The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A Review and Evaluation of Software Science
Open accessAbstract
During recent years, there have been many attempts to define and measure the "complexity" of a computer program.Maurme Halstead has developed a theory that gives objective measures of software complexity.Various studms and experiments have shown that the theory's predictmns of the number of bugs in programs and of the time required to implement a program are amazingly accurate.It is a promising theory worthy of much more probing scientific investigation.This paper reviews the theory, called "software science," and the evidence supporting it.A bmef description of a related theory, called "software physics," is included.
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
The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information.
Miller, G. A. (1956) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/h0043158 · Cited by 17,812
Cited by
Programs, life cycles, and laws of software evolution
Lehman, M. M. (1980) · Proceedings of the IEEE · doi:10.1109/proc.1980.11805 · Cited by 1,181
Curtis, B., Sheppard, S. B., Milliman, P., Borst, M. A., & Love, T. (1979) · IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering · doi:10.1109/tse.1979.234165 · Cited by 288
Self-citationComputer algorithms for plagiarism detection
Parker, A., & Hamblen, J. O. (1989) · IEEE Transactions on Education · doi:10.1109/13.28038 · Cited by 216
Metadata
- Authors
- Fitzsimmons, A., & Love, T.
- Venue
- ACM Computing Surveys
- Published
- 1978-03
- Volume
- 10
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 3-18
- ISSN
- 0360-0300 (ISSN-L)
- 1557-7341
- OpenAlex
- W2013940063
- Cited by
- 183
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 133.10
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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 Review and Evaluation of Software Science. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1145/356715.356717
- The paper
- Fitzsimmons, A., & Love, T. (1978). A Review and Evaluation of Software Science. ACM Computing Surveys. https://doi.org/10.1145/356715.356717
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.
