The DOI matches its Crossref record.
A metrics suite for object oriented design
Open accessAbstract
Given the central role that software development plays in the delivery and application of information technology, managers are increasingly focusing on process improvement in the software development area. This demand has spurred the provision of a number of new and/or improved approaches to software development, with perhaps the most prominent being object-orientation (OO). In addition, the focus on process improvement has increased the demand for software measures, or metrics with which to manage the process. The need for such metrics is particularly acute when an organization is adopting a new technology for which established practices have yet to be developed. This research addresses these needs through the development and implementation of a new suite of metrics for OO design. Metrics developed in previous research, while contributing to the field's understanding of software development processes, have generally been subject to serious criticisms, including the lack of a theoretical base. Following Wand and Weber (1989), the theoretical base chosen for the metrics was the ontology of Bunge (1977). Six design metrics are developed, and then analytically evaluated against Weyuker's (1988) proposed set of measurement principles. An automated data collection tool was then developed and implemented to collect an empirical sample of these metrics at two field sites in order to demonstrate their feasibility and suggest ways in which managers may use these metrics for process improvement.>
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
A hierarchical model for object-oriented design quality assessment
Bansiya, J., & Davis, C. G. (2002) · IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering · doi:10.1109/32.979986 · Cited by 1,020
Exploring the relationships between design measures and software quality in object-oriented systems
Briand, L. C., Wüst, J., Daly, J. W., & Victor Porter, D. (2000) · Journal of Systems and Software · doi:10.1016/s0164-1212(99)00102-8 · Cited by 710
Automatically learning semantic features for defect prediction
Wang, S., Liu, T., & Tan, L. (2016) · Proceedings of the 38th International Conference on Software Engineering · doi:10.1145/2884781.2884804 · Cited by 689
A systematic review of machine learning techniques for software fault prediction
Malhotra, R. (2015) · Applied Soft Computing · doi:10.1016/j.asoc.2014.11.023 · Cited by 620
Object-Oriented Metrics in Practice
(2006) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/3-540-39538-5 · Cited by 527
Metadata
- Authors
- Chidamber, S. R., & Kemerer, C. F.
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering
- Published
- 1994-06
- Volume
- 20
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 476-493
- ISSN
- 0098-5589 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-3520
- 2326-3881
- OpenAlex
- W2158864412
- Cited by
- 5,669
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 103.94
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: A metrics suite for object oriented design. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/32.295895
- The paper
- Chidamber, S. R., & Kemerer, C. F. (1994). A metrics suite for object oriented design. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering. https://doi.org/10.1109/32.295895
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.