Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The EMISQ method and its tool support-expert-based evaluation of internal software quality

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Innovations in Systems and Software Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

There is empirical evidence that internal software quality, e.g., the quality of source code, has great impact on the overall quality of software. Besides well-known manual inspection and review techniques for source code, more recent approaches utilize tool-based static code analysis for the evaluation of internal software quality. Despite the high potential of code analyzers the application of tools alone cannot replace well-founded expert opinion. Knowledge, experience and fair judgment are indispensable for a valid, reliable quality assessment, which is accepted by software developers and managers. The EMISQ method (Evaluation Method for Internal Software Quality), guides the assessment process for all stakeholders of an evaluation project. The method is supported by the Software Product Quality Reporter (SPQR), a tool which assists evaluators with their analysis and rating tasks and provides support for generating code quality reports. The application of SPQR has already proved its usefulness in various code assessment projects around the world. This paper introduces the EMISQ method and describes the tool support needed for an efficient and effective evaluation of internal software quality.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. ISO 9126 (1991) Information technology–software product quality

  2. Nagappan N, Ball T, Zeller A (2006) Mining metrics to predict component failures. In: Proceedings of 28th international conference on software engineering (ICSE’06), pp 452–461

  3. Nagappan N, Williams L, Hudepohl J, Snipes W, Vouk M (2004) Preliminary results on using static analysis tools for software inspection. In: Proceedings of the 15th international symposium on software reliability engineering (ISSRE’04), pp 429–439

  4. Kim S, Zimmermann T, Whitehead EJ, Zeller A (2007) Predicting faults from cached history. In: Proceedings of 29th international conference on software engineering (ICSE’07), pp 489–498

  5. Fenton NE, Neil M (1999) A critique of software defect prediction models. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 25(5): 675–

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Fagan ME (1986) Advances in software inspections. IEEE Trans Softw Eng SE-12(7): 744–

    Google Scholar 

  7. Gilb T, Graham B (1993) Software inspection. Addison-Wesley, Wokingham

    Google Scholar 

  8. Runeson P, Andersson C, Thelin T, Andrews A, Berling B (2006) What do we know about defect detection methods?. IEEE Softw 23(3): 82–

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Product information about PC-Lint can be obtained via http://www.gimpel.com

  10. Product information about FxCop can be obtained via http://www.microsoft.com

  11. Product information about PMD can be obtained via http://pmd.sourceforge.net

  12. Chidamber SR, Kemerer CF (1994) A metrics suite for object oriented design. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 20(6): 476–

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Alshayeb M, Li W (2003) An empirical validation of object-oriented metrics in two different iterative software processes. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 29(11): 1043–

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Fenton NE, Ohlsson N (2000) Quantitative analysis of faults and failures in a complex software system. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 26(8): 797–

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Nagappan N, Ball T (2005) Use of relative code churn measures to predict system defect density. In: Proceedings of 27th international conference on software engineering (ICSE’05), pp 284–292

  16. Wagner S, Jürjens J, Koller C, Trischberger P (2005) Comparing Bug Finding Tools with Reviews and Tests. In: Proceedings of 17th international conference on testing of communicating systems (TestCom’05), pp 40–55

  17. ISO/IEC 14598 (1999) Information technology—software product evaluation

  18. ISO/IEC 25000 (2005) Software engineering—software product quality requirements and evaluation (SQuaRE), Guide to SQuaRE

  19. Punter T, Kusters R, Trienekens J, Bemelmans T, Brombacher A (2004) The W-Process for software product evaluation: a method for goal-oriented implementation of the ISO 14598 standard. Softw Qual J 12(2): 137–

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Information about MITRE can be obtained via http://www.mitre.org

  21. Martin AE, Shafer LH (1996) Providing a Framework for effective software quality assessment—a first step in automating assessments. In: Proceedings of the 1st annual software engineering & economics conference

  22. Product information about QiDO can be obtained via http://www.qido.at

  23. Information about the QBench approach can be obtained via http://www.qbench.de

  24. Simon F, Seng O, Mohaupt T (2006) Code quality management. dpunkt.verlag, Heidelberg

    Google Scholar 

  25. Hyatt L, Rosenberg L (1996) A software quality model and metrics for identifying project risks and assessing software quality. In: Proceedings of 8th annual software technology conference

  26. Grady RB, Caswell DL (1987) Software metrics: establishing a company-wide program. Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River

    Google Scholar 

  27. SEI (2007) Quality Measures Taxonomy. http://www.sei.cmu.edu

  28. Product information about CPD can be obtained via http://pmd.sourceforge.net/cpd.html

  29. Product information about FindBugs can be obtained via http://findbugs.sourceforge.net

  30. Product information about JLint can be obtained via http://jlint.sourceforge.net

  31. Product information about QJ-Pro can be obtained via http://qjpro.sourceforge.net

  32. Product information about Eclipse can be obtained via http://www.eclipse.org

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institut für Wirtschaftsinformatik—Software Engineering, Johannes Kepler University Linz, Linz, Austria

    R. Plösch, H. Gruber, G. Pomberger & S. Schiffer

  2. Siemens AG, Corporate Technology–SE 1, Otto-Hahn-Ring 6, Munich, Germany

    A. Hentschel, Ch. Körner & M. Saft

  3. Siemens Corporate Research Inc.–SCR SE, 755 College Road East, Princeton, NJ, USA

    S. Storck

Authors
  1. R. Plösch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. H. Gruber
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. A. Hentschel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ch. Körner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. G. Pomberger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. S. Schiffer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. M. Saft
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. S. Storck
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to R. Plösch.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Plösch, R., Gruber, H., Hentschel, A. et al. The EMISQ method and its tool support-expert-based evaluation of internal software quality. Innovations Syst Softw Eng 4, 3–15 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11334-007-0039-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11334-007-0039-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation