Reliability Metrics for Software Quality

1 1 2 1 1
MariaUsman , Nouman Ali , Usman Habib , SaadatHanif Dar , Tehmina Khalil

1. Department of Software Engineering, Mirpur University of Science and Technology

(MUST), Mirpur-10250 (AJK), Pakistan
2. Department of computer science, FAST National University of Computers &
Emerging Sciences (NUCES), Peshawar campus, Pakistan

Correspondance author: [email protected]

Abstract:Reliability metrics provide a foundation for quantitative development and

prediction of software development process. We prove reliability metrics on software
products and also discussvarious views on software quality. Moreover, reliability metric
models have been developed that promote utilization and resulting of remarkable success.
This paper focuses on the area of the software engineering to see the importance of these
reliability metrics, why they are needed where used. The results of these metrics can also be
improved further as we attain additional understanding with the variety of reliability metrics.
These experiences can yield significant benefits and betterment in quality and reliability. We
do comparison of reliability models has been done in this study and see which models is
better and why.

Keywords:Reliability metrics; different views; software reliability factors; software

quality; product metrics; Reliability metrics analysis model.

1. Introduction
Software reliability is defined as: “The possibility of a given system executing its task
effectively for a quantified amount of time under its proposed operating environment [1]. The
probability of the software that it will provide free of error operation for a given amount of
time under suitable condition. [2].We calculate reliability as [3]: Reliability = 1 – E/ L,
where as E represents number of errors means actual error and L represents total number of
lines means executable lines of code.
Initially, we measure software reliability by counting the numbers of faults in the system. The
possibility of the failure is independent of time. The possibility of the failure means failure of
the software. It is likely different from program correctness. It means the program is correct
and consistent or reliable with its specified environment when it satisfies its desired
specification and respond to a specific event in a particular time interval. A program is
inconsistent or unreliable when it doesn’t satisfies itssystem specification and doesn’t
respond to an event in a given time interval and it is not able to cover errors.
In software development, reliability is calculated as correctness and correctness means the
number of faults detected from the system and then fix it through reliability, we are better
able to develop a robust and high quality product Software reliability becomes the most
crucial part in the quality of software in the industry.
Quality of software is the most significant aspect of software reliability. Reliability means
providing a software that meet customer’s specification and it satisfy customerSoftware
reliability is divided into three categories. The first one is modelling and it provides a
foundation to software reliability and give knowledge about different models of reliability
and tell us which model is more appropriate for specific condition/ environment. Second one
is measurement it provides reliability metrics for the purpose of validation. The third and last
step is to provide improvement. If some fault is detected from overall process it should be
removed. Some factor required to measure the improvement of reliability because it is not
measured directly. There are various models used for software reliability and they are not
unique for all situation. Although some functionalities may be same in some model but they
are modeled to handle specific condition. Key characteristics of software reliability is that it
first create, review and then validate it. Software Reliability is mandatory and hard to
achieve, but it is the most important factor for the success of the product. It can be improved
by better understanding of the reliability characteristics for the software. Testing will
ultimately improve the reliability of product, but complete testing of product is not
possible[4]. The question arises, why we need measurements for software reliability? The
answer to make our product defect free. Although every products have problem it is not
completely bug free. The product is defect free means that important functionalities working
correctly.
In this paper we have discusses different reliability models, reliability metrics, software
reliability metrics, different views of reliability metrics and finally we compare reliability
model for Component Based System and reliability models for soft computing techniques.
And finally we conclude our result based on the validation procedure they follow.
Component Based Systems mainly depend upon the interaction among different components
of the system and it depends upon the dependences among system. When dependency level
increases it leads to the complex system. The estimation of these systems are mainly based on
reliability and it is bit lengthy task. There are different types of CBS discussed in section 7.
Soft computing techniques mainly focuses on the different concepts of computing related to
real life. Its main aim is to overcome the problem associated to real life. It is an association of
different computing approaches such as neural network (NN),Fuzzy Logic (FL) etc.
The finding reveals that Soft computing Techniques are more suitable for complex system
and also for critical system where human factor involves and validation is mandatory without
validation we cannot move. Where as Component Based System works with the interaction
of elements it is more suitable for case studies and also for experimental results.
The paper is structured as follows. We discuss reliability models in Section 2, reliability
metrics in section 3, in section 4 we discuss software metrics We present Reliability Metrics
in Section 4, Software Metrics for Reliability are presented in Section 5, in Section 5 we
discuss measurement factors for reliability, section 6 focuses on the comparison of the CBS
and soft computing techniques, results and discussion discussed in section 7 and finally
conclude our discussion in Section 8.
2. RELIABILITY MODELS
Reliability models assume the failure in the software that are independent to each other. It
characterize the instance of the failures in random process and study software failure as the
instance time. There are mainly three models of reliability. That are usage model, trend
model, and probabilistic failure model. The models discussed here are inherent from these
three models. We are going to discuss the reliability models that are used now a days. The
working of reliability model shown in Figure 3: [5]

RELI ABI LI TY M ODEL

Figure 1. Reliability model

Li Xiao-hua et al. [6]gave us a more particle model of reliability that is based on components
of software and its architecture. It is based on semi-Markov chain and give us a quantitative
evaluation of the digital protection of software. Related with software module and material
architecture and also the reliability model and then converted into semi Markov that is based
on the software architecture module. Used for complex system for calculating paratactic and
study the sensitivity of reliability factors and get higher quality software.
Usage Model described how the system is used. Harb et al. [7] gave us a new way to
calculate the Mean Time between Failures (MTBF) for the (photovoltaic module-integrated
inverter)PV-MII and it is applied on a usage model of reliability to find the statistical
distribution of electrical components. The modulate integrated electronics and operating
environment volatility used for the calculation of Mean Time between Failure of MII and it
gives a realistic assessment of the reliability. The results show that electrolytic capacitor have
a low MTBF and give us realistic MTBF.
Ullah et al. [8]provided a systematic approach that extend the validation of reliability
models. Evaluates the eight reliability models and observe which one of the best model. By
determining the number of faults left and provide a practical support to managers. The main
aim is to focus on supporting the practitioners and characterize the reliability of the OSS
model in the terms of defects remains in the system and help to achieve large goals and helps
managers to make decisions on OSS use. Experiments done on four models that are
Generalized Goel, Delayed S-shaped, Gompertz, Logistics. The results show that Delayed S
shaped to give better results as compare to others.
Mohit et al.[9] gave us an improved version of reliability tool i.e. CASRE (Computer
Aided Software Reliability Estimation) and the improved version of the reliability tool is
named as Improved Software Reliability Estimation Tool (ISRET). The results taken by
Improved Software Reliability Estimation Tool are better than that of CASRE another
advantage of Improved Software Reliability Estimation Tool is that it works with any version
of Windows.
Mirjafariet al. [10]presented a usage model for photovoltaic (PV) convertor to find the
efficiency. Record the maximum power point of current and voltage from the actual value of
solar module and then calculated the weighted efficiency. It gives better results while
comparing the performance of CEC.
 A. Barabadi et al.[11] presented an effective reliability model for multi release OSS
based on Jørgensen model based on SDLC (Software Development Life Cycle). Based on the
unique characteristics of OSS model and remove bugs from parallel debugging test phases
and pre-commit test. It depends on the total number of faults removed in new release and the
number of faults reported in previous release. The parameters of this model depend on the
three releases of the Apache project. The comparison made based on three models and then
select the suitable reliability model and also propose changes point concept that it capture
fault with minimum number of error percentage.
Noorossanaet al.[12] introduce a reliability model for risky system and for random usage.
Haphazard usage, random shocks and Degradation processare the main reason for the failure
of the system. They proposed a reliability model maximizes the system availiability and
called it condition-based maintenance model. Maintenance model is considered and compare
their policies with numerical examples. System monitoring sensors and maintenance action
are not always perfect that’s why maintenance and reliability models are again considered
this issue and restart the process.
Yuanjie Si et al.[13] gave us component based software system for an architecture based
bottom up reliability estimation framework. This approach takes utilization frequency and
composition mechanism for each component and takes different architectural styles
Trend Model describes how the bugs are being fixed. Romney B et al.[14] focuses on
mathematical models of learning theory and during testing phase it searches the evidence
from learning trends. Learning models such as Stevens’s equation and then applied to
datasets of historical literature review. Historical Literature is not able to provide evidence for
learning additional faults are included in the system. Results show that learning models can
predict remaining failures in the software than that of traditional proposed techniques. And
these traditional techniques are based on nonhomogeneous Poisson process.
Sharmet al.[15] gave us a framework that evaluates the reliability from probe-sourced
traffic speed data for the assessment of general infrastructure performance and also
congestion detection. To find the similarities and dissimilarities from probe- sourced it used
time series analysis and pattern recognition. Reliability is estimated based on synchrony and
similarity between corresponding trends. Synchrony used to measure short and medium the
accuracy of congestion detection and long term is used to measure the performance
assessment. It supports a state of DOTs.
Probabilistic failure model defines how to capture the fact that failure may be happening.
Liu et al.[16] presented a more realistic probabilistic region failure (PRF) model that capture
some important features that correlate the geographical region of failure and then develop a
framework that apply the probabilistic region failure for the assessment of wireless mesh
network reliability. It selects appropriate routing and protection strategy for failure of the
region and identify geographical distribution the worst case of degradation of network
performance from PRF and do we achieve failure-resilient network design. It is cost efficient.
Lorenzo et al.[17] extended the fault tolerance models and present a technique that will
cover the non independent development in the process of diverse version. It gives us a way to
open questing and farming claim about how to purse the diversity and the positive and
negative effect of commonalities between developments from correction of the specification
to the test case selection. How to improve the reliability of expected system by creating
intentionally negative dependencies in the system and create a relation between the
developments of different iterations. This gives better results while extended the preference
and removing the commonalities in the different version of the development of the product
and help to identify damage and uncertain effect.
Bing Zhu et al.[18] presented a distributed storage system that will provide data
redundancy, guarantee reliability and fault tolerance. The conventional replication scheme
(CRS) is not efficient, but the storage emerging coding techniques such as FRC (fractional
repetition codes) is more efficient and provide redundancy than that of (CRS). It is applied to
the storage system and where different capacity of storage. It is evaluated based on node
repair metric and it measure the subsets of different nodes and then repaired the failed node.
Fan et al.[19] presented time series models that examine the construction, reliability
analysis and forecasting failures. It is mainly concerned on expected number of failures per
interval and Mean Time between Failures. Experimental results shows that this model is
suitable for selection of system reliability assessment and right maintenance strategy are the
most important tool for decision makers, model is also used for FRMCE forecasting of
reliability metrics of construction equipment and also flexible. The significant of this wok is
validated from literature review.
FAQIH et al [20] investigated the issues and critical factors that may lead to poor
performance of reliability models. Software Reliability Models are unable to deliver the
expected outcome. The reason behind is that performance inefficiency is that software
reliability models are inefficient and 14 major flaws in their attributes and it has been
explored. The study suggests that contemporary methodologies are immature in the reliability
concept of application.
Z. Zeng et al, [21] proposed a belief reliability model to evaluate the effectiveness of
reliability models with respect to epistemic uncertainly and assess the reliability of
engineering activities. Epistemic uncertainly was not properly addressed in traditional model.
The result of proposed model shows that Epistemic uncertainly is a major problem and has
diverse effect in real world.

Vizarreta et al. [22] propose a software reliability maturity metrics to identify the failure
earlier in software reliability model using real time data. Moreover a new technique has been
proposed the model regularization technique use to adopt the reliability model earlier than
before you deploy or access the project. Results shows that these techniques helps the
developer to decide which of the reliability model and software controller is more mature that
will help you to deploy and release the project.

Kishani et al.[23] analyze the soft errors in data storage system (cache memory). A new
metrics has been proposed to identify the soft errors from the server and from the entire
system dependability mainly from cache system. The experiments shows that up to 40% of
the user’s data saved in your systems cache memory get loss due to unrecoverable soft errors.
This technique will help you to identify the soft errors such silent data corruption and
recoverability of cache memory.

3. RELIABILITY METRICS
The probability of the software to provide an operation or process free of errors in a specified
environment for a specified interval of time. [2] A reliability metric should be able to
measure the characteristics and behavior of the system and check software is the part of
execution testing. It indicate that software or system is reliability and working under their
specified operation (ISO-IEC 2000) (ISO-IEC 2000b). Reliability Metrics are further divided
into Maturity metrics (MT), Fault tolerance metrics (FTM), Recoverability metrics (RM), and
Reliability compliance metrics (RCM). Figure 2 shows the reliability metrics.
 Reliability Metrics

Reliability
Compliance Maturity Metrics Recoverability Fault Tolerance
Metrics (RCM) (MM) Metrics (RM) Metrics (FTM)

Figure 2: Reliability Metrics

3.1 MATURITY METRICS

Maturity metrics deals with the readiness for the release of the software system. It is
useful for the readiness of release when changes, addition or deletion has been made.
The maturity metrics are calculated as follows:
MM = Mt – (Fa + Fc + Fd) / Mt Where
MM= Maturity Metrics value
Mt defines the number of the modules in current release
Fa defines the number of modules added since the previous release
Fc defines the number of modules changed from the previous release
Fd defines the number of modules deleted from previous release
KM performance measures are used to measure the metrics [24]. It describes the four
levels of maturity metrics level one basic metrics. Basic metric says that “We do not need to
measure, just control the costs” Level two is Reporting. Reporting says that “metrics are not
our problem, metrics are coming out of our ears!” Level three Understanding. Understanding
says that “We know the process of performance and where a particular problem.” Level Four
Predictability. Predictability says that “Mangers use metrics and applied” [25].

3.2 FAULT & FAILURE METRICS

These metrics are used to examine that the software is error free. When a defect arises in
the program the programmers make an error in the program and causes a failure and executed
in a particular condition.
To achieve the goal when the fault has been reported by the end user after delivery as the
failure metrics is generally based on the customer feedback and information concerning on
the failure after release of the software. This information is collected and used to calculate the
particular kind of failure. Mean Time between failure, density and other parameters to
measure SR (Software Reliability) [26].
Metrics for expected failure
 M (t) is the random process of failure over time
M(t)= E [( M (t) ]
There are several techniques used for fault detection analysis some are discussed here: Safety
Review, Checklist, Failure Modes & Effects, Fault Tree Analysis (FTA), Failure Modes,
Event Tree Analysis Effects and Criticality Analysis (FMECA).

3.3 RECOVERABILITY METRICS

External reliability metrics measures the characteristics of the software so that a system
is able to reestablish the sufficient level of performance so that it recover the data directly that
affect the system and may cause the system failure (ISO- IEC). It describes the probability of
failure free operation [27]. It is difficult to define terms, user expectations, and environmental
factors. There are several different models of software quality. It tells us objectives, user
quality, intermediate quality and identification [28].

3.4 RELIABILITY COMPLIANCE METRICS

External reliability metrics measures the characteristics of the software such as
occurrences of the compliance problem and the number of functions. When the product fails
then it is adhere to the rules and standards reliability (ISO-IEC).

4. SOFTWARE METRICS FOR RELIABILITY

The metrics that are used for improvement of reliability of the system or software and
identify the areas of requirements for specification. There are different types of software
metrics discussed in this paper.

4.1 REQUIREMENT RELIABILITY METRICS

Requirements indicate what are the features and functionality that are encompassed in
the system to specify the requirements of the system. The requirements of the system are
transcribed in such a way that it cannot be misunderstood. This metric provides a way that the
valuable requirements cannot be loss it also helps to evaluate the quality factor of the
required document.
Jamiliet al.[29] presented RRM for risk assessment. There are a lot of different measures
for the measurement of the quality. Two important measurements are reliability and validity.
It is not defined for hardware reliability, but also puts into software product reliability. It
helps to identify the impact of reliability and analyze the potential risk if the software
product. Requirement reliability is inversely proportional to the risk. Reliability is higher than
ultimately risk factor is low. Requirement reliability is lower than ultimately risk factor is
high.

4.1.1 DESIGN & CODE RELIABILITY METRIC

This metric is used to find the error in the software. It exists in the design and coding
plan are how much complex their size and modularity. As we know that the complex
components are challenging to understand and there is higher rate of possibility of errors
have been occurred. The reliability is inversely proportional to reliability so that if
complexity increases the reliability of the software is also decreasing. It is also used in object
oriented code. It is used to evaluate the quality [30].
4.1.2 TESTING RELIABILITY METRIC
This metric is used for the verification purpose. It ensures that the system has all the
functionalities specified in the requirements. Multiple test case is generated for the
verification purpose. The main objective of this metric is to provide an effective way for the
verification process to deliver the product with the required functionalities of the system [30].

4. SOFTWARE METRICS
Software metrics provide standard measurement in the degree of which a software or a
system process some property of interest. By mean of metrics it is not used for measurements
it provide functions while measuring the values obtained from the application

4.1 SOFTWARE METRICS

It provide basis for predicting and planning SDP (Software Development Process). SQ
can be controlled and better-quality thus achieve higher productivity. It [31] focuses on
different views of quality metrics. Many of the models and metrics has been developed that
promote and utilize the results and also the remarkable success. Two type of software metrics
are discussed in this paper are product metrics and process metrics.

4.1.1 PRODUCT METRICS

The product metrics (PM) mainly focus on the deliverables of the product it is used in the
software requirement specification document, system design document. This metric is used to
report the product attributes such as maintainability, usability, reliability and portability. It is
also used in the measurement of the source code. It is used to quantitythe software size
through the Lines of code (LOC) and Lines of codes in thousands (KLOC) [31].
PM are used to quantify the complexity of the product. Complexity is directly related to
reliability. It is used to measure Metrics for the product, Measures of the Analysis Model use
to overcome the problem, Complexity of the Design Model use to measure the complexity of
the software, Internal algorithmic complexity defines the complexity in the algorithm code
and try to overcome it, Architectural complexity measure the complexity in the architecture,
Data flow complexity measure the flow of data and increase flexibility, Code metrics
provides a better way to developer and overcome rework.
Product metrics are used to measure the features of the product such as quality, size,
design, performance and complexity of the product. It is used to measure the final product. It
is the most efficient way to improve software project, product and process management. It is
the most important quality metrics to improve the product quality and also improve the final
product.

4.1.2 PROCESS METRICS

Process metrics are used to quantify the characteristics of development process and
maintenance and also used to improve maintenance and software development. Effectiveness
of process metrics is that it removes defect during development, the response time of fixed
process and the pattern of arrival of defects in testing [31].

4.2. VARIOUS VIEWS OF SOFTWARE METRICS

Software tactics give birth to metrics because in software industry, software reliability
plays an important role. As we know that software reliability is consistently high. So we need
reliability metrics to identify accurately the property of the software. Software metrics
(SM)are used to improve engineering process. In this paper we have discuss four different
views of software metrics.

4.2.1 Product view

The product view focuses on the features and characteristics of the product, where the
product is inherent in its characteristics. The user is expecting from the system what are the
features and characteristics of the product what are the functionalities includes in the system
these are all for the user’s perspective. If all characteristics defined are fulfilled it will give a
positive effect on the internal software quality (ISQ). The ISQ gives rise to external software
quality. [32] The product, viewpoint of software quality is that looks at the internal
characteristics of the product. The idea behind is that to look out the functionality and
features of the product that the customer offers. In terms of software quality as it is mainly
based on the user view. User quality model is used for product view. It is mainly focused on
the internal quality of product ultimately achieve external quality of the product.
There are a lot of different techniques for product view, but it varies from product to
product. Considering an example of User Interface (UI) and discuss their techniques.
Sketching [33] is one of the technique in product view. Sketching has some parameters such
as Editing, work planes, visibility, formulas, constraints etc.

4.2.2 User view

The user view of the quality of the software tends to be more tangible and can be
extremely one sided depending on the user’s requirement. The user view evaluates the
product according to user’s need what the user is expecting. Also check the quality of fitness
for purpose there reliability, performance, maintainability. In software quality user view user
view give us user’s need so that it is easy to evaluate a software product. In certain cases like
the model the reliability of performance and operational products, and monitor the user how a
user use a product [32].There are a lot of different methods for user view, here we discuss
some of user’s view technique such as meetings, interview etc.

4.2.3 Manufacturing view

The Manufacturing view as the name indicates that it is about the production phase of the
software product. The Manufacturing view point is a process based so it focuses on the
consistency of the process which ultimately leads to the better software product and where
quality is conformance to its specification. As we know that better manufacturing process
will automatically leads to the best quality product and also the market value of the product
are also increasing. By following a better manufacturing process, we are better able to build a
standardized and defect free product and it will meet all the market values. In software
quality manufacturing view is used to build a product defect free and provide product to users
in the first iteration without any additional rework. And if any defect detected after
deliverables than the extra cost charged. ISO 9001 Capability Maturity Model encompasses
the manufacturing view. Due to manufacturing view high quality product manufactured and
due to this better productivity achieved. And standardization is achieved [32]. There are a lot
of different techniques for manufacturing view, here we discuss some of the manufacturing
techniques such as prototype, simulations etc.

4.2.4 Value Based view

The value based view (VBV) helps in resolving the conflicts from the product so that the
software product has not been deferred forever. It helps to resolve such conflicts such as
resources, costing, time and costing. It is used to resolve and determine interview conflicts
and helps the software product to keep on track. In VBV the quality is measure , when the
customer is agreeable to pay for the product. The VBV of software quality has a lot of
importance when there are lots of different views, which are organized by departmental level
in an organization. For example, technical department mainly focuses on the product view,
and the marketing department focus on the user view. For example, if the technical
department wants to change (user view) the interface of the site because it is not feasible
(product view). The issue arises when there are conflicting views arise than value based view
helps to resolve such a conflicting point of views [32]. Value based view technique starts
with Orientation techniques and end it into Functional Identification [34].

5. SOFTWARE RELIABILITY MEASUREMENT FACTORS

To get reliable software we consider five important factors for software reliability: 1)
Software Defects/ Faults (It defines the bugs, failure in the software). 2) Requirement
analysis, it includes following through which we are able to get the customer needs bitterly.
Feasibility, Survey, Interview. 3) Cost is the most important factor if a cost of project high, so
its reliability is also high. 4) Size estimation (define size, amount, etc.). 5) Measuring the
Reliability of Software Products
Reliability of the system is calculated as follows
N= Number of errors in the system, whether it is actual or predicted
L= Total number LEC (Lines of executable code)
Reliability= 1- N/L
There are mainly three metrics for reliability
Mean time to failure (MTTF) [35]. It tells us the expected time of failure of the identical
system of the population. For example, assume two identical systems (IS) tested. It starts
from time 0 to the time until all of system are getting failed. The first IS failed at 12 hours
and the second IS failed at 10 hours then we calculate the MTTF by using the following
formula.
𝐓𝐨𝐭𝐚𝐥𝐓𝐢𝐦𝐞
𝐌𝐓𝐓𝐅 =
𝐍𝐮𝐦𝐛𝐞𝐫𝐨𝐟𝐔𝐧𝐢𝐭𝐬𝐔𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐓𝐞𝐬𝐭
Total Time= Total number of unit of an item
Number of Units under Test= Number of failures in the population.
The probability of the density function (pdf), f (t) when takes two failure samples and the
time of failure is distributed in pdf, is defined by this mathematical formula:
∞ ∞

𝐌𝐓𝐓𝐅 = ∫ 𝐭𝐟(𝐭)𝐝𝐭 = ∫ 𝐑(𝐭)𝐝𝐭

𝟎 𝟎
Example Table of Mean Time to Failure [36], determine the automobile tire mileage and
also calculate the time of survivor. The standard is Normal at 95% CI.

Table 1. Mean Time of Failure

Distribution Errors Mean Low High

Smallest 646.6 69473.1 68205.7 70740.5
Extreme
Lognormal 1066.4 72248.6 70188.4 74369.3
Weibull 629.3 69545.4 68322.8 70789.9
Exponential 2865.1 75858.8 70446.0 81687.6
 Exponential, Lognormal MTTF is better than others
 Mean Time between Failures (MTBF) [35]. It excludes the average time of repairing, inspection and
prevention of maintenance.
MTBF= Mean Time between Failure.
𝚺(𝐒𝐭𝐚𝐫𝐭𝐨𝐟𝐝𝐨𝐰𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐦𝐞 − 𝐒𝐭𝐚𝐫𝐭𝐨𝐟𝐮𝐩𝐭𝐢𝐦𝐞)
𝐌𝐓𝐁𝐅 =
𝐧𝐮𝐦𝐛𝐞𝐫𝐨𝐟𝐟𝐚𝐢𝐥𝐮𝐫𝐞𝐬

Where Start of down time means start date of last failure, Startup time means start date
of first failure.

 The Mean Time to Repair (MTTR) is the required time to repair a system.

𝐓𝐨𝐭𝐚𝐥𝐌𝐚𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐧𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐞𝐓𝐢𝐦𝐞
𝐌𝐓𝐓𝐑 =
𝐍𝐮𝐦𝐛𝐞𝐫𝐨𝐟𝐑𝐞𝐩𝐚𝐢𝐫𝐬
Reliability (R) is directly proportional to software quality (Q)
𝐑 ∝ 𝐐, 𝐲 = 𝐤𝐱
Reliability is inversely proportional to the complexity (C)
𝟏 𝐤
𝐑∝ , 𝐲=
𝐂 𝐱

The major distinction between software and other engineering artifacts is that software is
wholesome of implementation and design. Software reliability is something that the system is
not able to respond to a particular task, it is due to the fault in the design and it occurs due to
human errors. Hardware reliability basically in design and manufacturing time it is not
intentionally. Software reliability is a change in the code or program intentionally.
Reliability is important in such a way that to identify the weakness of the system and
identify which component is more crucial for the component failure [37].
The process of reliability of software optimization through which program emphasizes
on fault detection, fault removal, software error prevention and the use of some measures of
reliability to increase the reliability in the form of schedule, performance, resource. The
importance of reliability IR of the component i in the system n component is given as follows
𝐼𝑅𝑖 =ɚ𝑅𝑠
ɚ𝑅𝑖
Where Rs Defines the system reliability, Ri defines the component reliability. To find the
reliability of the system [35] calculated by this formula Reliability= 𝒆^ (-168/< Mean time
𝑡
between hours).To find the probability of repair time [38]∫0 𝑅(𝑡 − 𝑢0𝑚(𝑢)𝑑𝑢. [39].

6. COMPARISON OF RELIABILITY MODELS

While comparing the models we have consider three important points that are type of models,
scope of the model and the technique used by the model.

Type of Models:
Three main models of reliability models on which framework analysis approach based
that are Additive Model evaluates the reliability of the system on the failure of component
data. Consideration of software architecture is not explicit, State Based Models consider the
Control flow between modules and the modules are fails independently. It considers Markov
behavior and transfer between models. It is expressed by two methods Composite model and
Hierarchical model. The failure of this model depends upon Constant Failure rate, Failure
Probability or Reliability, Time Dependent Failure Rate. The limitation of this model is that
the probability is not constant and Path Based Models consider the conceivable execution
paths for the reliable application. Testing done based on algorithms and experiments. The
limitation of this model is the architecture of an application provides infinite number of paths
in the presence of a loop [40].

Scope
It is the domain of software applications to check the applicability of the proposed
approach. Reviewed approach is Reuse Oriented Systems are used for refining the programs
and thus produce sequences of prototype and define rules, Service Oriented Architecture is
the collection of web services. Communication done with services and pass data during
communication and then preform activity, Complex Component Based Systems used for
large scale Component Based Systems which are complex, Component Based Systems (CBS)
based on the interaction among components [40].

Techniques
These models are estimated based on these techniques by using Algebraic Method,
Algorithm, mathematical formulas, and by using Component Dependency Graph (CDG) [40].

6.1 Comparison of different models

Basically RM are used to quantitatively identify the reliability of the software product
[40]. Measuring the reliability of the software process is a difficult process because we do not
have good knowledge or understanding of the nature of the software and also have lack of
domain understanding. To choose which metrics that will best fit into the system
requirement. Component based software applications are discussed in table 2 and soft
computing techniques discussed in table 3.

Table 2.COMPONENT BASED SOFTWARE APPLICATIONS (COTS)

Reliability Scope Model Method Technique Validation Critique

estimation
Models
Littlewood’s COTS State Based pij = Pr CTMC Hypothetic SRM
model for . Model.(SBM al example
reliability )
estimation[41]
[42] [43]
Cheung’s model COTS SBM P = [pij]. Composite The For
[44] solution solution is critical
taken from module
given
example
Kubat’s Model COTS SBM Qi(r) = Hierarchica Hypothetic A good
[45] possibility of l solution al example model for
the task r that the
will call its estimation
first of the
component reliability.
iPij (r )=
probability
 that task r
will call
component j
after the
module I
execution
Failure
amount for a
modulei is
given by αi.
Gokhale’s COTS SBM Non Hierarchal Test cases Analytica
Model [46] Homogeneou solution. l model
s Poisson Symbolic
Process Hierarchical
Automated
Reliability
and
Performance
Evaluator
(SHARPE)

Everett’s model COTS Additive Extended Use NHPP. Done by Analyzin

for [47] [48] Model(AM) Execution some g CBS
Time (EET) examples reliability
model.
H. Singh’s. Componen Path Based Unified Probabilisti Case study New
Bayesian ts based and model.(PBM) Modelling c and Approach
Approach for reuse Language Algorithmic for
Reliability oriented (UML) technique is reliability
Prediction[49] software used based
developmen on UML
t paradigms. diagrams.

Scenario-
SherifYacoub’s
Based Algorithm Good for
Scenario Based Waiting
Reliability and extended
Reliability COTS PBM queue
Analysis Mathematica distributed
Analysis simulator
Approach l formulation systems
Approach[50]
(SBRA)
Fan Zhang’s COTS PBM sub domain Tij . (Rij × Hypothetic Analyzes
novel model for based method Wij). al validation the
CBS reliability reliability
analysis[51] of CBS
and
propose
algorithm
Ning Huang’s CBSS and Architecture Based on Algebraic Hypothetic
An Algebra- composite
and algebra method al example
Based Reliability web
Prediction services. operational
Approach[52] profile based
approach.
 WANG Dong’s COTS PBM Markov Mathematic No Markov
Reliability Components model. al formulas validation is Model is
Analysis of CBS Based given extended
on Relationships Software
of Systems
Components[53] (CBSS) and
SOA.
VivekGoswamis COTS and Component Operational Mathematic Experiment Promisin
’s Method for CBSS usage ratio profile al formulas al results g
reliability based. estimation
estimation[54] of
software
reliability
Yuanjie Si’s CBSS PBM Estimate the Mathematic Case study Estimates
Reliability reliability of al formulas reliability
Estimation five basic based on
Framework component the
through composition componen
Component mechanism t
Composition
Mechanisms[55]
Chao-Jung Complex PBM Adaptive Algorithmic Experiment Sensitive
Hsu’s Adaptive CBSS approach approach al results Analysis
Reliability has been
Analysis Using used
Path Testing[56]
integrated Belief New metric Bayesian Case Study To
framework reliability proposed theory identify
the effect
of
epistemic
uncertaint
y in
reliability
model,
 Table 3. Soft computing techniques

Technology Referen
Results
Used ce
Neural Networks It explores the feed forward for the NN based on
[57]
(NN) reliability growth prediction
It explores that network can predict the
Neural Networks commutativefaults and it can be used in future [58]
testing
It explains that NN are not much simpler but the it
Neural Networks [59]
is equal to recalibration method.
It demonstrate that the neural network should be
Neural Networks [60]
consider as an effective modeling tool.
It compare two models and results shows that
Neural Networks [61]
Jordan Model is better than feed -forward model
It propose that system get remarkably low
Neural Networks [62]
prediction errors
Neural Networks It provide models for smaller normalized root [63]
It describe that Neural Network is a robust
Neural Networks [64]
technique
Introduce a dynamic weighted combinational
Neural Networks [65]
model
Neural
It introduce two encoding schemes [66]
Network

Neural It done estimation of complete software and

[67]
Network estimate the prediction of faults.
It introduce applications related to NN in computer
Neural Network [68]
vision
It determine about mapping which is better and
Neural Network [69]
which is unnecessary
Proposed model that are more flexible and
Fuzy Logic [70]
assumption free.
Presented a models that provide high performance
Fuzy Logic [71]
for modeling capabilities
It examine problem with the EEG pattern cognition
Fuzy Logic and also examine the applicability of the T2FL [72]
approach
Genetic
Measure predictability of reliability [73]
Algorithms
Genetic It analyze that GA based hybrid technique is good
[74]
Algorithms emerging tool for optimization
It measure the efficiency of map Virtual Networks
Genetic
in multi cast services and consider reliability in [75]
Algorithms
terms of max-min fairness
Genetic It identifies the sensitive analysis and identify the
[76]
Algorithms optimal strategies for multi-criteria control signals.
It explain an equation for software reliability
Genetic
modeling and it can represents the data in better [77]
Programming
way.
Genetic It use boosting technique for the improvement of
[78]
Programming reliability models.
Genetic Purposed (µ+λ) GP system and it provide better
[79]
Programming results for small data sets
Genetic
Proposed novel approach doe soft computing. [80]
Programming
Genetic Analysis has been done based on different soft [81]
 Programming computing techniques
Proposed a technique based on 2D finite impulse
Artificial Bee
response. it found that all of the technique will [82]
Colony
outperform by obtaining lowest ripple effect.
Artificial Bee Introduce a technique called ABC method results
[83]
Colony shows significant improvement in EE problem.
Presented an Enhanced Ant Colony Optimization
Method (EACO). Results shows it give better
Ant Colony [84]
results than that of ACO snd it reduce space and
time complexity.
Analysis has been done based on various
Ant Colony [85]
techniques and estimate different parameters.
Provide a technique for both Ant Colony
Ant Colony Optimization and Particle Swarm Optimization and [86]
results shows that it provide better parameters.
Presented a technique calledANFIS and results
Neuro Fuzzy shows that it improves the evaluation method for the [87]
reliability of FIS technique.

7. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

Analysis has been done on already proposed soft computing techniques and component
based techniques and we compare these techniques and conclude our result.
This work is an effort to attain greater understanding of the Soft Computing \techniques
and Component Based System and the effect on software reliability. It will ultimately help in
improving the reliability of software products. The finding reveals that Soft computing
Techniques are more suitable for complex system and also for critical system where human
factor involves and validation is mandatory without validation we cannot move. Whereas
Component Based System works with the interaction of elements it is more suitable for case
studies and also for experimental results. Process is visible in Soft Computing Techniques. It
consider known facts. In CBS validation done based on experimental results, or with no
validation and case studies. Figure 4 shows the analysis result of SC and CBS.
We represent the analysis of the soft computing and Component Based System are
shown in the Figure. Results are taken from almost 200 papers.
 . Comparison of Soft Computing Techniques and Component
Based Systems
Neural Networks Fuzzy Logic Genetics Algorithms Genetics
Programming Artifical Bee colony Ant Colony
State Based Model Additive Model COTS Component Based

60 Column1 Column2

50

40

30

20

10

0
Out Datasets Testcases Design Exp-results
Need Process Complex Facts
Examples Visibility models

Figure 3

Comparison of different techniques discussed in table 4 the comparison is very useful because result is placed in
one platform.

Table 4.Comparison of Soft Computing Techniques and Component Based System in terms of Modeling
Capabilities

Working New Based on Need

Suitable on test data set experimental examples Applicable Known
Technology Process
Outputs for small cases included results for complex facts
Used is Visible
data sets for new models considered
design
Neural No No No
No No No No Yes Partially
Networks
Fuzzy Logic Yes Yes No Yes No No Yes Yes Yes
Genetic No No No
Partially Partially Yes Yes Partially No
Algorithms
Genetic No No No
Yes No No No Yes No
Programming
Artificial Bee No No No
Yes Partially Partially No Yes Yes
Colony
Ant Colony Yes No No Yes No No Yes Yes Yes
State Based Yes No No
No No No No No No
Model
Additive Yes
No No No No No No No No
Model
COTS
Components
Based No No No No Yes No No No No
Software
Systems.
4
Comparison of SCT and CBS.
 RESULTS
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Case Studies Complex System Critical System Experimental Results Validation and
Verification

Soft computing Technique Component Based technique

Figure 4

8. CONCLUSION
In this paper, we examine different soft computing techniques and component based
techniques and considered some criteria based on our assumptions on available approaches
that are used in improvement of reliability. Most of the techniques used mathematical
calculations, formulas and operational profile. As the rapid improvement in software
industries for the importance of reliability metrics have also developed fast. Reliability
metrics become an essential part of the software management to accomplish the software
development. It is estimated that by using reliability metrics we are better able to develop
software and thus due to the overall progress rate will improve of software maintainability,
productivity and software quality.
Although the people appreciate the importance of reliability metrics and it will become a
mature field and it will help in various large projects where life of people is in danger.
Looking for the increasing demands of reliability metrics for the implementation and
most successful case study for the betterment of software quality. It is better to say that in
coming years the software reliability metric’s significance will increase and it will affect the
industry. The developer or leaders of the industry will better able to improve the delivering
product and they will have better software quality. There are amount of reliability metrics are
anticipated for software metrics that measure the software quality before implementation. In
future research, we are looking for the enhancement in existing reliability metrics based on
the magnitude and nature of the problem being addressed. There is better scope for many
software tools that will better able to manage the software project development they are able
to reduce the cost, development time, effort required and manage the project in a consistent
manner. The main task is to relate and compare different models and see which models are
more accurate and fit in the risky environment.

References

[1] IEEE, Standard Glossary of Software Engineering Terminology, ANSI/IEEE, STD-729-

1991.

[2] P. Kubat, "Assessing reliability of modular software.Operations Research Letters," pp.

35-41, 1989.
[3] Vinay Tiwari, Dr. R.K. Pandey, "Prospects on ‘Open Source Software Development’
Education to Technical Education Students of India," International Journal of Computer
Applications (0975 – 8887), vol. 46, no. 12, December 2012.
[4] Aasia Quyoum, Mehraj – Ud - Din Dar, S. M. K. Quadr, "Improving Software
Reliability using Software Engineering Approach- A Review," International Journal of
Computer Applications (0975 – 8887), vol. 10, no. 5, 2010.
[5] P. Panwar, "A seminar on Reliability Models".
[6] Li Xiao-hua, Wang Gang, Xiao Lin, Ding Maosheng, "Reliability Analysis of
DigitalProtection's Sofware BasedonArchitecture," in IEEE/PES Transmission and
Distribution Conference & Exhibition: Asia and Pacific Dalian, China, 2005.
[7] Souhib Harb, Robert S. Balog, "Reliability of Candidate Photovoltaic Module-
Integrated-Inverter (PV-MII) Topologies—A Usage Model Approach," IEEE
TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, vol. 28, no. 6, 2013.
[8] Ullah, Najeeb; Morisio, Maurizio; Vetrò, Antonio, "Selecting the Best Reliability Model
to Predict Residual Defects in Open Source Software," COMPUTER PUBLISHED BY
THE IEEE COMPUTER SOCIETY, vol. 48, no. 6, 2015.
[9] Mohit Surati, Bhavesh Tanawala and Prashant Swadas, "Refinement of Reliability by
Improving Reliability Estimation Tool," International Institution for Technological
Research and Development, vol. 1, no. 4, 2016.
[10] Mehran Mirjafari, Robert S. Balog, , and Ras¸it Turan, "Multiobjective Optimization of
the DC–DC Stage of a Module-Integrated Inverter Based on an Efficiency Usage
Model," IEEE JOURNAL OF PHOTOVOLTAICS, vol. 4, no. 3, 2014.
[11] H.S. Garmabaki, A. Barabadi , F. Yuan , J. Lu ,Y.Z. Ayele, "Reliability modeling of
successive release of software using NHPP," in Industrial Engineering and Engineering
Management (IEEM), 2015 IEEE International Conference on, 2015.
[12] Noorossana, Kamyar Sabri-Laghaie and Rassoul, "Reliability and Maintenance Models
for a Competing-Risk System Subjected to Random Usage," IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON
RELIABILITY, vol. 65, no. 3, 2016.
[13] Yuanjie Si, Xiaohu Yang, Xinyu Wang,Chao Huang,Aleksander J. Kavs, "An
 Architecture- Based Reliability Estimation framework Through Component
Composition Mechanisms," in 2nd International Conference on Computer Engineering
and Technology, 2011.
[14] Romney B, Duffey and Lance Fiondella, "Software, Hardware, and Procedure
Reliability by Testing and Verification: Evidence of Learning Trends," IEEE
TRANSACTIONS ON HUMAN-MACHINE SYSTEMS, vol. 44, no. 3, 2014.
[15] Y.O. Adu-Gyamfi, Anuj Sharm, "Reliability of Probe Speed Data for Detecting
Congestion Trends," in 2015 IEEE 18th International Conference on Intelligent
Transportation System, 2015.
[16] Jiajia Liu, Xiaohong Jiang, Hiroki Nishiyama and Nei Kato, "Reliability Assessment for
Wireless Mesh Networks Under Probabilistic Region Failure Model," IEEE
TRANSACTIONS ON VEHICULAR TECHNOLOGY, vol. 60, no. 5, 2011.
[17] Strigini, Kizito Salako and Lorenzo, "When Does “Diversity” in Development Reduce
Common Failures? Insights from Probabilistic Modeling," IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON
DEPENDABLE AND SECURE COMPUTING, vol. 11, no. 2, 2014.
[18] Bing Zhu, Kenneth W. Shum, Hui Li and Hanxu Hou, "General Fractional Repetition
Codes for Distributed Storage Systems," IEEE COMMUNICATIONS LETTERS, vol. 18,
no. 4, 2014.
[19] Fan, Qing Fan and Hongqin, "Reliability Analysis and Failure Prediction of
Construction Equipment with Time Series Models," Journal of Advanced Management
Science, vol. 3, no. 3, 2015.
[20] FAQIH, KHALED M. S., "The Performance of Software Reliability Models: A View
Point," International Journal of Performability Engineering, vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 375-386,
2013.
[21] R. K. W. Z. ZHIGUO ZENG, "A Model-Based Reliability Metric Considering," IEEE
Access, vol. 5, pp. 15505 - 15515, 2017.
[22] K. T. ,. B. H. ,. P. H. ,. S. M. I. A. B. ,. etra Vizarreta, "Assessing the Maturity of SDN
Controllers With," EEE TRANSACTIONS ON NETWORK AND SERVICE
MANAGEMENT, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 1090-1103, 2018.
[23] M. T. S. M. I. a. H. A. ,. S. M. I. Mostafa Kishani, "Dependability Analysis of Data
Storage Systems," IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON RELIABILITY, vol. 68, no. 1, 2019.
[24] Rob Hoss, KM,Art Schlussel., "How Do You Measure the Knowledge Management
(KM),Maturity of Your Organization?Metrics That Assess an Organization’s KM
State.," 2009.
[25] Group, David Consulting, "Why Metrics Maturity Matters," www.dcg-sms.com.
[26] Gawali, Shital V. Tate & S. Z., "Quantitative Analysis of Fault and Failure Using
Software Metrics," Global Journal of Computer Science and Technology Software &
Data Engineering, vol. 12, no. 12, 2012.
[27] Somerville, Mancoridis, "Software Reliability," in Dependable software system
(reliability).
[28] Dr. Linda Rosenberg, Ted Hammer,Jack Shaw, "Software Metrics and reliability,"
Software Reliability Engineering was presented at the 9th International Symposium,
1998.
[29] Jamili, A.A., "Requirement Reliability Metrics for Risk Assessment," in Engineering,
Sciences and Technology, Student Conference On, 2006.
[30] K. B. Gurpreet Kaur, "Software Reliability, Metrics, Reliability Improvement Using
Agile Process," IJISET - International Journal of Innovative Science, Engineering &
Technology, vol. 1, no. 3, 2014.
[31] A. M. K. D. Mrinal Singh Rawat, "Survey on Impact of Software Metrics on Software
Quality," (IJACSA) International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and
Applications, vol. 3, no. 1, 2012.
[32] Mrinal Singh Rawat, Arpita Mittal, Sanjay Kumar Dubey, "Survey on Impact of
Software Metrics on Software Quality," (IJACSA) International Journal of Advanced
Computer Science and Applications,, vol. 3, no. 1, 2012.
[33] https://knowledge.autodesk.com/support/revit-products/learn-
explore/caas/CloudHelp/cloudhelp/2017/ENU/Revit-Model/files/GUID-60C4C656-
52F9-4A95-8A5C-028011CF0397-htm.html.
[34] Nick Rich, Matthias Holweg, Dipl., "VALUE ANALYSIS VALUE ENGINEERING,"
dissemination of innovation and knowledge management techniques, Lean Enterprise
Research Centre Cardiff, United Kingdom, 2000.
[35] http://www.weibull.com/hotwire/issue79/relbasics79.htm.
[36] http://support.minitab.com/en-us/minitab/17/topic-library/modeling-
statistics/reliability/reliability-metrics/what-is-mttf/.
[37] Kubat, Peter, "Assessing reliability of modular software.Operations Research Letters,"
Journal Operations Research Letters, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 35-41, February, 1989.
[38] http://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic851071-392-1.aspx.
[39] Mandeep Kaur, Sukhpreet Singh,Dr. Madhuchanda Rakshit, "A Review of various
metrics used in software reliability," International Journal of Computer Science &
Engineering Technology (IJCSET, vol. 4, no. 7, 2013.
[40] Kubat, Peter, "Assessing reliability of modular software," Operations Research Letters,
vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 35-41, 1989.
[41] H. Joe, N. Reid, "On the Software Reliability Models of Jelinski-Moranda and
Littlewood," IEEE Transactions on Reliability, Vols. R-34, no. 3, 1985.
[42] B. Littlewood, " A reliability model for systems with markov structure.," in Applied
Statistics, 1975.
[43] Ledoux, James, "Littlewood reliability model for modular software and Poisson
 approximation," in 3th Conference on Mathematical Methods in Reliability
(MMR2002),, Trondheim, 2002.
[44] R. Cheung, "A user-oriented software reliability," in IEEE Trans. on Software
Engineering, 1980.
[45] J. Loman, W. Wang, "On Reliability Modeling and Analysis of Highly-reliable, Large
Systems," in Proceedings of the 48th Annual Reliability and Maintainability Symposium,
2002.
[46] Pai, Ganesh J., "A Survey of Software Reliability Models," Cornell University Library,
2013.
[47] Swapna S. Gokhale, Michael R. Lyu, Kishor S. Trivedi, "Reliability simulation of
Component based software systems," in in Proceeding of 9th International. Symposium
on Software, 1998.
[48] KIRTI TYAGI, ARUN SHARMA, "Reliability of Component Based Systems – A
Critical Survey," WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on COMPUTERS, vol. 11, no. 2, 2012.
[49] W.Everett, "Software Component Reliability Analysis," in in Proceeding of. Symposium
Application Specific systems and Software Engineering Technology (ASSET’99) , 1999.
[50] H. Singh, V. Cortellessa,B. Cukic,E. Gunel and V. Bharadwaj, "A Bayesian approach to
reliability prediction and assessment of component based systems," in in 12th IEEE
International. Symposium on Software Reliability Engineering , (Hong Kong, Nov.
2001), 2001.
[51] S. Yacoub, B. Cukic, and H. Ammar., "A scenario-based reliability analysis approach
for Component based software," in IEEE Transactions on Reliability, 2004.
[52] Fan Zhang, Xingshe Zhou, Junwen Chen, Yunwei Dong, "A Novel Model for
Component –based Software Reliability Analysis," in 11th IEEE High Assurance
Systems Engineering Symposium, 2008.
[53] Ning Huang, Dong Wang, Xiaoguang JIA, "FAST ABSTRACT: An Algebra – Based
Reliability Prediction Approach for Composite Web Services," in 19th International
Symposium on Software Relability Engineering, 2008.
[54] Wang Dong, Ning Huang, Ye Ming, "Reliability Analysis of Component –based
Software Based on Relationships of Components," in IEEE Conference on Web
Services, 2008.
[55] Vivek Goswami, Y.B.Acharya, "Method for Reliability Estimation of COTS
Components based Software Systems," in InternationalSymposium on Software
Reliability Engineering (ISSRE 2009)., 2009.
[56] Huang, Chao-Jung Hsu and Chin-Yu, "An Adaptive Reliability Analysis Using Path
Testing for Complex Component based Software Systems," IEEE transaction on
reliability, vol. 60, no. 1, 2011.
[57] N. Karunanithi , Y.K. Malaiya , D. Whitley, "Prediction," in Proceedings of the Second
 IEEE International, 1991.
[58] N. Karunanithi, D. Whitley, Y.K. Malaiya, "Using neural," IEEE Software, vol. 9, no. 4,
pp. 53-59, 1992.
[59] Sitte, R., "Comparison of Software Reliability Growth," in IEEE transactions on
Reliability, 1999.
[60] T. M. Khoshgoftaar, R. M. Szabo, and P. J. Guasti, "Exploring the Behavior of Neural-
network Software," Software Eng. J, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 89-96, 1995.
[61] S. L. Ho, M. Xie and T. N. Goh, "A Study of the Connectionist Models for Software
Reliability Prediction," in Computers and Mathematics with Applications, vol. 46, pp.
1037-1045, 2003.
[62] Singh, Nirvikar Katiyar and Raghuraj, "Effect of Neural," Network for Prediction of
Software Reliability, vol. 1, pp. 490-500, 2011.
[63] Debnath, Sultan Aljahdali and Narayan C., "Improved Software Reliability Prediction
through Fuzzy Logic," in IASSE, 2004.
[64] Sultan H. Aljahdali and Khalid A. Buragga, "Employing four ANNs Paradigms for
Software Reliability Prediction and Analytical Study," ICGST-AIML, vol. 8, no. 2, 2008.
[65] Yu Shen Su, Chin-Yu Huang, Yi Shin Chen and Jing Xun Chen, "An Artificial Neural-
Network-Based Approach to Software Reliability Assessment," in TENCON, IEEE,
2005.
[66] Manjubala Bisi and Neeraj Kumar Goyal, "Software Reliability Prediction using Neural
Network with Encoded Input," International Journal of Computer Applications, vol. 47,
no. 22, 2012.
[67] S. K. J. a. M. P. Singh, "Estimation for Faults Prediction from Component Based
Software Design using Feed Forward Neural Networks," IJARCCE, vol. 2, no. 7, 2013.
[68] Jiuxiang Gu, Zhenhua Wang, Jason Kuen, Lianyang Ma, Amir Shahroudy, Bing Shuai,
Ting Liu, Xingxing Wang, Gang Wang, "Recent Advances in Convolutional Neural
Networks," in Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (cs.CV); Learning (cs.LG);
Neural and Evolutionary Computing, 2015.
[69] Weicong Na , Feng Feng ,Chao Zhang , Qi-Jun Zhang , "A Unified Automated
Parametric Modeling Algorithm Using Knowledge-Based Neural Network and l1
Optimization," IEEE Transactions on Microwave Theory and Techniques , vol. 65, no.
3, 2017.
[70] S. N. J. S. L. U. S. Chatterjee, "Application of Fuzzy Time Series in Prediction of Time
Between Failures & Faults in Software ReliabilityAssessment," in Application of Fuzzy
Time Series in Prediction of Time Between Failures & Faults in Software
ReliabilityAssessment, 2011.
[71] “. o. S. R. Sultan Aljahdali, "Growth Models for Industrial Applications Using Fuzzy
Logic," Journal of Computer Science 7, pp. 1574-1580, 2011.
[72] G. P. ,. T. M. M. Pawel Andrzej Herman, "Designing an Interval Type-2 Fuzzy Logic
System for Handling Uncertainty Effects in Brain–Computer Interface Classification of
Motor Imagery Induced EEG Patterns," IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems , vol. 25,
no. 1, pp. 29-42, 2017.
[73] S. H. A. a. M. E. El-Telbany, "Genetic Algorithms for Optimizing Ensemble of Models
in Software Reliability Prediction," ICGST-AIML, vol. 8, no. 1, 2008..
[74] G. S. M. a. A. P. T. Sona Ahuja, "Jelinski – Moranda Model for Software Reliability
Prediction and its G. A. based Optimised Simulation Trajectory," 2002.
[75] Xiujiao Gao ; Zilong Ye ; Jingyuan Fan ; Weida Zhong ; Yangming Zhao ; Xiaojun Cao
; Hongfang Yu ; Chunming Qiao, "Virtual network mapping for multicast services with
max-min fairness of reliability," IEEE/OSA Journal of Optical Communications and
Networking ( Volume: 7, Issue: 9, Sept. 2015 ), vol. 7, no. 9, pp. 942-951, 2015.
[76] F. Zheng, H. J. v. Zuylen, X. Liu and S. L. Vine, "Reliability-Based Traffic Signal
Control for Urban Arterial Roads," IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation
Systems ( Volume: 18, Issue: 3, March 2017 ), vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 643 - 655, 2017.
[77] S. V. A. P. a. G. S. E. Costa, "Modeling software reliability growth with genetic
programming," in In ISSRE ’05: Proceedings of the 16th IEEE International Symposium
on Software Reliability Engineering, 2005.
[78] E. Costa, S. Vergilio, A. Pozo, and G. Souza., "Modeling software reliability growth
with genetic programming.," in In ISSRE ’05: Proceedings of the 16th IEEE
International Symposium on Software Reliability Engineering, USA, 2005.
[79] Eduardo Oliveira Costa, Aurora Trinidad Ramirez Pozo and Silvia Regina Vergilio, "A
Genetic Programming Approach for Software Reliability Modeling," IEEE Transactions
on Reliability, vol. 59, no. 1, 2010.
[80] Vahid Hajipour ; Vahid Khodakarami ; Madjid Tavana, "The Redundancy Queuing-
Location-Allocation Problem: A Novel Approach," IEEE Transactions on Engineering
Management , vol. 61, no. 3, pp. 534-544, 2014.
[81] Uttara Goyal ; Arunima Jaiswal, "Analysing software reliability modelling aspects using
soft computing methodology," in Computing, Communication and Automation (ICCCA),
2016 International Conference on, 2016.
[82] A. K. Dwivedi, S. Ghosh and N. D. Londhe, "Low power 2D finite impulse response
filter design using modified artificial bee colony algorithm with experimental validation
using field-programmable gate array," IET Science, Measurement & Technology (
Volume: 10, Issue: 6, 9 2016 ), vol. 10, no. 6, pp. 671-678, 2016.
[83] L. Yang, X. Sun, L. Peng, X. Yao and T. Chi, "An Agent-Based Artificial Bee Colony
(ABC) Algorithm for Hyperspectral Image Endmember Extraction in Parallel," IEEE
Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing , vol. 8,
no. 10, pp. 4657 - 4664, 2015.
[84] Florence, Latha Shanmugam and Lilly, "Enhancement and comparison of ant colony
optimization for software reliability models," Journal of Computer Science 9, pp. 1232-
1240, 2013.
[85] Soft Computing Techniques and Implementations (ICSCTI), 2015 International
Conference on, "Survey on parameter estimation in software reliability," in Insha Altaf ;
Firdousul Rashid ; Jawad Ahmad Dar ; Mohd. Rafiq, 2015.
[86] N. A. A.-S. a. M. Abd-AlKareem, "The Use of Cuckoo Search in Estimating the
Parameters of Software Reliability Growth Models," (IJCSIS) International Journal of
Computer Science and Information Security, vol. 11, no. 6, 2013.
[87] Kirti Tyagi and Arun Sharma, "An adaptive neuro fuzzy model for estimating the
reliability of component-based software systems," in Applied Computing and
Informatics, 2014.
[88] Jorgensen, N, "Putting it All in the Trunk Incremental Software Development in the
FreeBSD Open Source Project," Information Systems Journal, vol. 11, pp. 321-336,
2001.