The DOI matches its Crossref record; 61 of the 61 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Understanding and controlling software costs
Abstract
A discussion is presented of the two primary ways of understanding software costs. The black-box or influence-function approach provides useful experimental and observational insights on the relative software productivity and quality leverage of various management, technical, environmental, and personnel options. The glass-box or cost distribution approach helps identify strategies for integrated software productivity and quality improvement programs using such structures as the value chain and the software productivity opportunity tree. The individual strategies for improving software productivity are identified. Issues related to software costs and controlling them are examined and discussed. It is pointed out that a good framework of techniques exists for controlling software budgets, schedules, and work completed, but that a great deal of further progress is needed to provide an overall set of planning and control techniques covering software product qualities and end-user system objectives.>
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
Cites
Competitive Strategy: Techniques for Analyzing Industries and Competitors
(1980) · Journal of Sustainable Competitive Intelligence · doi:10.24883/iberoamericanic.v2i2.38 · Cited by 16,592
McCabe, T. J. (1976) · IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering · doi:10.1109/tse.1976.233837 · Cited by 6,059
Software Engineering Economics
Boehm, B. W. (2001) · Pioneers and Their Contributions to Software Engineering · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-48354-7_5 · Cited by 5,981
Self-citationA spiral model of software development and enhancement
Boehm, B. W. (1988) · Computer · doi:10.1109/2.59 · Cited by 4,972
Self-citationBrooks, F. P. (1975) · ACM SIGPLAN Notices · doi:10.1145/390016.808439 · Cited by 3,224
Halstead, M. H. (1977) · CERN Document Server (European Organization for Nuclear Research) · Cited by 2,930
Halstead, M. H. (1977) · CERN Document Server (European Organization for Nuclear Research) · Cited by 2,339
Designing for usability: key principles and what designers think
Gould, J. D., & Lewis, C. (1985) · Communications of the ACM · doi:10.1145/3166.3170 · Cited by 2,066
Design and code inspections to reduce errors in program development
Fagan, M. E. (1976) · IBM Systems Journal · doi:10.1147/sj.153.0182 · Cited by 1,492
Measuring application development productivity
Albrecht, A. (1979) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 1,119
Cited by
Davis, F. D., & Venkatesh, V. (2004) · IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management · doi:10.1109/tem.2003.822468 · Cited by 582
People, organizations, and process improvement
Perry, D. E., Staudenmayer, N. A., & Votta, L. G. (1994) · IEEE Software · doi:10.1109/52.300082 · Cited by 401
(2015) · doi:10.1007/s10664-013-9279-3 · Cited by 273
Graziotin, D., Wang, X., & Abrahamsson, P. (2015) · Journal of Software: Evolution and Process · doi:10.1002/smr.1673 · Cited by 126
A Systematic Review of Productivity Factors in Software Development
Wagner, S., & Ruhe, M. (2018) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1801.06475 · Cited by 114
Metadata
- Authors
- Boehm, B. W., & Papaccio, P. N.
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering
- Published
- 1988
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 1462-1477
- ISSN
- 0098-5589 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2021503621
- Cited by
- 667
- References
- 61
- FWCI
- 59.69
- 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: Understanding and controlling software costs. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/32.6191
- The paper
- Boehm, B. W., & Papaccio, P. N. (1988). Understanding and controlling software costs. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering. https://doi.org/10.1109/32.6191
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.
