research-article

Functional size measurement revisited

Authors:

Onur DemirorsAuthors Info & Claims

ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology (TOSEM), Volume 17, Issue 3

Article No.: 15, Pages 1 - 36

https://doi.org/10.1145/1363102.1363106

Published: 27 June 2008 Publication History

Abstract

There are various approaches to software size measurement. Among these, the metrics and methods based on measuring the functionality attribute have become widely used since the original method was introduced in 1979. Although functional size measurement methods have gone a long way, they still provide challenges for software managers. This article identifies improvement opportunities based on empirical studies we performed on ongoing projects. We also compare our findings with the extended dataset provided by the International Software Benchmarking Standards Group (ISBSG).

References

[1]

Abran A. 1994. Analysis of the Measurement Process of Function Point Analysis, a PhD Thesis Submitted to Department of Electrical Engineering and Software Engineering, École Polytechnique De Montréal.

[2]

Abran, A. and Robillard, P. N. 1994. Function points: A study of their measurement processes and scale transformations. J. Syst. Softw. 25, 171--184.

Digital Library

[3]

Abran, A., St-Pierre, D., Maya, M., and Desharnais J. M. 1998. Full function points for embedded and real-time software. In Proceedings of the UKSMA Fall Conference, London, UK, 14.

[4]

Abran, A. 1999. COSMIC FFP 2.0: An Implementation of COSMIC functional size measurement concepts. In Proceedings of the 2nd European Software Measurement Conference (FESMA'99), (Oct. 7), Amsterdam.

[5]

Abran, A., Ndiaye, I., and Bourque, P. 2003. Contribution of software size in effort estimation. Research Laboratory in Software Engineering, École de Technologie Supérieure, Canada.

[6]

Abran, A., Desharnais, J. M, and Aziz, F. 2005. Measurement convertibility—from function points to COSMIC-FFP. In Proceedings of the 15th International Workshop on Software Measurement (IWSM'2005), Montreal, Canada, Shaker-Verlag, 227--240.

[7]

Abran, A. and Robillard, P. N. 1996. Function points analysis: An empirical study of its measurement processes. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 22, 12, 895--909.

Digital Library

[8]

Albrecht, A. J. 1979. Measuring application development productivity. In Proceedings of the IBM Applications Development Symposium, October 14--17 1979, Monterey, California, 83--92.

[9]

Albrecht, A. J. and Gaffney J. E. 1983. Software function, source lines of code, and development effort prediction: A software science validation. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. SE-9, 6, 639--648.

Digital Library

[10]

Albrecht, A. J. 1984. AD/M Productivity Measurement and Estimate Validation. IBM Corporate Information Systems, IBM Corp., Purchase, NY.

[11]

Angelis L., Stamelos, I., and Morisio, M. 2001. Building a cost estimation model based on categorical data. In Proceedings of the 7th IEEE International Software Metrics Symposium (Metrics 2001), April 2001, London, UK.

Digital Library

[12]

Banker, R., Kauffman, R. J., Wright, C., and Zweig, D. 1994. Automating output size and reuse metrics in a repository based computer aided software engineering (CASE) environment. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 20, 3, 169--187.

Digital Library

[13]

Bock, D. B. and Klepper, R. 1992. FP-S: A simplified function point counting method. J. Syst. Softw. 18, 245--254.

[14]

Boehm, B. W. 1981. Software Engineering Economics, Prentice-Hall, 487.

Digital Library

[15]

Boehm, B. W., Horowitz, E., Madachy, R., Reifer, D., Bradford K. C., Steece, B., Brown, A. W., Chulani, S., and Abts, C. 2000. Software Cost Estimation with COCOMO II, Prentice Hall, New Jersey.

Digital Library

[16]

Borland. Borland Together Architect, http://www.borland.com/us/products/together/index.html#architect

[17]

Briand, L. C., El Emam, K., Maxwell, K., Surmann, D., and Wieczorek, I. 1999. An assessment and comparison of common software cost estimation models. In Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE 99), Los Angeles, 313--322.

Digital Library

[18]

Briand, L. C., Langley, T., and Wieczorek, I. 2000. A replicated assessment and comparison of software cost modeling techniques. In Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE 00), Limerick, Ireland, 377--386.

Digital Library

[19]

Caldiera, G., Antoniol, G., Fiutem, R., and Lokan, C. 1998. Definition and experimental evaluation for object oriented systems. In Proceedings of the 5th International Symposium on Software Metrics (METRICS 98), Nov. 20--21, Bethesda MD, 167--178.

Digital Library

[20]

Conte, M., Iorio, T., Meli, R., and Santillo, L. 2004. E&Q: An early and quick approach to functional size measurement methods. In Proceedings of Software Measurement European Forum (SMEF), Rome, Italy.

[21]

COSMIC. 2003. COSMIC FFP v.2.2, Measurement Manual.

[22]

DeMarco T. 1982. Controlling Software Projects, Yourdon press, New York.

[23]

Demirors, O., Gencel, C., and Tarhan, A. 2003. Utilizing business process models for requirements elicitation. In Proceedings of the 29th Euromicro Conference, IEEE CS Press, 409--412.

Digital Library

[24]

Demirors, O. and Gencel, C. 2004. A Comparison of size estimation techniques applied early in the life cycle. European Software Process Improvement Conference (EurSPI 2004). Springer Verlag, Springer. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (LNCS), Vol. 3281, 184.

[25]

Desharnais, J. M. and Abran, A. 2003. Approximation techniques for measuring function points. In Proceedings of the 13th International Workshop on Software Measurement (IWSM 2003), 23--25 Sept. Montréal, Canada, Springer-Verlag, 270--286.

[26]

Fenton, N. E. and Pfleeger, S. L. 1996. Software Metrics: A Rigorous and Practical Approach, Second Edition, International Thomson Computer Press, Boston.

Digital Library

[27]

Fenton, N. 1994. Software measurement: A necessary scientific basis. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 20, 3, 199--206.

Digital Library

[28]

Fetcke T., Abran, A., and Dumke, R. 2001. A generalized representation for selected functional size measurement methods. In Current Trends in Software Measurement, R. Dumke and A. Abran, Eds. Shaker, 1--25.

[29]

Forselius, P. 2000. Benchmarking software-development productivity, IEEE Softw. 17, 1, 80--88.

Digital Library

[30]

Forselius, P. 2004. Finnish Software Measurement Association Functional Size. Finnish Software Metrics Association, Finland.

[31]

Gencel, C., Demirors, O., and Yuceer, E. 2005. A case study on using functional size measurement methods for real time systems. In Proceedings of the 15th. International Workshop on Software Measurement (IWSM), Sept. 2--14, Montreal, Canada, Shaker-Verlag, 159--178.

[32]

Gencel, C. 2005. An Architectural Dimensions Based Software Functional Size Measurement Method, a PhD Thesis Submitted to Dept. of Information Systems, Informatics Institute, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey.

[33]

Glass, R. L. 2002. Facts and Fallacies of Software Engineering, Addison Wesley.

Digital Library

[34]

Hastings, T. E. and Sajeev, A. S. M. 2001. A vector-based approach to software size measurement and effort estimation. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 27, 4, 337--350.

Digital Library

[35]

Henderson, G. S. 1992. The Application of Function Points to Predict Source Lines of Code for Software Development, An MSc Thesis submitted to Air Force Institute of Technology, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH, Report Number: AD-A258447, AFIT/GCA/LSY/92S-4.

[36]

Hughes, B. 2000. Practical Software Measurement, McGraw-Hill.

[37]

IEEE. 2000. IEEE Std. 14143.1: Implementation Note for IEEE Adoption of ISO/IEC 14143-1: 1998—Information Technology - Software Measurement- Functional Size Measurement - Part 1: Definition of Concepts.

[38]

IFPUG. 1999. IFPUG Counting Practices Manual - Release. 4.1, International Function Point Users Group, Westerville, OH.

[39]

ISBSG. 2005. Software Project Estimates - How accurate are they&quest; The International Software Benchmarking Standards Group Subscriber Newsletter, Vol. 4, No: 1.

[40]

ISBSG. 2004. ISBSG Dataset, http://www.isbsg.org.

[41]

ISO. 1998. ISO/IEC 14143-1: Information Technology - Software Measurement - Functional Size Measurement - Part 1: Definition of Concepts.

[42]

ISO. 2002a. ISO/IEC 14143-2: Information Technology - Software Measurement - Functional Size Measurement - Part 2: Conformity Evaluation of Software Size Measurement Methods to ISO/IEC 14143-1:1998.

[43]

ISO. 2003a. ISO/IEC TR 14143-3: Information Technology - Software Measurement - Functional Size Measurement - Part 3: Verification of Functional Size Measurement Methods.

[44]

ISO. 2002b. ISO/IEC TR 14143-4: Information Technology - Software Measurement - Functional Size Measurement - Part 4: Reference Model.

[45]

ISO. 2004. ISO/IEC TR 14143-5: Information Technology - Software Measurement - Functional Size Measurement - Part 5: Determination of Functional Domains for Use with Functional Size Measurement.

[46]

ISO. 2005a. ISO/IEC FCD 14143-6: Guide for the Use of ISO/IEC 14143 and Related International Standards.

[47]

ISO. 2003b. ISO/IEC 19761: COSMIC Full Function Points Measurement Manual, v.2.2.

[48]

ISO. 2003c. ISO/IEC 20926: Software Engineering - IFPUG 4.1 Unadjusted FSM Method - Counting Practices Manual.

[49]

ISO. 2002c. ISO/IEC 20968: Software Engineering - MkII Function Point Analysis - Counting Practices Manual.

[50]

ISO. 2005b. ISO/IEC 24570: Software Engineering - NESMA Functional Size Measurement Method v.2.1 - Definitions and Counting Guidelines for the Application of Function Point Analysis.

[51]

Jeffery, R. and Stathis, J. 1996. Function point sizing: structure, validity and applicability. J. Empir. Softw. Eng. 1, 1, 11--30.

[52]

Jeffery, R., Ruhe, M., and Wieczorek, I. 2000. A comparative study of two software development cost modeling techniques using multi-organizational and company-specific data, Inform. Softw. Tech. 42, 1009--1016.

[53]

Jones, T. C. 1987. A Short History of Function Points and Feature Points, Software Productivity Research Inc., USA.

[54]

Jones, T. C. 1997. Applied Software Measurement, Assuring Productivity and Quality, Second ed. New York, NY: McGraw Hill.

Digital Library

[55]

Jorgensen, M. and Molokken-Ostvold, K. 2004. Reasons for software effort estimation error: Impact of respondent role, information collection approach, and data analysis method, IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 30, 12, 993--1007.

Digital Library

[56]

Kammelar, J. 2000. A sizing approach for OO-environments. In Proceedings of the 4th International ECOOP Workshop on Quantitative Approaches in Object-Oriented Software Engineering.

[57]

Kauffman, R. and Kumar, R. 1997. Investigating object-based metrics for representing software output size. In Proceedings of the Conference on Information Systems and Technology (CIST). In the INFORMS 1997 Annual Conference, San Diego.

[58]

Kitchenham, B. and Kansala, K. 1993. Inter-item correlations among Function Points. In Proceedings of the First International Metrics Symposium (May 21--22). IEEE Computer Society, 11--14.

[59]

Kitchenham, B. 1997. The problem with Function Points. IEEE Softw. 14, 2, 29--31.

Digital Library

[60]

Kitchenham, B. and Mendes, E. 2004. Software productivity measurement using multiple size measures. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 30, 12, 1023--1035.

Digital Library

[61]

Leung, H. and Fan, Z. 2002. Software Cost Estimation, Handbook of Software Engineering, Hong Kong Polytechnic University.

[62]

Lokan, C. J. 1999. An empirical study of the correlations between Function Point elements. In Proceedings of the Sixth IEEE International Symposium on Software Metrics, Boca Raton, Florida, (Nov. 04--06), 200.

Digital Library

[63]

Lokan, C., Wright, T., Hill, P. R., and Stringer, M. 2001. Organizational benchmarking using the ISBSG data repository. IEEE Softw. 18, 5, 26--32.

Digital Library

[64]

Lother, M. and Dumke, R. 2001. Points metrics—comparison and analysis. In Proceedings of the International Workshop on Software Measurement (IWSM'01), Montréal, Québec, 155--172.

[65]

Matson, J. E., Barret, B. E., and Mellichamp, J. M. 1994. Software development cost estimation using Function Points. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 20, 4, 275--287.

Digital Library

[66]

Maxwell, K. D. 2001. Collecting data for comparability: Benchmarking software development productivity, IEEE Softw. 18, 5, 22--25.

Digital Library

[67]

Maya, M., Abran, A. Oligny, S. St-Pierre, D., and Desharnais, J. M. 1998. Measuring the functional size of real-time software. In Proceedings of the European Software Control and Metrics Conference, Maastricht, The Netherlands, 191--199.

[68]

Meli, R. 1997a. Early and extended Function Point: A new method for Function Points estimation. In Proceedings of the IFPUG-Fall Conference, 15--19 September, Scottsdale, Arizona.

[69]

Meli, R. 1997b. Early Function Points: A new estimation method for software projects. In Proceedings of ESCOM 97, Berlin, Germany.

[70]

Meli, R., Abran, A., Ho, V. T., and Oligny, S. 2000. On the applicability of COSMIC-FFP for measuring software throughout its life cycle. In Proceedings of the Escom-Scope, 2000.

[71]

Menzies, T., Chen, Z., Hihn, J., and Lum, K. 2006. Selecting best practices for effort estimation. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 32, 11, 883--895.

Digital Library

[72]

Morasca, S. and Russo, G. 2001. An empirical study of software productivity. In Proceedings of the 25th International Computer Software and Applications Conference on Invigorating Software Development, 317--322.

Digital Library

[73]

Nesma. 1997. Definitions and Counting Guidelines for the Application of Function Point Analysis, v.2.0.

[74]

Pastor, O., Abrahão, S. M., Molina, J. C., and Torres, I. 2001. A FPA-like measure for object oriented systems from conceptual models. In Proceedings of the 11th International Workshop on Software Measurement (IWSM'01), Montréal, Canada, Shaker Verlag, 51--69.

[75]

Premraj, R., Shepperd, M. J., Kitchenham, B. and Forselius, P. 2005. An empirical analysis of software productivity over time. In Proceedings of the 11th IEEE International Symposium on Software Metrics (Metrics 2005), IEEE Computer Society, 37.

Digital Library

[76]

Reifer, D. J. 1990. Asset-R: A function point sizing tool for scientific and real-time systems. J. Syst. Softw. 11, 3, 159--171.

Digital Library

[77]

Rollo, T. 2000. Sizing e-commerce. In Proceedings of the ACOSM 2000—Australian Conference on Software Measurement, Sydney.

[78]

Rollo, T. 2006. Functional size measurement and COCOMO—a synergistic approach. In Proceedings of Software Measurement European Forum (SMEF), Rome, Italy, 259--267.

[79]

RTCA/DO-178B: Software Considerations in Airborne Systems and Equipment Certification, 1992.

[80]

RTCA/DO-185A Vol. 2: Minimum Operational Performance Standards for Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance System II (TCAS II) Airborne Equipment.

[81]

Rule, G. 1999. A comparison of the Mark II and IFPUG variants of Function Point analysis [Online], http://www.gifpa.co.uk/library/Papers/Rule/MK2IFPUG.html.

[82]

Symons, C. 1988. Function Point analysis: Difficulties and improvements. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 14, 1, 2--11.

Digital Library

[83]

Symons, C. 1999. Conversion between IFPUG 4.0 and MkII Function Points, Software Measurement Services Ltd., Version 3.0.

[84]

Symons, C. 2001. Come back Function Point analysis (Modernized) -- All is Forgiven&excl;). In Proceeding of the 4th European Conference on Software Measurement and ICT Control (FESMA-DASMA 2001), Germany, 413--426.

[85]

Teologlou, G. 1999. Measuring OO Software with Predictive Object Points, Shaker Publ., ISBN 90-423-0075-2.

[86]

Tran-Cao, D., Lévesque, G., and Meunier, J. 2004. Software functional complexity measurement with the task complexity approach. In Proceedings of the International Conference on RIVF'04, (Feb. 2--5), Hanoi, Vietnam, 77-86.

[87]

Uksma. 1998. MkII Function Point Analysis Counting Practices Manual v. 1.3.1.

[88]

UNDERSTAND FOR C++, http://www.scitools.com/ucpp.html

[89]

Whitmire, S. A. 1992. 3D Function Points: Scientific and real-time extensions to Function Points. In Proceedings of the Pacific Northwest Software Quality Conference.

[90]

Yin R. K. 1994. Case Study Research: Design and Methods, Applied Social Research Methods Series, Vol. 5, 2nd ed., Sage Publications, Inc.

Cited By

Matalkah BEl-Adaileh NHajaya M(2025)A Hierarchical Software Quality Model for Estimating Function Point AnalysisWSEAS TRANSACTIONS ON INFORMATION SCIENCE AND APPLICATIONS10.37394/23209.2025.22.1522(153-165)Online publication date: 27-Jan-2025
https://doi.org/10.37394/23209.2025.22.15
Yürüm OÜnlü HDemirörs O(2024)Towards the Construction of a Software Benchmarking Dataset via Systematic Literature Review2024 50th Euromicro Conference on Software Engineering and Advanced Applications (SEAA)10.1109/SEAA64295.2024.00037(194-200)Online publication date: 28-Aug-2024
https://doi.org/10.1109/SEAA64295.2024.00037
Ünlü HKennouche DSoylu GDemirörs O(2024)Microservice-based projects in agile worldInformation and Software Technology10.1016/j.infsof.2023.107334165:COnline publication date: 1-Jan-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1016/j.infsof.2023.107334
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

Functional size measurement revisited
1. Social and professional topics
  1. Professional topics
    1. Management of computing and information systems
      1. Implementation management
        Pricing and resource allocation
2. Software and its engineering
  1. Software creation and management
    1. Software development techniques
      1. Reusability
        Software product lines
  2. Software notations and tools
    1. General programming languages
      1. Language types

Recommendations

Convertibility between IFPUG and COSMIC functional size measurements
PROFES'07: Proceedings of the 8th international conference on Product-Focused Software Process Improvement

Since 1984 the International Function Point Users Group (IFPUG) has produced and maintained a set of standards and technical documents about a functional size measurement methods, known as IFPUG, based on Albrecht Fuction Points. On the other hand, in ...
On the conversion between IFPUG and COSMIC software functional size units: A theoretical and empirical study

Since 1984 the International Function Point Users Group (IFPUG) has produced and maintained a set of standards and technical documents about a functional size measurement methods, known as IFPUG, based on Albrecht function points. On the other hand, in ...
The Impact of Individual Assumptions on Functional Size Measurement
IWSM/Metrikon/Mensura '08: Proceedings of the International Conferences on Software Process and Product Measurement

Having been improved, evolved and standardized by the Organiza-tion for Standardization (ISO), Functional Size Measurement (FSM) methods have become widely used. However, the measurers still face difficulties in measuring the software products which ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology

ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology Volume 17, Issue 3

June 2008

133 pages

ISSN:1049-331X

EISSN:1557-7392

DOI:10.1145/1363102

Issue’s Table of Contents

Copyright © 2008 ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 27 June 2008

Accepted: 01 April 2007

Revised: 01 January 2007

Received: 01 June 2006

Published in TOSEM Volume 17, Issue 3

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article
Research
Refereed

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

78
Total Citations
View Citations
1,915
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)20
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)1

Reflects downloads up to 07 Mar 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Matalkah BEl-Adaileh NHajaya M(2025)A Hierarchical Software Quality Model for Estimating Function Point AnalysisWSEAS TRANSACTIONS ON INFORMATION SCIENCE AND APPLICATIONS10.37394/23209.2025.22.1522(153-165)Online publication date: 27-Jan-2025
https://doi.org/10.37394/23209.2025.22.15
Yürüm OÜnlü HDemirörs O(2024)Towards the Construction of a Software Benchmarking Dataset via Systematic Literature Review2024 50th Euromicro Conference on Software Engineering and Advanced Applications (SEAA)10.1109/SEAA64295.2024.00037(194-200)Online publication date: 28-Aug-2024
https://doi.org/10.1109/SEAA64295.2024.00037
Ünlü HKennouche DSoylu GDemirörs O(2024)Microservice-based projects in agile worldInformation and Software Technology10.1016/j.infsof.2023.107334165:COnline publication date: 1-Jan-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1016/j.infsof.2023.107334
Hacaloglu TDemirors O(2023)An exploratory case study using events as a software size measureInformation Technology and Management10.1007/s10799-023-00394-y24:3(293-312)Online publication date: 13-Apr-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s10799-023-00394-y
Sarro FMoussa RPetrozziello AHarman M(2022)Learning From Mistakes: Machine Learning Enhanced Human Expert Effort EstimatesIEEE Transactions on Software Engineering10.1109/TSE.2020.304079348:6(1868-1882)Online publication date: 1-Jun-2022
https://doi.org/10.1109/TSE.2020.3040793
Hai VNhung HHoc H(2021)Calibrating Function Complexity in Enhancement Project for Improving Function Points Analysis EstimationSoftware Engineering Application in Informatics10.1007/978-3-030-90318-3_67(857-869)Online publication date: 17-Nov-2021
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-90318-3_67
Van Hai VLe Thi Kim Nhung HHoc H(2021)Empirical Evidence in Early Stage Software Effort Estimation Using Data Flow DiagramSoftware Engineering and Algorithms10.1007/978-3-030-77442-4_53(632-644)Online publication date: 20-Jul-2021
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-77442-4_53
Ozen OOzsoy BAktilav BGulec EDemirors O(2020)Automated Estimation of Functional Size from Code2020 Turkish National Software Engineering Symposium (UYMS)10.1109/UYMS50627.2020.9247067(1-7)Online publication date: 7-Oct-2020
https://doi.org/10.1109/UYMS50627.2020.9247067
Martino SFerrucci FGravino CSarro F(2020)Assessing the Effectiveness of Approximate Functional Sizing Approaches for Effort EstimationInformation and Software Technology10.1016/j.infsof.2020.106308(106308)Online publication date: Mar-2020
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2020.106308
De Vito GFerrucci FGravino C(2020)Design and automation of a COSMIC measurement procedure based on UML modelsSoftware and Systems Modeling (SoSyM)10.1007/s10270-019-00731-219:1(171-198)Online publication date: 1-Jan-2020
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s10270-019-00731-2
Show More Cited By

View Options

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Article

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Figures

Tables

Media

View Issue’s Table of Contents