The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Top 10 list [software development]
Abstract
Software's complexity and accelerated development schedules make avoiding defects difficult. We have found, however, that researchers have established objective and quantitative data, relationships, and predictive models that help software developers avoid predictable pitfalls and improve their ability to predict and control efficient software projects. The article presents 10 techniques that can help reduce the flaws in your code.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Mohr, D. C., Lyon, A. R., Lattie, E. G., Reddy, M., & Schueller, S. M. (2017) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/jmir.7725 · Cited by 432
Learning a Metric for Code Readability
Buse, R. P. L., & Weimer, W. R. (2010) · IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering · doi:10.1109/tse.2009.70 · Cited by 396
(2014) · doi:10.1145/2597073.2597082 · Cited by 252
Wahono (2007) · doi:10.3923/jse.2007.1.12 · Cited by 113
End-user debugging strategies: A sensemaking perspective
Grigoreanu, V., Burnett, M., Wiedenbeck, S., Cao, J., Rector, K., & Kwan, I. (2012) · ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction · doi:10.1145/2147783.2147788 · Cited by 60
Metadata
- Authors
- Boehm, B., & Basili, V. R.
- Venue
- Computer
- Published
- 2001
- Volume
- 34
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 135-137
- ISSN
- 0018-9162 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1986736724
- Cited by
- 814
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 63.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Top 10 list [software development]. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/2.962984
- The paper
- Boehm, B., & Basili, V. R. (2001). Top 10 list [software development]. Computer. https://doi.org/10.1109/2.962984
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
