•
•
Within COCOMO Suite
COCOMO II & COQUALMO (Chulani 1999)
COCOMO II & COCOTS (Abts 2003)
COCOMOII, COPSEMO, & CORADMO (Brown, et al)
COINCOMO: COCOMOII & COPSEMO & multi build
(Brown, et al 2004)
• Early design COCOMOII, early COCOTS, & COSYSMO
(Clark & Clark 2004)
• Outside of COCOMO Suite
– SEER-SEM & SEER-H (Stump 2004)
– ICE (Shroder 2004)
26 October 2004
COCOMO II Unification Tutorial
©USC-CSE
5
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering
Agenda
• Unification Concepts
• Overview of Models
– COCOMO II and Dependent Extensions
– Overview of Emerging Independent Extensions
– Current Model Status
•
•
•
•
Key Issues
Summary of Unification Analysis Performed to Date
DBA COCOMO Prototype Demo
Next Steps
26 October 2004
COCOMO II Unification Tutorial
©USC-CSE
6
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering
Overview of Models
• COCOMO II: software development
– Motivation and Context
– Conceptual View of Model and Parameters
– Scope of Outputs
• Emerging COCOMO-Dependent Extensions
• Emerging Independent Extensions
• Current Model Status
26 October 2004
COCOMO II Unification Tutorial
©USC-CSE
7
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering
COCOMO II Overview
Software product size estimate
Software product, process,
computer, and personal
attributes
Software reuse, maintenance,
and increment parameters
COCOMO
Software development
and maintenance:
• Costs (effort)
• Schedule estimates
• Distributed by phase,
activity, increment
Software organization’s
Project data
COCOMO locally
calibrated to
organization’s data
26 October 2004
COCOMO II Unification Tutorial
©USC-CSE
8
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering
Purpose of COCOMO II
• To help people reason about the cost and schedule
implications of their software decisions
– Software investment decisions
• When to develop, reuse, or purchase
• What legacy software to modify or phase out
–
–
–
–
Setting project budgets and schedules
Negotiating cost/schedule/performance tradeoffs
Making software risk management decisions
Making software improvement decisions
• Reuse, tools, process maturity, outsourcing
• Model versions supported
– Early design
– Post-architecture
26 October 2004
COCOMO II Unification Tutorial
©USC-CSE
9
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering
COCOMO II Model Stages
4x
2x
Early Design
(13 parameters)
1.5x
1.25x
Relative
Size Range x
0.8x
Post-Architecture
(23 parameters)
0.67x
0.5x
Applications
Composition
(3 parameters)
0.25x
Feasibility
Plans
and
Rqts.
Detail
Design
Spec.
Product
Design
Spec.
Rqts.
Spec.
Concept of
Operation
Product
Design
Detail
Design
Accepted
Software
Devel.
and Test
Phases and Milestones
26 October 2004
COCOMO II Unification Tutorial
©USC-CSE
10
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering
COCOMO II Scope of Outputs
• Provides the estimated software development
effort and schedule for MBASE/RUP
– Elaboration
– Construction
26 October 2004
LCO
COCOMO II Unification Tutorial
©USC-CSE
LCA
IOC
11
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering
Overview of Models
• COCOMO II: software development
• Emerging COCOMO-Dependent Extensions
–
–
–
–
–
–
COQUALMO: software quality
iDAVE: software dependability
COPLIMO: product line investment
COPSEMO: phased schedule & effort
CORADMO: rapid application software development
COPROMO: productivity improvement
• Emerging Independent Extensions
• Current Model Status
26 October 2004
COCOMO II Unification Tutorial
©USC-CSE
12
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering
Constructive Quality Model: COQUALMO
• Predicts the number of residual defects in a software product
• Enables 'what-if' analyses that demonstrate the impact of
– various defect removal techniques
– effects of personnel, project, product and platform characteristics on
software quality.
• Provides insights into
– Probable ship time
– Assessment of payoffs for quality investments
– Understanding of interactions amongst quality strategies
Model Point of Contact: Ye Yang
26 October 2004
COCOMO II Unification Tutorial
©USC-CSE
13
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering
COQUALMO Operational Concept
COCOMO II
COQUALMO
Software Size Estimate
Software platform,
Project, product and
personnel attributes
Defect
Introduction
Model
Software
development effort,
cost and schedule
estimate
Number of residual defects
Defect density per unit of size
Defect removal
profile levels
Automation,
Reviews, Testing
Defect
Removal
Model
Model Point of Contact: Ye Yang
26 October 2004
COCOMO II Unification Tutorial
©USC-CSE
14
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering
Information Dependability Attribute
Value Estimator: iDAVE
•
iDAVE estimates and tracks software dependability Return on
Investment (ROI)
– Help determine how much dependability is enough
– Help analyze and select the most cost-effective combination of software
dependability techniques
– Use estimates as a basis for tracking performance
• Based on COCOMO II and COQUALMO cost models and Value
Estimating Relationships (VERs)
• Used to reason about the ROI of software dependability investments
• Dependability defined as a composite property that integrates such
attributes as availability, reliability, safety, security, survivability and
maintainability
Model Point of Contact: LiGuo Huang
26 October 2004
COCOMO II Unification Tutorial
©USC-CSE
15
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering
iDAVE Operational Concept
Time-phased
information
processing
capabilities
Cost estimating relationships (CER’s)
Time-phased
Cost = f
IP Capabilities (size),
project attributes
 Dependability
attribute levels Di
Project attributes
Time-phased
dependability
investments
 Cost
Dependability attribute estimating
relationships (DER’s)
 Value components
Vj
Di = gi
Dependability
investments,
project attributes
 Return on
Investment
Value estimating relationships (VER’s)
Vj = hj
IP Capabilities
dependability levels Di
Model Point of Contact: LiGuo Huang
26 October 2004
COCOMO II Unification Tutorial
©USC-CSE
16
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering
Constructive Product Line Investment
Model: COPLIMO
• Supports software product line cost estimation and
ROI analysis within the scope of product line life
cycle
• Consists of two components
– Product line development cost model
– Annualized post-development life cycle extension
• Based on COCOMO II software cost model
– Statistically calibrated to 161 projects, representing 18
diverse organizations
Model Point of Contact: Ye Yang
26 October 2004
COCOMO II Unification Tutorial
©USC-CSE
17
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering
COPLIMO Operational Concept
For set of products:
• Average product size
(COCOMO II cost
drivers)
• Percent missionunique, reused-withmodifications, blackbox reuse
COPLIMO
• Relative cost of reuse
(RCR) and relative
cost of writing for
reuse (RCWR)
factors
As functions of #
products, # years in
life cycle:
• Non-product line
effort
• Product line
investment (effort)
• Product line savings
(ROI)
Model Point of Contact: Ye Yang
26 October 2004
COCOMO II Unification Tutorial
©USC-CSE
18
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering
Constructive Phased Schedule and Effort
Model: COPSEMO
• Provides a phased distribution of effort to support
incremental rapid application development
• Typically used in conjunction with CORADMO
• Calculates/predicts the
– Schedule (months, M)
– Personnel (P)
– Adjusted effort (person-months, PM)
Model Point of Contact: Winsor Brown
26 October 2004
COCOMO II Unification Tutorial
©USC-CSE
19
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering
Constructive Rapid Application
Development Model: CORADMO
• Calculates/predicts for smaller, rapid application
development projects
– Schedule
– Personnel
– Adjusted effort
• Allocates effort and schedule to the stages, which are
anchored at points in a development life cycle
• Scope includes inception, elaboration, and construction
• Used in conjunction with COCOMO II and COPSEMO
Model Point of Contact: Winsor Brown
26 October 2004
COCOMO II Unification Tutorial
©USC-CSE
20
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering
COPSEMO and CORADMO Operational Concept
COCOMO II
cost drivers
(except SCED)
Baseline
effort and
schedule
• Reuse and Very High Level Languages
• Development Process Reengineering and
Streamlining
• Collaboration Efficiency
• Architecture/Risk Resolution
• Prepositioning Assets
• RAD Capability and Experience
COCOMO II
CORADMO
Language
level,
experience,...
COPSEMO
Effort and
schedule by
stage
• RAD effort
• Schedule by phase
Model Point of Contact: Winsor Brown
26 October 2004
COCOMO II Unification Tutorial
©USC-CSE
21
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering
Constructive Productivity Model:
COPROMO
• Determines impact of technology investments on model
parameter settings
• Predicts the most cost effective allocation of investment
resources in new technologies intended to improve
productivity
• Uses COCOMO II, COPSEMO, and CORADMO models
as assessment framework
– Well-calibrated to 161 projects for effort, schedule
– Subset of 106 1990’s projects for current-practice baseline
– Extensions for Rapid Application Development formulated
Model Point of Contact: Winsor Brown
26 October 2004
COCOMO II Unification Tutorial
©USC-CSE
22
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering
COPROMO Operational Concept
CORADMO Inputs
COCOMO II
Inputs
COPROMO
Graphs
COCOMO II
CORADMO
COPSEMSO
Inputs
COPSEMO
• RAD effort
• Schedule by phase
Model Point of Contact: Winsor Brown
26 October 2004
COCOMO II Unification Tutorial
©USC-CSE
23
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering
Overview of Models
• COCOMO II: software development
• Emerging COCOMO-Dependent Extensions
• Emerging Independent Extensions
– COCOTS: software commercial off the shelf
– COSYSMO: systems engineering
– COSOSIMO: systems of systems
• Current Model Status
26 October 2004
COCOMO II Unification Tutorial
©USC-CSE
24
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering
Constructive COTS Model: COCOTS
• Estimates the effort associated with the integration of
Commercial-Off-The-Shelf (COTS) software products
• Scope includes inception, elaboration, and construction
• Model has four components
–
–
–
–
Assessment
Tailoring
“Glue” code
System volatility
• Effort reported by COCOTS is the sum of the efforts from
each of the four components
• Can be used in conjunction with COCOMO II to estimate
new software development with COTS integration
Model Point of Contact: Ye Yang
26 October 2004
COCOMO II Unification Tutorial
©USC-CSE
25
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering
COCOTS Operational Concept
• # COTS Classes
• # Candidates/Class
• Tailoring Complexity
• Glue code size & cost drivers
• COCOMO II application
effort (separate from COTS)
Assessment
Tailoring
COCOTS
Effort
• COTS volatility rework (%)
• Rework due to COTS
requirements changes (%)
“Glue”
Code
Volatility
• Rework due to non-COTS
requirements changes (%)
Model Point of Contact: Ye Yang
26 October 2004
COCOMO II Unification Tutorial
©USC-CSE
26
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering
STAFFING
COCOMO vs. COCOTS Cost Sources
TIME
26 October 2004
COCOMO II Unification Tutorial
©USC-CSE
27
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering
Constructive System Engineering Cost
Model: COSYSMO
• Covers full system engineering lifecycle (maps to ISO/IEC
15288)
Conceptualize
Develop
Oper Test Transition
to
& Eval
Operation
Operate,
Maintain,
or
Enhance
Replace
or
Dismantle
Life cycle stages being used in COSYSMO Project
• Estimates standard Systems Engineering WBS tasks
(based on EIA/ANSI 632)
• Developed with USC-CSE Corporate Affiliate sponsorship
and INCOSE participation
Model Point of Contact: Ricardo Valerdi
26 October 2004
COCOMO II Unification Tutorial
©USC-CSE
28
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering
COSYSMO Operational Concept
# Requirements
# Interfaces
# Scenarios
# Algorithms
+
3 Volatility Factors
Size
Drivers
Effort
Multipliers
- Application factors
-8 factors
- Team factors
-6 factors
- Schedule driver
COSYSMO
Effort
Calibration
WBS guided by
EIA/ANSI 632
Model Point of Contact: Ricardo Valerdi
26 October 2004
COCOMO II Unification Tutorial
©USC-CSE
29
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering
COSYSMO Effort Multipliers
• Application Factors
–
–
–
–
–
–
• Team Factors
Requirements understanding
Architecture complexity
Level of service requirements
Migration complexity
Technology Maturity
Documentation Match to Life
Cycle Needs
– # and Diversity of
Installations/Platforms
– # of Recursive Levels in the
Design
– Stakeholder team cohesion
– Personnel/team capability
– Personnel
experience/continuity
– Process maturity
– Multisite coordination
– Tool support
Model Point of Contact: Ricardo Valerdi
26 October 2004
COCOMO II Unification Tutorial
©USC-CSE
30
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering
Constructive System-of-System Cost
Model: COSOSIMO
• Parametric model to estimate the effort
associated with the definition and
integration of software-intensive “system
of systems” components
–
–
–
–
–
–
SoS abstraction
Architecting
Source selection
Systems acquisition
Integration and test
Change management effort
• Includes at least one size driver and 6
exponential scale factors related to effort
• Targets input parameters that can be
determined in early phases
Model Point of Contact: Jo Ann Lane
26 October 2004
COCOMO II Unification Tutorial
©USC-CSE
31
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering
COSOSIMO Operational Concept
Size Drivers
• Interface-related eKSLOC
• Number of logical
interfaces at SoS level
• Number of operational
scenarios
• Number of components
Exponential Scale Factors
•
•
•
•
•
•
Integration simplicity
Integration risk resolution
Integration stability
Component readiness
Integration capability
Integration processes
COSOSIMO
SoS
Definition and
Integration
Effort
Calibration
Model Point of Contact: Jo Ann Lane
26 October 2004
COCOMO II Unification Tutorial
©USC-CSE
32
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering
Overview of Models
•
•
•
•
COCOMO II: software development
Emerging COCOMO-Dependent Extensions
Emerging Independent Extensions
Current Model Status
26 October 2004
COCOMO II Unification Tutorial
©USC-CSE
33
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering
USC-CSE Modeling Methodology
Analyze existing
literature
Step 1
Concurrency and
feedback implied…
Perform
Behavioral
analyses
Step 2
Identify relative
significance
Step 3
Perform expert-judgment
Delphi assessment,
formulate a-priori model
Step 4
Gather project
data
Determine Bayesian
Step 5
A-Posteriori model
Step 6
Gather more
data; refine
model
Step 7
26 October 2004
COCOMO II Unification Tutorial
©USC-CSE
34
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering
Status of Models
1
Significant Delphi
Data,
Variables
Bayesian
Tool
Model
Literature
Behavior
COCOMO II
*
*
*
*
>200
Product
COQUALMO
*
*
*
*
6
Excel
iDAVE
Excel
COPLIMO
Excel
COPSEMO
*
*
CORADMO
*
*
*
COPROMO
*
*
*
*
COCOTS
*
*
*
*
20
Excel
COSYSMO
*
*
*
*
11
Excel
COSOSIMO1
*
*
*
n/a
Excel
n/a
Excel
16
Excel
Excel
Literature, behavior, and variable analysis limited due to number of available SoS’ to evaluate
26 October 2004
COCOMO II Unification Tutorial
©USC-CSE
35
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering
Agenda
•
•
•
•
•
•
Unification Concepts
Overview of Models
Key Issues
Summary of Unification Analysis Performed to Date
DBA COCOMO Prototype Demo
Next Steps
26 October 2004
COCOMO II Unification Tutorial
©USC-CSE
36
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering
Discussion Questions from Initial Workshop
1. What does a unified model mean? Front end to specific
system structure
2. Which models in the COCOMO suite should be included
in the unified version?
3. What is the unified model development
framework/vision?
4. How should the unified model evolve?
– Top down approach, starting with a more comprehensive
framework
– Bottoms up approach, starting with the easier model(s)
26 October 2004
COCOMO II Unification Tutorial
©USC-CSE
37
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering
Discussion Questions from Initial Workshop
(continued)
5. When current models are used separately:
– What is missed for the larger development effort?
– What is double counted?
6. How are extensions treated? (or What framework
constructs are needed to support extensions that may
apply to only parts of effort to be estimated?)
7. How de we mix actuals and estimates together for
incremental updates?
8. What is not included in these models?
9. How can we get something that we can easily validate?
26 October 2004
COCOMO II Unification Tutorial
©USC-CSE
38
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering
Main Issues
For each individual model as well as the unified model:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Objectives & Strategies
Inputs/scope of work
Output/scope of estimate
Assumptions of each model
Stakeholders for each model
Counting Rules
Sponsorship (FCS, Model-Based Acq.)
PhD dissertation critical mass
Data sources
26 October 2004
COCOMO II Unification Tutorial
©USC-CSE
39
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering
Issue #1: Objectives & Strategies
• First pass and future enhancements
• Framework (Goal-Quality-Metric model approach)
• Restate objectives for existing models
–
–
–
–
–
–
COCOMO II
COCOTS
COSYSMO
COSOSIMO
CORADMO
COQUALMO
• Develop objectives for unified cost model
• Operational scenario(s) for each model
26 October 2004
COCOMO II Unification Tutorial
©USC-CSE
40
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering
Issue #2: Inputs/scope of work
• Need to define on several levels
– To determine scope of work to be estimated
– To determine system of interest/viewpoint and system component
characteristics
– To determine specific sub-model inputs
• Life cycle model
• Single user interface
• A single definition for each parameter/driver (eg. TEAM, PMAT, etc.)
vs, context-specific definitions for parameters with common names
across models
• Need to determine which “components” can be estimated as
relatively independent pieces vs. tightly coupled components
26 October 2004
COCOMO II Unification Tutorial
©USC-CSE
41
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering
Issue #3: Output/scope of estimate
• Single value for all integrated models (default 152 hours per person-month)
– Normalized PM for calibration
• Backward compatibility to existing models
• What set of “bins” should be used for initial effort outputs?
• What additional levels of granularity should be provided?
–
–
–
–
–
By phase/stage?
By labor category?
By activities?
Break out by sub-models?
Increments? (i.e., COINCOMO)
• How will an Integrated Master Schedule be developed?
• Effort & schedule as a function of risk
• Projected productivity
26 October 2004
COCOMO II Unification Tutorial
©USC-CSE
42
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering
Issue #4: Assumptions of each model
Model
Life Cycle Stages
COCOMO II
COCOTS
COSYSMO
COSOSIMO
26 October 2004
COCOMO II Unification Tutorial
©USC-CSE
43
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering
Issue #5: Users for each model
Acquirers, SW developers, estimators, systems engineers,
managers, executives, or accountants who are interested in:
–
–
–
–
–
Software development (COCOMO II)
Commercial off the shelf software (COCOTS)
Systems engineering (COSYSMO)
Software quality (COQUALMO)
Software rapid application development (COPSEMO,
CORADMO)
– Software system of systems integration (COSOSIMO)
– ROI/Investment analysis (iDave, COPLIMO)
26 October 2004
COCOMO II Unification Tutorial
©USC-CSE
44
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering
Issue #6: Counting Rules &
Definitions
• Inputs
– Size drivers (VHLLs, FPs, APs, Use Case Points, KSLOC, REQS,
ALG, I/F, SCEN, Components, etc.)
– Model inputs (cost drivers, scale factors)
• Outputs
– Effort distributions
• Phase, activity, or labor categories
–
–
–
–
–
Schedule
Defects
$ cost
Risk
Productivity
26 October 2004
COCOMO II Unification Tutorial
©USC-CSE
45
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering
Agenda
•
•
•
•
Unification Concepts
Overview of Models
Key Issues
Summary of Unification Analysis Performed to Date
– Model Comparisons
– Example: How Current Models Used Together Today
• DBA COCOMO Prototype Demo
• Next Steps
26 October 2004
COCOMO II Unification Tutorial
©USC-CSE
46
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering
High Level Partitioning of Cost Models
COSOSIMO
SOS
Architecting
System of System
Integration/Test
COSYSMO
System
Architecting
Software
Requirements
Analysis
System
Integration/Test
COCOMO II
Preliminary
Design
Software
Acceptance Test
Integration
Detailed
Design
Unit Test
Legend
COCOTS
26 October 2004
Coding
COCOMO II Unification Tutorial
©USC-CSE
COCOMO
COSYSMO
COSOSIMO
47
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering
COCOMO Suite: Sizing
Reuse
Volatility
Complexity
Components
Algorithms
Module
X
X
CORADMO
X
X
X
X
COQUALMO
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X X
X
X
COSYSMO
X
COSOSIMO
Glue
COCOTS
Glue
26 October 2004
Scenarios
Module
Interfaces
FP + Lang
Requirements
SLOC
COCOMO II
Model
X
X
X
X
Glue?
COCOMO II Unification Tutorial
©USC-CSE
X
X
48
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering
COCOMO Suite: Derivative Models
X
COPLIMO
X
iDAVE
X
Agile COCOMO II
X
Risk Analysis
X
Incremental Development
X
26 October 2004
Modules
COPROMO
COCOMO II –
Maintenance
X
COQUALMO
COPSEMO
CORADMO
COCOMO II
Model
X
Reuse category
X
X
COCOMO II Unification Tutorial
©USC-CSE
49
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering
COCOMO Suite: Phase/Activity Distribution
Model
Inception
Elaboration
Construction
Transition
COCOMO II
COQUALMO
iDAVE
COPLIMO
COPSEMO
CORADMO
COPROMO
COCOTS
COSYSMO
COSOSIMO
26 October 2004
COCOMO II Unification Tutorial
©USC-CSE
50
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering
COCOMO Suite: Quantities Estimated
Effort
Effort by
Phase
Schedule
COCOMO II
X
X
X
COQUALMO
X
Model
X
Defects
Improvement
Graphs
X
iDAVE
X
COPLIMO
X
COPSEMO
X
X
X
CORADMO
X
X
X
COPROMO
X
X
COCOTS
X
COSYSMO
X
COSOSIMO
X
26 October 2004
ROI
X
COCOMO II Unification Tutorial
©USC-CSE
X
51
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering
Additional Analysis in Progress
• Cost Drivers
• Scale Factors
26 October 2004
COCOMO II Unification Tutorial
©USC-CSE
52
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering
How Current Models Used Together Today:
9-1-1 Example*
SBC/PacBell Network Hub
911 Dispatch Center
COCOMO
COCOMO
COSYSMO
COSYSMO
COCOMO
COSYSMO
COSOSIMO
* Unification Paper
26 October 2004
COCOMO II Unification Tutorial
©USC-CSE
53
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering
For additional information on analysis, see
Steps Toward Model Unification for
Software, Systems Engineering,
and Systems of Systems
in Conference Proceedings
26 October 2004
COCOMO II Unification Tutorial
©USC-CSE
54
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering
Agenda
•
•
•
•
•
•
Unification Concepts
Overview of Models
Key Issues
Summary of Unification Analysis Performed to Date
DBA COCOMO Prototype Demo
Next Steps
26 October 2004
COCOMO II Unification Tutorial
©USC-CSE
55
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering
DBA COCOMO Prototype Demo
26 October 2004
COCOMO II Unification Tutorial
©USC-CSE
56
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering
Next Steps
1.
2.
Workshop: Develop/refine group vision for the unified
model
Develop framework for the model
a.
b.
3.
Coordination of activities with:
a.
b.
4.
Complete investigations in USC CS577a Fall 2004 project and
analyze data collected
Using results of workshop and CS577a project, develop
framework and roadmap for achieving unification
DBA COCOMO (Brown)
COCOST (Clark & Clark)
Develop and track action items for future work
26 October 2004
COCOMO II Unification Tutorial
©USC-CSE
57
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering
Conceptual View of Unified Model: Initial Efforts
COSOSIMO
COSYSMO
COSIZEMO
COCOMOII/
COQUALMO
COCOTS
26 October 2004
COCOMOII extensions
•RAD, security
•Incremental,
phase/activity
•Agile, risk, Monte Carlo
•ROI (product line,
dependability)
•Maintenance
COCOMO II Unification Tutorial
©USC-CSE
Overlap
Resolver
58
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering
Long Term Vision
COSOSIMO
COSYSMO
Unified
Interface
COCOMOII extensions
•RAD, security
•Incremental,
phase/activity
•Agile, risk, Monte Carlo
•ROI (product line,
dependability)
•Maintenance
COCOMOII/
COQUALMO
COCOTS
Output
Analysis
and Report
Generation
Unified Model
26 October 2004
COCOMO II Unification Tutorial
©USC-CSE
59
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering
SYSTEM LEVEL
COSYSMO/SoSI = COSOSIMO/SoSI
COSOSIMO/Software
COSYSMO
COCOMOII
SYSTEM LIFE CYCLE PHASE
26 October 2004
COCOMO II Unification Tutorial
©USC-CSE
60
University of Southern California
Center for Software Engineering
References
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Abts, C., Extending The COCOMO II Software Cost Model To Estimate
Effort And Schedule For Software Systems Using Commercial-off-theshelf (COTS) Software Components: The COCOTS Model, USC PhD
dissertation, May 2004
Boehm, B. W., et al, Software Cost Estimation with COCOMO II, Prentice
Hall, 2000.
Chulani, "Bayesian Analysis of Software Cost and Quality Models“, USC
PhD dissertation, April 1999.
Clark, B., Clark, B., “Early COCOTS”, September 2004.
Lane, J. “Constructive Cost Model for System-of-System Integration,” 3rd
ACM-IEEE International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering,
Redondo Beach, CA, August, 2004
Shroder, R., “Integrated Cost Estimation”, http://www.fti-net.com/AS/ice/
Stump, E., “Estimating System Level Costs”, Galorath E-Journal, Vol. 14,
June 2004
Valerdi, R., Boehm, B., Reifer, D., “COSYSMO: A Constructive Systems
Engineering Cost Model Coming Age,” Proceedings, 13th Annual
INCOSE Symposium, Crystal City, VA. July 2003.
26 October 2004
COCOMO II Unification Tutorial
©USC-CSE
61