The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Optimizing Preventive Service of Software Products
Abstract
The implementer of a large, complex software system cannot make it completely defect free, so he must normally provide fixes for defects found after the code is put into service. A system user may do preventive service by installing these fixes before the defects cause him problems. Preventive service can benefit both the software developer and the software user to the extent that it reduces the number of operational problems caused by software errors, but it requires the expenditure of the resources required to prepare, disseminate, and install fixes; and it can be the cause of additional software problems caused by design errors introduced into the code by fixes. The benefit from removing a given defect depends on how many problems it would otherwise cause. Benefits may be estimated by modeling problem occurrence as a random process in execution time governed by a distribution of characteristic rates. It is found that most of the benefit to be realized by preventive service comes from removing a relatively small number of high-rate defects that are found early in the service life of the code. For the typical user corrective service would seem preferable to preventive service as a way of dealing with most defects found after code has had some hundreds of months of usage.
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
Fenton, N. E., & Neil, M. (2000) · Proceedings of the Conference on The Future of Software Engineering · doi:10.1145/336512.336588 · Cited by 317
Metadata
- Authors
- Adams, E. N.
- Venue
- IBM Journal of Research and Development
- Publisher
- IBM
- Published
- 1984-01
- Volume
- 28
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 2-14
- ISSN
- 0018-8646 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2079729471
- Cited by
- 373
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 23.35
- 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
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.