Cocomo II With Example

Application Composition Estimation Model allows one to estimate the cost, effort at the stage 1 of
the COCOMO II Model.
In this model size is first estimated using Object Points. Object Points are easy to identify and count.
Object Points defines screen, reports, third generation (3GL) modules as objects.
Object Point estimation is a new size estimation technique but it is well suited in Application
Composition Sector.
Estimation of Efforts:
Following steps are taken to estimate effort to develop a project
Step-1: Access Object counts

Estimate the number of screens, reports and 3GL components that will comprise this application.
Step-2: Classify complexity levels of each object

We have to classify each object instance into simple, medium and difficult complexity level
depending on values of its characteristics.
Complexity levels are assigned according to the given table
Step-3: Assign complexity weights to each object
The weights are used for three object types i.e, screens, reports and 3GL components.
Complexity weight are assigned according to object’s complexity level using following table
Step-4: Determine Object Points
Add all the weighted object instances to get one number and this is known as object point count.
Object Point
= Sigma (number of object instances)
* (Complexity weight of each object instance)
Step-5: Compute New Object Points (NOP)

We have to estimate the %reuse to be achieved in a project.
Depending on %reuse
NOP = [(object points) * (100 - %reuse)]/100
NOP are the object point that will need to be developed and differ from the object point count
because there may be reuse of some object instance in project.
Step-6: Calculate Productivity rate (PROD)

Productivity rate is calculated on the basis of information given about developer’s experience and
capability.
For calculating it, we use following table
Step-7: Compute the estimated Effort
Effort to develop a project can be calculated as
Effort = NOP/PROD
Effort is measured in person-month.
Example 1:
Consider a database application project with
1. The application has four screens with four views each and seven data tables for three servers
and four clients.
2. Application may generate two reports of six section each from seven data tables for two
servers and three clients.
10% reuse of object points.

Developer’s experience and capability in similar environment is low. Calculate the object point count,
New object point and effort to develop such project.
Step-1:
Number of screens = 4
Number of records = 2
Step-2:
For screens,
Number of views = 4
Number of data tables = 7
Number of servers = 3
Number of clients = 4
by using above given information and table (For Screens),
Complexity level for each screen = medium
For reports,
Number of sections = 6
Number of data tables = 7
Number of servers = 2
Number of clients = 3
by using above given information and table (For Reports),
Complexity level for each report = difficult
Step-3:
By using complexity weight table we can assign complexity weight to each object instance depending
upon their complexity level.
Complexity weight for each screen = 2
Complexity weight for each report = 8
Step-4:
Object point count
= sigma (Number of object instances) * (its Complexity weight)
= 4 * 2 + 2 * 8 = 24
Step-5:
%reuse of object points = 10% (given)
NOP = [object points * (100 - %reuse)]/100
= [24 * (100 -10)]/100 = 21.6
Step-6:
Developer’s experience and capability is low (given)
Using information given about developer and productivity rate table
Productivity rate (PROD) of given project = 7
Step-7:
Effort
= NOP/PROD
= 21.6/7
= 3.086 person-month
Therefore, effort to develop the given project = 3.086 person-month.
Example 2:
You are tasked with estimating the effort required for developing a software application using the
COCOMO II Application Composition model. The application is expected to have 100,000 lines of
code (KLOC). The application type is classified as "Organic" and falls into the "Semi-Detached" level of
the Application Composition model. Given the following scale factors and cost drivers:
• Precedentedness: Very Low (1.34)
• Development Flexibility: High (1.07)
• Architecture/Risk Resolution: High (0.95)
• Team Cohesion: Low (1.16)
• Process Maturity: Very Low (1.29)
• Personnel Capability: High (0.86)
• Required Reusability: Nominal (1.00)
• Documentation Match to Life Cycle Needs: Very Low (1.23)
• Execution Time Constraint: High (1.29)
• Main Storage Constraint: Very Low (1.22)
• Platform Volatility: Low (1.05)
Using the COCOMO II model, calculate the estimated effort required for developing the application in
Person-Months.
Solution: Let's break down the calculation step by step.
1. Calculate the Unadjusted Function Points (UFP): UFP = KLOC * Sum of Weighting Factors =
100 * (1.34 + 1.07 + 0.95 + 1.16 + 1.29 + 0.86 + 1.00 + 1.23 + 1.29 + 1.22 + 1.05) ≈ 1182.82
2. Calculate the Application Composition Adjusted Function Points (AFP): AFP = UFP * (0.65 +
0.01 * Sum of Cost Drivers) = 1182.82 * (0.65 + 0.01 * (1.34 + 1.07 + 0.95 + 1.16 + 1.29 + 0.86
+ 1.00 + 1.23 + 1.29 + 1.22 + 1.05)) ≈ 1397.99
3. Calculate the effort in Person-Months using the following formula: Effort (Person-Months) =
2.94 * (AFP)^1.01 Effort = 2.94 * (1397.99)^1.01 Effort ≈ 5171.89 Person-Months
So, the estimated effort required for developing the application is approximately 5171.89 Person-
Months using the COCOMO II Application Composition Estimation Model.
Example 3: You are tasked with estimating the effort required for a software project using the
COCOMO II model. The project involves developing a web application with an estimated size of
50,000 lines of code (KLOC). The project is categorized as having an "Organic" type and falls under
the "Nominal" scale of the COCOMO II model. Given the following scale factors and cost drivers:
• Precedentedness: Low (4.96)
• Development Flexibility: High (2.03)
• Architecture/Risk Resolution: Very Low (1.41)
• Team Cohesion: Very High (1.29)

• Process Maturity: High (0.98)
• Personnel Capability: Very Low (1.22)
• Required Reusability: High (0.72)
• Documentation Match to Life Cycle Needs: Very High (1.00)
• Execution Time Constraint: High (1.29)
• Main Storage Constraint: Nominal (1.00)
• Platform Volatility: Low (0.87)
Using the COCOMO II model, calculate the estimated effort required for developing the web
application in Person-Months.
Solution: Let's go through the calculations step by step.
1. Calculate the Unadjusted Function Points (UFP): UFP = KLOC * Sum of Weighting Factors = 50
* (4.96 + 2.03 + 1.41 + 1.29 + 0.98 + 1.22 + 0.72 + 1.00 + 1.29 + 1.00 + 0.87) ≈ 396.27
2. Calculate the Effort Adjustment Factor (EAF): EAF = Product of Cost Drivers = 4.96 * 2.03 *
1.41 * 1.29 * 0.98 * 1.22 * 0.72 * 1.00 * 1.29 * 1.00 * 0.87 ≈ 45.62
3. Calculate the effort in Person-Months using the following formula: Effort (Person-Months) =
2.94 * (UFP)^1.18 * EAF Effort = 2.94 * (396.27)^1.18 * 45.62 Effort ≈ 455.64 Person-Months

Cocomo II With Example

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Cocomo II With Example

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Cocomo II With Example

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Application Composition Estimation Model allows one to estimate the cost, effort at the stage 1 of

the COCOMO II Model.

Step-1: Access Object counts

Step-2: Classify complexity levels of each object

= Sigma (number of object instances)

* (Complexity weight of each object instance)

Step-5: Compute New Object Points (NOP)

NOP = [(object points) * (100 - %reuse)]/100

Step-6: Calculate Productivity rate (PROD)

Effort is measured in person-month.

10% reuse of object points.

Object point count

= sigma (Number of object instances) * (its Complexity weight)

%reuse of object points = 10% (given)

NOP = [object points * (100 - %reuse)]/100

= [24 * (100 -10)]/100 = 21.6

Therefore, effort to develop the given project = 3.086 person-month.

• Development Flexibility: High (1.07)

• Architecture/Risk Resolution: High (0.95)

• Team Cohesion: Low (1.16)

• Process Maturity: Very Low (1.29)

• Personnel Capability: High (0.86)

• Required Reusability: Nominal (1.00)

• Documentation Match to Life Cycle Needs: Very Low (1.23)

• Execution Time Constraint: High (1.29)

• Main Storage Constraint: Very Low (1.22)

• Platform Volatility: Low (1.05)

Solution: Let's break down the calculation step by step.

• Precedentedness: Low (4.96)

• Development Flexibility: High (2.03)

• Architecture/Risk Resolution: Very Low (1.41)

• Team Cohesion: Very High (1.29)

• Personnel Capability: Very Low (1.22)

• Required Reusability: High (0.72)

• Documentation Match to Life Cycle Needs: Very High (1.00)

• Execution Time Constraint: High (1.29)

• Main Storage Constraint: Nominal (1.00)

• Platform Volatility: Low (0.87)

Solution: Let's go through the calculations step by step.

You might also like