A study of differences by industry using factor models influencing software development estimates
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Recently, IoT and AI/machine learning have attracted attention, and software development has been a critical activity for the companies that use IT. The investment in IT has been increasing, and it varies with the industry. In addition, software development has become complex with the growing sophistication in the target applications; therefore, it is a challenging task for the software vendors to prepare an accurate estimate. Consequently, the estimates grossly deviate from the true value. In this paper, we propose a method based on the previous research that uses the factors related to productivity of software development to find factors that affect the estimation of man-hours. We analyzed the parameters among populations using two factors and simultaneous analysis of multiple populations from nine industries. We used two-factor models extracted from “the study of software estimation factors extracted using covariance structure analysis” and verified the method by applying five constraints, including factor load amount and error variance, simultaneously for the nine industries. As a result, it was possible to separate industries with large factor variance and those with small factor variance. Moreover, it was possible to separate industries with large correlation coefficient between factors and industries with small factor correlation coefficient. For industries with small variance of factors, the factors are consistent within the industry, and in industries with large correlation between factors; the relationship between the two factors is more relevant. In other words, we could find out the relationship of factors influencing software estimation for each industry type. In addition, the variance of these two factors and the correlation coefficient between the factors were grouped, and a cluster analysis was performed. It was found that there was a difference in the estimate for each group of Business-to-Business and Business-to-Customer industry groups. Based on these results, while preparing software estimates, IT vendors would capture the characteristics of the factors for each type of industry and clarify the influential factors of fluctuation by being conscious of the productivity fluctuation factors related to the two factors.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle