fpa cosmic ffp convertability final
DESCRIPTION
A Sogeti study to which extent it\'s possible to convert function points to COSMIC function points and back. A framework on how to make the transition from FPA to COSMIC as the leading FSMM in the organzition. - Published at the SMEF2007 conference (Rome, May 2007)TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Fpa Cosmic Ffp Convertability Final](https://reader033.vdocuments.site/reader033/viewer/2022061618/555d5126d8b42a52368b49a9/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Software Measurement European Forum
2007
Conversion of Functional Size
FPA COSMIC
Harold van HeeringenThursday May 10, 2007
Rome, Italy
![Page 2: Fpa Cosmic Ffp Convertability Final](https://reader033.vdocuments.site/reader033/viewer/2022061618/555d5126d8b42a52368b49a9/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Overview
• Why study conversion possibilities?• Similarities and differences• Conversion studies• Conversion Framework• Conclusions and discussion
![Page 3: Fpa Cosmic Ffp Convertability Final](https://reader033.vdocuments.site/reader033/viewer/2022061618/555d5126d8b42a52368b49a9/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
COSMIC-FFP
• Second generation FSM, exists since late ’90s
• Applicable on domains : business application software, real-time software, infrastructure software en hybrids
• Enables measurement of separate components
• Applicable for sizing documentation delivered by modern design and development methods
• Applicable for sizing modern architectures
• Also applicable for sizing traditional development methods and architectures
![Page 4: Fpa Cosmic Ffp Convertability Final](https://reader033.vdocuments.site/reader033/viewer/2022061618/555d5126d8b42a52368b49a9/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Sogeti Bid challenge
Sogeti bid process:> Bottom-up (expert) estimate> Top-down (metrics) estimate
Problem:> Requirements delivered by (potential) clients> Requirements often un-FPA’able> Experience base / Estimation tools based on FP
Need:> COSMIC analysis> Transformation FPA> Use estimation tools with FPA
![Page 5: Fpa Cosmic Ffp Convertability Final](https://reader033.vdocuments.site/reader033/viewer/2022061618/555d5126d8b42a52368b49a9/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Estimating wizard
I nput
Development tools J ava
Distribution of work Onshore OffshoreConstruction 0% 100%System test 0% 100%
System test strategy TMap Medium
Delivery test Yes
Complexity Medium
Size 1235 FP
Start date 01-08-07
Duration in weeks 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 Delivery for acceptance 14-11-07 28-11-07 12-12-07 26-12-07 9-01-08 23-01-08 6-02-08 Total effort 9462 8106 7026 6342 5916 5646 5400 Effort per FP 15,77 13,51 11,71 10,57 9,86 9,41 9 Totaal cost € 413.352 € 354.126 € 306.936 € 277.056 € 258.414 € 246.594 € 236.022 Cost per FP € 689 € 590 € 512 € 462 € 431 € 411 € 393
![Page 6: Fpa Cosmic Ffp Convertability Final](https://reader033.vdocuments.site/reader033/viewer/2022061618/555d5126d8b42a52368b49a9/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Possible reasons to migrate to COSMIC
• New development methods and therefore new forms of functional documentation
• Organizations want to measure software in real-time, telecommunications or infrastructure domain as well
• Organizations want to size separate distinct components (e.g. SOA architectures)
• Organizations want to measure more accurately the relative differences between functions
• Organizations are structured in a way that teams are only creating part of an elementary function
![Page 7: Fpa Cosmic Ffp Convertability Final](https://reader033.vdocuments.site/reader033/viewer/2022061618/555d5126d8b42a52368b49a9/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Reasons why organizations don’t migrate
• COSMIC is unknown to the large ‘public’• Few skilled analysts ‘on the market’• Few training facilities• Not much benchmarking data available
> ISBSG R10: 110 projects out of 4200 in total• No general ‘rules of thumb’ available
• Organizations: ‘fear’ to lose the experience base• People: ‘fear’ to lose their ‘rules of thumb’ based on FPA
![Page 8: Fpa Cosmic Ffp Convertability Final](https://reader033.vdocuments.site/reader033/viewer/2022061618/555d5126d8b42a52368b49a9/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Sogeti conversion study
Study objectives:
1) To find a statistically reliable transformation formula, based on our own experiences and data
2) Incorporate the formula in our estimation process and tools
3) To learn from the study results to be able to construct a framework in order to help clients to migrate their FSM
![Page 9: Fpa Cosmic Ffp Convertability Final](https://reader033.vdocuments.site/reader033/viewer/2022061618/555d5126d8b42a52368b49a9/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Differences and similarities between FPA and COSMIC
![Page 10: Fpa Cosmic Ffp Convertability Final](https://reader033.vdocuments.site/reader033/viewer/2022061618/555d5126d8b42a52368b49a9/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
ILF
EIF
FPA
Users TransactionsLogical files (data functions)
EI
EQ
EO
![Page 11: Fpa Cosmic Ffp Convertability Final](https://reader033.vdocuments.site/reader033/viewer/2022061618/555d5126d8b42a52368b49a9/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
FPA in a nutshell
• Applicability of FPA is strongly dependable on the existence of a data model
• FPA grants function points to both data functions and to logical transactions
• The maximum size of data functions and logical transactions is limited> ILF: 7,10 or 15 FP> EIF: 5, 7 or 10 FP> EI: 3,4 or 6 FP> EQ: 3,4 or 6 FP> EO: 4,5 or 7 FP
![Page 12: Fpa Cosmic Ffp Convertability Final](https://reader033.vdocuments.site/reader033/viewer/2022061618/555d5126d8b42a52368b49a9/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
COSMIC
Users Transactions Data
W
X R
E
![Page 13: Fpa Cosmic Ffp Convertability Final](https://reader033.vdocuments.site/reader033/viewer/2022061618/555d5126d8b42a52368b49a9/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
COSMIC in a nutshell
• COSMIC is not dependable on the existence of a data model
• COSMIC values data movements within functional processes and does not explicitly reward data functions
• This value is not limited per functional process> Theoretically the size of a COSMIC functional process can be any
number between 2 and infinity
![Page 14: Fpa Cosmic Ffp Convertability Final](https://reader033.vdocuments.site/reader033/viewer/2022061618/555d5126d8b42a52368b49a9/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Most important differences
FPA COSMIC
Applicable on Domain Business Software Business, Real-time, Infrastructure Software
Data model required? Required Not required (but useful)
Measurement of separate components?
Not possible Possible
Size limit per function Yes Size is not limited
Benchmarking data Many (ISBSG R10: n=3108)
Few (ISBSG R10: n=110)
Measurement of processing functionality
No No, but local extensions are possible
Early sizing Based on data model Based on process model
![Page 15: Fpa Cosmic Ffp Convertability Final](https://reader033.vdocuments.site/reader033/viewer/2022061618/555d5126d8b42a52368b49a9/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Correlation?
There is no exact conceptual mapping> The data model is quantified in FPA, but is not in COSMIC-
FFP> Complexity of the functions is established differently> Different counting guidelines
But…. There is a high correlation > FPA transactions ≈ COSMIC functional processes
> FPA data functions vs. extra CFP for large processesAverage CFP/functional process = 7.6
![Page 16: Fpa Cosmic Ffp Convertability Final](https://reader033.vdocuments.site/reader033/viewer/2022061618/555d5126d8b42a52368b49a9/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Conversionfrom FPA to COSMIC
![Page 17: Fpa Cosmic Ffp Convertability Final](https://reader033.vdocuments.site/reader033/viewer/2022061618/555d5126d8b42a52368b49a9/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Earlier conversion studies
• Fetcke (1999)> N=4> Y(CFP) = 1,1(FP IFPUG) – 7,6> R2 = 0.97
• Vogelezang & Lesterhuis (2003)> N=11> Y(CFP) = 1,2(FP NESMA) – 87> R2 = 0.99
<200 FP: Y(CFP) = 0,75(FP) – 2.6 (Abran 2005)>200 FP: Y(CFP) = 1,2(FP) – 108 (Abran 2005)
![Page 18: Fpa Cosmic Ffp Convertability Final](https://reader033.vdocuments.site/reader033/viewer/2022061618/555d5126d8b42a52368b49a9/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Earlier conversion studies
• Desharnais & Abran (2005)> Y(CFP) = 0,84(FP IFPUG) + 18> R2 = 0.91
Transactions only: Y(CFP) = 1,35 (FPTX) + 5.5 R2 = 0.98
• Desharnais & Abran (2006)> N=14> Y(CFP) = 1,0(FP IFPUG) – 3> R2 = 0.93
Transactions only: Y(CFP) = 1,36 (FPTX) + 0 R2 = 0.98
![Page 19: Fpa Cosmic Ffp Convertability Final](https://reader033.vdocuments.site/reader033/viewer/2022061618/555d5126d8b42a52368b49a9/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Sogeti Study (2006)
• Purpose> To be able to size clients’ requirements in COSMIC and use the
results of these measurements in estimation tools based on FPA> Learn from the differences and similarities so that we can advise
clients on their FSM
• Method> Double measurements of a number of projects by experienced
analysts in both methods
• Projects> 26 projects for a variety of clients> New developments> Business applications> Variety of branches> Early requirements> Often low quality documentation
![Page 20: Fpa Cosmic Ffp Convertability Final](https://reader033.vdocuments.site/reader033/viewer/2022061618/555d5126d8b42a52368b49a9/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Division of the data set?
• Only transactions (Abran 2006)
• Division in datasets greater and smaller than 200 (Abran 2005)
y = 1,6057x - 17,111
R2 = 0,8826
-200
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
#fp -->
#cfs
u -
->
CFP = 1,6 (FP NESMA-TX) -17
R2 = 0.88
y = 0,6812x + 16,134
R2 = 0,4472
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
#fp -->
#cfs
u -->
CFP = 0.68 (FP NESMA) +16
R2 = 0.45
y = 1,2422x - 80,027
R2 = 0,9609
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
0 500 1000 1500 2000
#fp -->
#cfs
u -
->
CFP = 1.24 (FP NESMA) -80
R2 = 0.96
![Page 21: Fpa Cosmic Ffp Convertability Final](https://reader033.vdocuments.site/reader033/viewer/2022061618/555d5126d8b42a52368b49a9/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Sogeti 2006
N=26Y(CFP) = 1,22(FP NESMA) – 64R2 = 0.97
y = 1,22x - 64
R2 = 0,97
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
2000
0 500 1000 1500 2000
# FP -->
# C
FP
-->
![Page 22: Fpa Cosmic Ffp Convertability Final](https://reader033.vdocuments.site/reader033/viewer/2022061618/555d5126d8b42a52368b49a9/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Results
• Sogeti – Use one formula for the conversion> CFP = 1.22 FP (Nesma) – 64 FP (Nesma) = 0.82 (CFP) + 52> Projects > 200 FP
• Advising clients: Use Transition framework
I nput
Development tools J ava
Distribution of work Onshore OffshoreConstruction 0% 100%System test 0% 100%
System test strategy TMap Medium
Delivery test Yes
Complexity Medium
Size 1235 FP
Start date 01-08-07
I nput
Development tools J ava
Distribution of work Onshore OffshoreConstruction 0% 100%System test 0% 100%
System test strategy TMap Medium
Delivery test Yes
Complexity Medium
Size 1500 COSMIC =1282 FP
Start date 01-08-07
Duration in weeks 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 Delivery for acceptance 14-11-07 28-11-07 12-12-07 26-12-07 9-01-08 23-01-08 6-02-08 Total effort 9462 8106 7026 6342 5916 5646 5400 Effort per FP 15,77 13,51 11,71 10,57 9,86 9,41 9 Totaal cost € 413.352 € 354.126 € 306.936 € 277.056 € 258.414 € 246.594 € 236.022 Cost per FP € 689 € 590 € 512 € 462 € 431 € 411 € 393
![Page 23: Fpa Cosmic Ffp Convertability Final](https://reader033.vdocuments.site/reader033/viewer/2022061618/555d5126d8b42a52368b49a9/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Transition framework
![Page 24: Fpa Cosmic Ffp Convertability Final](https://reader033.vdocuments.site/reader033/viewer/2022061618/555d5126d8b42a52368b49a9/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
A Transition Framework
• Change FSM:> Technical change (Metrics database)
Convert metrics in experience base from FPA to COSMIC (or the other way around)
> Organizational changeConvert the organization knowledge and procedures from FPA to COSMIC
![Page 25: Fpa Cosmic Ffp Convertability Final](https://reader033.vdocuments.site/reader033/viewer/2022061618/555d5126d8b42a52368b49a9/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Technical change
1) Identify a data set to be analyzed in COSMIC> Enough variation> At least 15 projects> Recent projects with good
documentation> At least 2 ‘very large’ projects> Avoid very small projects (<150
FP)> Avoid likely outliers (lot of
codetables / listboxes)
![Page 26: Fpa Cosmic Ffp Convertability Final](https://reader033.vdocuments.site/reader033/viewer/2022061618/555d5126d8b42a52368b49a9/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Technical Change
2) Measure the projects in COSMIC> Experienced COSMIC analyst> Peer reviews> Detailed method
![Page 27: Fpa Cosmic Ffp Convertability Final](https://reader033.vdocuments.site/reader033/viewer/2022061618/555d5126d8b42a52368b49a9/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
Technical Change
> Use MS-Excel or other spreadsheet
> Insert scatter diagram> Display the R2 and the
regression formula> If regression is low
(<0.90), try to explain this by analyzing the outliers
3) Create local statistically based conversion formula
![Page 28: Fpa Cosmic Ffp Convertability Final](https://reader033.vdocuments.site/reader033/viewer/2022061618/555d5126d8b42a52368b49a9/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
Technical Change
4) Apply the formula to convert FPA sizes to COSMIC> When the formula is there, this is the easy part
5) Recalculate the metrics database> Recalculate PDR (hours/FP), quality (defects/FP) and
other metrics to their COSMIC equivalents
![Page 29: Fpa Cosmic Ffp Convertability Final](https://reader033.vdocuments.site/reader033/viewer/2022061618/555d5126d8b42a52368b49a9/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
Organizational change
> Organizational awareness> Revision of processes and
procedures > Communication to
stakeholders> Training of analysts /
outsourcing FSM> Revision of calculation
instruments> Possibly change the tool to
administrate analysis and/or metrics
After conversion COSMIC analysis
![Page 30: Fpa Cosmic Ffp Convertability Final](https://reader033.vdocuments.site/reader033/viewer/2022061618/555d5126d8b42a52368b49a9/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
Conclusion & Discussion
• Conversion is a highly relevant topic for very different kind of reasons. Most important is the need to size ‘un-FPA-able’ documentation, while using estimation tools based on FPA
• It is possible to migrate your FSM without too many ‘problems’. The proposed transition framework can help
• Changing FSM also means an organizational change!
![Page 31: Fpa Cosmic Ffp Convertability Final](https://reader033.vdocuments.site/reader033/viewer/2022061618/555d5126d8b42a52368b49a9/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
Questions
Discussion