More Related Content
Similar to Comparing Software Quality Assurance Techniques And Activities (20)
Comparing Software Quality Assurance Techniques And Activities
- 1. Lemia Alamin Algmri Kansaa Abubaker
- 2. The quality assurance techniques and activities (Alternatives) which we will be compare : QA Techniques Testing Inspection Defect prevention formal verification fault tolerancefailure containment
- 3. Comparison of the different quality assurance (QA) techniques and activities will achieve by examining many questions and criteria related to : their effectiveness in dealing with different types of problems. their cost. their applicability under different environments and development phases.
- 4. comparing different QA alternatives by examining the: specific perspectives of defect they are dealing with, kind of problems they are good at addressing, their suitability to different defect levels and pervasiveness, their ability to provide additional information for quality improvement.
- 5. Defect perspective: Examine is the QA technique dealing with errors, faults, or failures? This examination can be broken down into two parts : i. Detection or observation of specific problems from specific defect perspectives. ii. Types of follow-up actions that deal with the observed or detected problems.
- 6. Defect PerspectiveQA Alternative At Follow-up(& Action)At Observation fault removalfailurestesting reduced fault injectionerrors & error sourcesdefect prevention fault removalfaultsinspection fault absence verified(absence of) faultsformal verification global failures avoidedlocal failuresfault tolerance hazards resolution & damage reduction accidentsfailure containment The table show the Defect observed and dealt with by different QA alternatives
- 7. Problem types: Different QA alternative might be effective for different types of problems, including dealing with different perspectives of defects. the table show the main problem types dealt with by different QA alternatives Problem TypesQA Alternative systematic errors or conceptual mistakes (by programmer, designer) defect prevention dynamic failures & related faultstesting static & localized faultsinspection logical faults, indirectlyformal verification operational failures in small areasfault tolerance accidents and related hazardsfailure containment
- 8. difference in detected defects can be explained by the following differences between the two types of QA alternatives: inspection vs testing : Inspection identifies faults directly by examining the software artifact, while testing observing failure but identifies faults indirectly later by utilizing the recorded execution information. It is hard for human inspectors to keep track of complicated interactions over time not like computer, therefore testing is generally better at detecting interaction problems Human inspectors can focus on a small area and perform in- depth analysis, so leading to effective detection of localized faults.
- 9. Defect level and pervasiveness: Defect LevelQA Alternative low - mediumtesting low - high (particularly pervasive problems) defect prevention medium - highinspection lowformal verification lowfault tolerance Lowestfailure containment Defect levels where different QA alternatives are suitable:
- 10. Result interpretation and constructive information: Ease of result interpretation for different QA alternatives and amount of constructive information/measurements Information/MeasurementResult InterpretationQA Alternative executions & failuresmoderatetesting experience(intangible)defect prevention faults, already locatedeasyinspection fault absence verifiedhardformal verification (unanticipated) environments/usages hardfault tolerance accident scenarios and hazards hardfailure containment
- 11. We can first divide our examination of the applicability environments into two: Development environment maintenance environment
- 12. the applicability to software maintenance may vary, as follows: Defect prevention techniques are typically not applicable to the software maintenance process Inspection, formal verification, and testing can be applied to a very limited degree to software maintenance process Defect containment alternatives, such as fault tolerance and failure containment, apply to software in operation and also can be applied to the software maintenance process.
- 13. the development process related activities and phases the general project environment.
- 14. ObjectQA Alternative (executable) codeTesting (implementation activities)defect prevention design, code, and other software artifacts inspection design/code with formal specification formal verification operational software systemfault tolerance system with potential accidentsfailure containment Objects of QA alternatives
- 15. Development Activity/PhaseQA Alternative testing phase and aftertesting implementation (req/spec/design/coding) defect prevention allinspection design/codingformal verification in-field operationfault tolerance in-field operationfailure containment Development activities where different QA alternatives are applicable
- 16. Required participant expertise Required expertise and background knowledge for people to perform different QA alternatives Background KnowledgeExpertise LevelQA Alternative low - hightesting medium – highdefect prevention low - mediuminspection formal traininghighformal verification dynamic systemshighfault tolerance safety, embedded systems highfailure containment
- 17. The direct cost for carrying out the planned QA activities typically involves: the time and effort of the software professionals who perform related activities and the consumption of other resources such as computer systems and supporting facilities.
- 18. there are also indirect costs, such as: training project participants acquisition and support for related software tools meeting time and other overhead.
- 19. There are several factors affecting the above total cost Simplicity of the techniques associated with the specific QA alternatives Availability of tool support also has a significant influence on the cost of specific QA alternatives.
- 20. effort of detecting problems effort of fixing the problems the defect prevention techniques fault tolerance failure containment
- 21. For the cases of fault tolerance and failure containment, the cost includes three parts: Operational cost of having specific mechanisms in the operational systems. Implementation cost to design, implement, and assure selected features and mechanisms. Failure or accident cost
- 22. Cost: Cost comparison for different QA alternatives costQA Alternative medium (low - high)testing Lowdefect prevention low - mediuminspection highformal verification highfault tolerance highestfailure containment
- 23. Questions ?