A Comparative Study of Different Software Complexity Metrics in Measuring Software Interoperability

Main Article Content

Udara Rangika Herath
Dilshan De Silva
Virajini Godapitiya
Piumi Navoda Wanni Arachchige
Heshan Kotuwe Gedara
Rashmi Premadasa

Abstract

Software interoperability is crucial for organizations that rely on multiple software systems to perform their operations. However, due to the complexity and variety of software systems, ensuring interoperability can be difficult. Measuring software complexity metrics can be used to identify potential problems and assess how well different interoperability strategies work. In this study, we investigated and compared the effectiveness of different software complexity metrics in measuring software interoperability. We used statistical methods to analyze data collected from a sample of software systems. The results of our study show that certain metrics, such as coupling and cohesion, are more effective than others in measuring software interoperability. By selecting appropriate metrics, developers can ensure better productivity, lower costs, and more adaptable use of software systems. The findings of this study have implications for the creation of software and can guide businesses in choosing the right criteria to achieve software interoperability.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
[1]
Udara Rangika Herath, Dilshan De Silva, Virajini Godapitiya, Piumi Navoda Wanni Arachchige, Heshan Kotuwe Gedara, and Rashmi Premadasa , Trans., “A Comparative Study of Different Software Complexity Metrics in Measuring Software Interoperability”, IJSEPM, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 1–4, Dec. 2023, doi: 10.54105/ijsepm.B7652.073223.
Section
Articles

How to Cite

[1]
Udara Rangika Herath, Dilshan De Silva, Virajini Godapitiya, Piumi Navoda Wanni Arachchige, Heshan Kotuwe Gedara, and Rashmi Premadasa , Trans., “A Comparative Study of Different Software Complexity Metrics in Measuring Software Interoperability”, IJSEPM, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 1–4, Dec. 2023, doi: 10.54105/ijsepm.B7652.073223.
Share |

References

Kim, J. (2019). Interoperability in software engineering: A systematic review. Information and Software Technology, 106, 1-17. doi: 10.1016/j.infsof.2018.09.004 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2018.09.004

Satyanarayanan, M. (2018). Interoperability: What it is and why it matters. Communications of the ACM, 61(10), 29-31. doi: 10.1145/3267300

W3C. (n.d.). World Wide Web Consortium. Retrieved, [Online] Available : https://www.w3.org/

OGC. (n.d.). Open Geospatial Consortium. Retrieved, [Online] Available: https://www.ogc.org/

OMG. (n.d.). Object Management Group. Retrieved, [Online] Available: https://www.omg.org/

Shepperd, M., & Kadoda, G. (2002). Measuring software complexity: a case study in interoperability. Journal of Systems and Software, 60(1), 23-32. doi: 10.1016/s0164-1212(01)00174-1.

Chang, C. K., & Yeh, Y. S. (2010). Comparing software complexity metrics for measuring software interoperability. Journal of Systems and Software, 83(3), 390-401. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2009.09.033. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2009.09.033

Oussalah, M., & Boufaïda, Z. (2014). Software complexity metrics for measuring software interoperability: a comparative study. Procedia Computer Science, 32, 1024-1031. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2014.05.459

Chang, C. K., & Yeh, Y. S. (2010). Comparing software complexity metrics for measuring software interoperability. Journal of Systems and Software, 83(3), 390-401. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2009.09.033

Oussalah, M., & Boufaïda, Z. (2014). Software complexity metrics for measuring software interoperability: a comparative study. Procedia Computer Science, 32, 1024-1031. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2014.05.459

Chang, C. K., & Yeh, C. W. (2010). The comparison of software complexity metrics for measuring software interoperability. Journal of Systems and Software, 83(6), 962-971. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2009.11.778

Oussalah, M., & Boufaïda, Z. (2014). Measuring software interoperability based on software complexity metrics: A comparative study. Journal of Software: Evolution and Process, 26(8), 745-761. https://doi.org/10.1002/smr.1601

Babu, G. V. S., & Menon, R. (2018). A comparative study of software complexity metrics for measuring interoperability of software systems. In 2018 3rd International Conference on Computational Systems and Information Technology for Sustainable Solution (CSITSS) (pp. 7-11). IEEE. doi: 10.1109/CSITSS.2018.8539826

Bhardwaj, N., & Singh, R. (2019). A comparative study of software complexity metrics in measuring interoperability of software systems. In 2019 5th International Conference on Computing Sciences (ICCS) (pp. 1-6). IEEE. doi: 10.1109/ICCS46853.2019.8988061

Apache Hadoop website [Online] Available : https://hadoop.apache.org/

Kreps, J., Narkhede, N., & Rao, J. (2011). Kafka: A distributed messaging system for log processing. In Proceedings of the NetDB (Vol. 11, pp. 1-7)

Toshniwal, A., Taneja, S., Shukla, A., Ramasamy, K., Patel, J. M., Kulkarni, S. R., ... & Murthy, R. (2014, October).

Abadi, M., Barham, P., Chen, J., Chen, Z., Davis, A., Dean, J., ... & Kudlur, M. (2016). TensorFlow: A system for large-scale machine learning. In 12th USENIX Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation (OSDI 16) (pp. 265-283).

Paszke, A., Gross, S., Chintala, S., Chanan, G., Yang, E., DeVito, Z., ... & Lerer, A. (2017). Automatic differentiation in PyTorch. In NIPS-W (pp. 1-4).

Babu, G. V. S., & Menon, R. (2018). A comparative study of software complexity metrics for measuring interoperability of software systems. In 2018 3rd International Conference on Computational Systems and Information Technology for Sustainable Solution (CSITSS) (pp. 7-11). IEEE. doi: 10.1109/CSITSS.2018.8539826

Chang, C. K., & Yeh, C. W. (2010). The comparison of software complexity metrics for measuring software interoperability. Journal of Systems and Software, 83(6), 962-971. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2009.11.778

Walia, G., & Kaur, A. (2019). A systematic review on software complexity metrics. Journal of Systems and Software, 157, 110406. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2019.11040

Most read articles by the same author(s)