Decision Support System for Optimal Selection of Software Reliability Growth Models Using a Hybrid Approach

被引:22
|
作者
Garg, Rakesh [1 ]
Raheja, Supriya [1 ]
Garg, Ramesh Kumar [2 ]
机构
[1] Amity Univ Uttar Pradesh, Amity Sch Engn & Technol, Dept Comp Sci & Engn, Noida 201307, India
[2] Deenbandhu Chhotu Ram Univ Sci & Technol, Dept Mech Engn, Sonepat 131039, India
关键词
Performance analysis; Software reliability; Indexes; Decision support systems; Software; Maximum likelihood estimation; Parameter estimation; Decision support system; entropy-combinative distance-based assessment (CODAS-E); multiple criteria decision-making; software; software reliability growth models; CODAS METHOD; FUZZY VIKOR; DEMATEL; ANP;
D O I
10.1109/TR.2021.3104232
中图分类号
TP3 [计算技术、计算机技术];
学科分类号
0812 ;
摘要
A hybrid approach, namely "entropy-combinative distance-Based assessment (CODAS-E)," is proposed and presented to select and rank software reliability growth models based on multiple performance indexes, which is hitherto not applied in the open literature for the purpose. In the proposed hybrid approach, i.e., CODAS-E, the Shannon entropy approach is used to obtain the performance indexes' priority weights and the CODAS method is used for optimum selection and ranking. The methodology is illustrated through two previously published different failure datasets. The ranking results depict that "Zhang-Teng-Pham" is the least suited model for software reliability estimation, whereas "Musa Okumoto" and "Yamada Imperfect debugging2" are best suitable for dataset-1 and dataset-2, respectively. The CODAS-E method is validated comparing with existing multicriteria decision-making methods; namely, technique for order preference by similarity to ideal solution and analytic hierarchy process. The significant contributions of the present research article include implementation of efficient, user-friendly, and time effective CODAS-E methodology to find the optimal model and the best overall ranking of employed models for any given dataset, and importance to the taxonomy of NHPP SRGMs rather than adding any new model. The presented model selection strategy will undoubtedly lead to high-quality software development.
引用
收藏
页码:149 / 161
页数:13
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] A Hybrid Feature Reduction Approach for Medical Decision Support System
    Kar, Bikram
    Sarkar, Bikash Kanti
    MATHEMATICAL PROBLEMS IN ENGINEERING, 2022, 2022
  • [42] Benchmarking software reliability growth models
    Hu, YW
    Zhang, W
    Li, B
    PROBABILISTIC SAFETY ASSESSMENT AND MANAGEMENT, VOL 1- 6, 2004, : 908 - 913
  • [43] A decision support system for additive manufacturing process selection using a hybrid multiple criteria decision-making method
    Wang, Yuanbin
    Zhong, Ray Y.
    Xu, Xun
    RAPID PROTOTYPING JOURNAL, 2018, 24 (09) : 1544 - 1553
  • [44] OPTIMAL SOFTWARE RELEASE POLICIES FOR SOFTWARE-RELIABILITY GROWTH-MODELS UNDER IMPERFECT DEBUGGING
    KAPUR, PK
    GARG, RB
    RAIRO-RECHERCHE OPERATIONNELLE-OPERATIONS RESEARCH, 1990, 24 (03): : 295 - 305
  • [45] Software reliability models: An approach to early reliability prediction
    Smidts, C
    Stoddard, RW
    Stutzke, M
    SEVENTH INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON SOFTWARE RELIABILITY ENGINEERING, PROCEEDINGS, 1996, : 132 - 141
  • [47] A Novel Framework of Software Reliability Evaluation with Software Reliability Growth Models and Software Metrics
    Okamura, Hiroyuki
    Dohi, Tadashi
    2014 IEEE 15TH INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON HIGH-ASSURANCE SYSTEMS ENGINEERING (HASE), 2014, : 97 - 104
  • [48] Software metrics decision support system
    Ulvila, JW
    Gaffney, JE
    Chinnis, JO
    FIFTH INTERNATIONAL SOFTWARE METRICS SYMPOSIUM - METRICS 1998, PROCEEDINGS, 1998, : 184 - 192
  • [49] A FUZZY HYBRID DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM FOR INTERCEPTOR BAYWATCH BOAT PROPULSION SYSTEM SELECTION
    Yanar, Latif
    Tozan, Hakan
    TEHNICKI VJESNIK-TECHNICAL GAZETTE, 2012, 19 (02): : 407 - 413
  • [50] Safety and Reliability Decision Support System
    Kolowrocki, K.
    Soszynska-Budny, J.
    ADVANCES IN SAFETY, RELIABILITY AND RISK MANAGEMENT, 2012, : 2088 - 2095