Table of Contents
Advances in Software Engineering
Volume 2010, Article ID 729826, 21 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2010/729826
Research Article

An Empirical Study of Social Networks Metrics in Object-Oriented Software

Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, University of Cagliari, 09123 Cagliari, Italy

Received 14 April 2010; Accepted 13 August 2010

Academic Editor: Ewan Tempero

Copyright © 2010 Giulio Concas et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Linked References

  1. S. R. Chidamber and C. F. Kemerer, “Metrics suite for object oriented design,” IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. 20, no. 6, pp. 476–493, 1994. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  2. F. Brito e Abreu, “The MOOD metrics set,” in Proceedings of ECOOP Workshop on Metrics, 1995.
  3. M. Lorenz and I. Kidd, Object Oriented Software Metrics: A Pratical Guide, Pretience Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA, 1994.
  4. S. R. Chidamber, D. P. Darcy, and C. F. Kemerer, “Managerial use of metrics for object-oriented software: an exploratory analysis,” IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. 24, no. 8, pp. 629–639, 1998. View at Google Scholar
  5. V. R. Basili, L. C. Briand, and W. L. Melo, “A validation of object-oriented design metrics as quality indicators,” IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. 22, no. 10, pp. 751–761, 1996. View at Google Scholar
  6. R. Subramanyam and M. S. Krishnan, “Empirical analysis of CK metrics for object-oriented design complexity: implications for software defects,” IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. 29, no. 4, pp. 297–310, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  7. T. Gyimóthy, R. Ferenc, and I. Siket, “Empirical validation of object-oriented metrics on open source software for fault prediction,” IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. 31, no. 10, pp. 897–910, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  8. S. Valverde, R. Ferrer Cancho, and R. V. Solé, “Scale-free networks from optimal design,” Europhysics Letters, vol. 60, no. 4, pp. 512–517, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  9. G. Concas, M. Marchesi, S. Pinna, and N. Serra, “Power-laws in a large object-oriented software system,” IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. 33, no. 10, pp. 687–708, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  10. A. Potanin, J. Noble, M. Frean, and R. Biddle, “Scale-free geometry in object-oriented programming,” Communications of the ACM, vol. 48, no. 5, pp. 99–103, 2005. View at Google Scholar
  11. J. P. Scott, “Social network analysis,” Sociology, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 109–127, 1988. View at Google Scholar
  12. T. Zimmermann and N. Nagappan, “Predicting defects using network analysis on dependency graphs,” in Proceedings of the 30th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE '08), pp. 531–540, May 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  13. P. Louridas, D. Spinellis, and V. Vlachos, “Power laws in software,” ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology, vol. 18, no. 1, article no. 2, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  14. A. Tosun, B. Turhan, and A. Bener, “Validation of network measures as indicators of defective modules in software systems,” in Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Predictor Models (PROMISE '09), 2009.
  15. M. E. J. Newman, “Power laws, Pareto distributions and Zipf's law,” Contemporary Physics, vol. 46, no. 5, pp. 323–351, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  16. “Eclipse,” http://www.eclipse.org/.
  17. “NetBeans,” http://www.netbeans.org/.
  18. “Bugzilla,” http://www.bugzilla.org/.
  19. http://netbeans.org/bugzilla/report.cgi.
  20. Cvs, http://www.nongnu.org/cvs/.
  21. H. Simon, “On a class of skew distribution functions,” Biometrika, vol. 42, pp. 425–440, 1955. View at Google Scholar
  22. G. Concas, M. Marchesi, S. Pinna, and N. Serra, “On the suitability of Yule process to stochastically model some properties of object-oriented systems,” Physica A, vol. 370, no. 2, pp. 817–831, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  23. T. J. McCabe, “Complexity measure,” IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 308–320, 1976. View at Google Scholar
  24. S. R. Chidamber and C. F. Kemerer, “Towards a metrics suite for object oriented design,” in Proceedings of the 6th Annual Conference Object-Oriented Programming Systems, Languages, and Applications (OOPSLA '91), vol. 26, pp. 197–211, 1991.
  25. C. Andersson and P. Runeson, “A replicated quantitative analysis of fault distributions in complex software systems,” IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. 33, no. 5, pp. 273–286, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  26. H. Zhang, “On the distribution of software faults,” IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. 34, no. 2, pp. 301–302, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  27. R. Vasa, M. Lumpe, P. Branch, and O. Nierstrasz, “Comparative analysis of evolving software systems using the gini coefficient,” in Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance (ICSM '09), pp. 179–188, September 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  28. S. Valverde and R. V. Solé, “Network motifs in computational graphs: a case study in software architecture,” Physical Review E, vol. 72, no. 2, Article ID 026107, pp. 1–8, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  29. R. Wheeldon and S. Counsell, “Power law distributions in class relationships,” in Proceedings of the 3rd IEEE International Workshop onSource Code Analysis and Manipulation (SCAM '03), 2003.
  30. G. Baxter, M. Frean, J. Noble et al., “Understanding the shapeof Java software,” in Proceedings of the 21st ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Object-Oriented Programming Languages, Systems, and Applications (OOPSLA '06), Portland, Ore, USA, October 2006.
  31. G. Concas, M. Marchesi, A. Murgia, S. Pinna, and R. Tonelli, “Assessing traditional and new metrics for object-oriented systems,” in Proceedings of the Workshop on Emerging Trends in Software Metrics (ICSE '10), Cape Town, South Africa, May 2010.
  32. M. Eaddy, T. Zimmermann, K. D. Sherwood et al., “Do crosscutting concerns cause defects?” IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. 34, no. 4, pp. 497–515, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  33. K. Ayari, P. Meshkinfam, G. Antoniol, and M. Di Penta, “Threats on building models from cvs and bugzilla repositories:the mozilla case study,” in Proceedings of the 17th Annual International Conference on Computer Science and Software Engineering (CASCON '07), Toronto, Canada, October 2007.
  34. G. Yule, “A mathematical theory of evolution based on the conclusions of dr. j.c. willis,” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society London B, vol. 213, pp. 21–87, 1925. View at Google Scholar
  35. A. Clauset, C. R. Shalizi, and M. E. J. Newman, “Power-law distributions in empirical data,” SIAM Review, vol. 51, no. 4, pp. 661–703, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  36. Qualitas Research Group, “Qualitas Corpus Version 20090202,” The Universityof Auckland, February 2009, http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/ewan/corpus.
  37. N. D. Singpurwalla, “Extreme values from a lognormal law with applications to air pollution problems,” Technometrics, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 703–711, 1972. View at Google Scholar