MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1973808584 · doi:10.5555/2664360.2664364

Simulation-based decision support for bringing a project back on track: the case of RUP-based software construction

2012· article· en· W1973808584 on OpenAlexaff
Elham Paikari, Guenther Ruhe, Prashanth Harish Southekel

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Conference on Software and System Process · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware Engineering Techniques and Practices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceScheduleSoftware project managementSoftware developmentSoftware engineeringProject managementProject planningContext (archaeology)Web applicationSystems engineeringSoftwareEngineeringSoftware constructionWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

RUP-based development has proven successful in various contexts. The iterative and phased development approach provides a framework for how to develop software efficiently and effectively. Yet, there are plenty of occasions that the projects go off-track in terms of the key parameters of the project such as quality, functionality, cost, and schedule. The challenge for the software project manager is to bring the project back on track. Simulation, in general, and system dynamics based simulation in particular, is established as a method to pro-actively evaluate possible scenarios and decisions. The main contribution of this paper is a method called SIM-DASH; it combines three established techniques for providing decision support to the software project manager in the context of RUP-based development. SIM-DASH consists of (i) a system dynamics modeling and simulation component for RUP-based construction, (ii) dashboard functionality providing aggregated and visualized information for comparing actual versus targeted performance, and (iii) knowledge and experience base describing possible actions that have proven successful in the past for how to bring a project back on track. As part of (iii), decision trees and experience-based guidelines are used. The interplay between these three components provides pre-evaluated actions for bringing the current project iteration back on track. As proof-of-concept, a case study is provided to illustrate the key steps of the method and to highlight its principal advantages. For this purpose, SIM-DASH was substantiated retrospectively for a real-world SAP web system development project within the banking field. While the method is applicable for different issues and scenarios, we study its impact for the specific issue of adding personnel to testing and/or development in order to ensure improved project performance to achieve established quality levels of feature development.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.067

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.059
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.293 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Conference on Software and System ProcessSame topicSoftware Engineering Techniques and PracticesFrench-language works237,207