A comparison of tool-based and paper-based software inspection

F. Macdonald, J. Miller

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    23 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    Software inspection is an effective method of defect detection. Recent research activity has considered the development of tool support to further increase the efficiency and effectiveness of inspection, resulting in a number of prototype tools being developed. However, no comprehensive evaluations of these tools have been carried out to determine their effectiveness in comparison with traditional paper-based inspection. This issue must be addressed if tool-supported inspection is to become an accepted alternative to, or even replace, paper-based inspection. This paper describes a controlled experiment comparing the effectiveness of tool-supported software inspection with paper-based inspection, using a new prototype software inspection tool known as ASSIST (Asynchronous/Synchronous Software Inspection Support Tool). 43 students used ASSIST and paper-based inspection to inspect two C++ programs of approximately 150 lines. The subjects performed both individual inspection and a group collection meeting, representing a typical inspection process. It was found that subjects performed equally well with tool-based inspection as with paper-based, measured in terms of the number of defects found, the number of false positives reported, and meeting gains and losses.
    LanguageEnglish
    JournalEmpirical Software Engineering
    Volume3
    Issue number3
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 1998

    Fingerprint

    Inspection
    Students
    Defects

    Keywords

    • CASE
    • software inspection
    • controlled experimen
    • tool support

    Cite this

    @article{4ecdc350e2dd4af08c3fcae0a72a71e4,
    title = "A comparison of tool-based and paper-based software inspection",
    abstract = "Software inspection is an effective method of defect detection. Recent research activity has considered the development of tool support to further increase the efficiency and effectiveness of inspection, resulting in a number of prototype tools being developed. However, no comprehensive evaluations of these tools have been carried out to determine their effectiveness in comparison with traditional paper-based inspection. This issue must be addressed if tool-supported inspection is to become an accepted alternative to, or even replace, paper-based inspection. This paper describes a controlled experiment comparing the effectiveness of tool-supported software inspection with paper-based inspection, using a new prototype software inspection tool known as ASSIST (Asynchronous/Synchronous Software Inspection Support Tool). 43 students used ASSIST and paper-based inspection to inspect two C++ programs of approximately 150 lines. The subjects performed both individual inspection and a group collection meeting, representing a typical inspection process. It was found that subjects performed equally well with tool-based inspection as with paper-based, measured in terms of the number of defects found, the number of false positives reported, and meeting gains and losses.",
    keywords = "CASE, software inspection, controlled experimen, tool support",
    author = "F. Macdonald and J. Miller",
    year = "1998",
    doi = "10.1023/A:1009747104814",
    language = "English",
    volume = "3",
    journal = "Empirical Software Engineering",
    issn = "1382-3256",
    number = "3",

    }

    A comparison of tool-based and paper-based software inspection. / Macdonald, F.; Miller, J.

    In: Empirical Software Engineering, Vol. 3, No. 3, 1998.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - A comparison of tool-based and paper-based software inspection

    AU - Macdonald, F.

    AU - Miller, J.

    PY - 1998

    Y1 - 1998

    N2 - Software inspection is an effective method of defect detection. Recent research activity has considered the development of tool support to further increase the efficiency and effectiveness of inspection, resulting in a number of prototype tools being developed. However, no comprehensive evaluations of these tools have been carried out to determine their effectiveness in comparison with traditional paper-based inspection. This issue must be addressed if tool-supported inspection is to become an accepted alternative to, or even replace, paper-based inspection. This paper describes a controlled experiment comparing the effectiveness of tool-supported software inspection with paper-based inspection, using a new prototype software inspection tool known as ASSIST (Asynchronous/Synchronous Software Inspection Support Tool). 43 students used ASSIST and paper-based inspection to inspect two C++ programs of approximately 150 lines. The subjects performed both individual inspection and a group collection meeting, representing a typical inspection process. It was found that subjects performed equally well with tool-based inspection as with paper-based, measured in terms of the number of defects found, the number of false positives reported, and meeting gains and losses.

    AB - Software inspection is an effective method of defect detection. Recent research activity has considered the development of tool support to further increase the efficiency and effectiveness of inspection, resulting in a number of prototype tools being developed. However, no comprehensive evaluations of these tools have been carried out to determine their effectiveness in comparison with traditional paper-based inspection. This issue must be addressed if tool-supported inspection is to become an accepted alternative to, or even replace, paper-based inspection. This paper describes a controlled experiment comparing the effectiveness of tool-supported software inspection with paper-based inspection, using a new prototype software inspection tool known as ASSIST (Asynchronous/Synchronous Software Inspection Support Tool). 43 students used ASSIST and paper-based inspection to inspect two C++ programs of approximately 150 lines. The subjects performed both individual inspection and a group collection meeting, representing a typical inspection process. It was found that subjects performed equally well with tool-based inspection as with paper-based, measured in terms of the number of defects found, the number of false positives reported, and meeting gains and losses.

    KW - CASE

    KW - software inspection

    KW - controlled experimen

    KW - tool support

    UR - http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1009747104814

    U2 - 10.1023/A:1009747104814

    DO - 10.1023/A:1009747104814

    M3 - Article

    VL - 3

    JO - Empirical Software Engineering

    T2 - Empirical Software Engineering

    JF - Empirical Software Engineering

    SN - 1382-3256

    IS - 3

    ER -