A b str a ct T h e p a p er is a b o ut t h e d e v el o p m e nt of a s oft w ar e q u alit y ass ess m e nt m et h o d, w hi c h is b as e d o n t h e F C M ( F a ct or -Crit eri a -M etri cs) s oft w ar e q u alit y ass ess m e nt m o d el, I S O / I E C 2 5 0 1 0 s oft w ar e q u alit y st a n d ar d a n d m ulti -crit eri a d e cisi o n a n al ysis m et h o d. T h e m et h o d pr es e nt e d i n t h e p a p er all o ws us t o o bt ai n a q u a ntit ati v e ass ess m e nt of q u alit y i n di c at ors usi n g t h e I S O / I E C 2 5 0 1 0 st a n d ar d w h e n ass essi n g s oft w ar e q u alit y. K e y w or ds 1 S oft w ar e, q u alit y, ass ess m e nt, F C M m o d el 1. I ntr o d u cti o n 2. St a n d ar d a n d m o d el of s oft w ar e q u alit y
T h e r a pi d d e v el o p m e nt of i nf or m ati o n
t e c h n ol o gi es is i n cr e asi n g t h e d e m a n d f or t h eir
us e i n al m ost all s p h er es of h u m a n a cti vit y,
m or e o v er, at pr es e nt it is i n c o n c ei v a bl e f or t h e m
t o f u n cti o n eff e cti v el y wit h o ut t h e us e of m o d er n
i nf or m ati o n t e c h n ol o gi es. T h e r a pi d d e v el o p m e nt
of i nf or m ati o n t e c h n ol o gi es a n d c o m p uti n g
pr o c ess es i n r e c e nt d e c a d es h as l e d t o t h e
e xist e n c e of s oft w ar e i n all ar e as of h u m a n
a cti vit y [ 1]. T h er ef or e i n cr e asi n g t h e d e m a n d f or
s oft w ar e q u alit y. S oft w ar e q u alit y is t h e
c o m bi n ati o n of t h e c h ar a ct eristi cs of a c o m p ut er
s oft w ar e pr o d u ct a n d t h eir m e a ni n gs t h at r el at e t o
t h e a bilit y t o us e it t o m e et est a blis h e d or e x p e ct e d
r e q uir e m e nts [
B as e d o n t h e a b o v e, t h e ai m of o ur p a p er is t o d e v el o p a s oft w ar e q u alit y ass ess m e nt m et h o d b as e d o n t h e F C M ( F a ct or -Crit eri a -M etri cs) s oft w ar e q u alit y ass ess m e nt m o d el, t h e I S O / I E C 2 5 0 1 0 s oft w ar e q u alit y st a n d ar d, a n d t h e m ulti crit eri a d e cisi o n a n al ysis m et h o d .
T h er e ar e m a n y st a n d ar ds i n s oft w ar e q u alit y e v al u ati o n t h at d et er mi n e t h e f a ct ors ( c h ar a ct eristi cs) of s oft w ar e q u alit y e v al u ati o n.
Q u alit y c h ar a ct eristi cs r efl e ct t h e diff er e nt
q u aliti es e x hi bit e d b y s elf -pr o m oti o n al s oft w ar e,
I S O / I E C 2 5 0 1 0 is a s oft w ar e q u alit y st a n d ar d, it
r ef ers t o t h e q u alit y of t h e s oft w ar e a p pli c ati o n as
a " pr o d u ct ", as w ell as t h e q u alit y of its cr e ati o n
pr o c ess es. T h e pr o d u ct q u alit y m o d el s p e cifi e d i n
I S O / I E C 2 5 0 1 0 i n cl u d es t h e f oll o wi n g q u alit y
c h ar a ct eristi cs[
• F u n cti o n al S uit a bilit y - F u n cti o n al S uit a bilit y r ef ers t o h o w w ell a pr o d u ct or s yst e m is a bl e t o pr o vi d e f u n cti o ns t h at m e et t h e st at e d a n d i m pli e d n e e ds.
• R eli a b ilit y - R eli a bilit y r ef ers t o h o w w ell a s yst e m, pr o d u ct, or c o m p o n e nt p erf or ms s p e cifi e d f u n cti o ns u n d er s p e cifi e d c o n diti o ns[ 1 1].
• P erf or m a n c e Effi ci e n c y - T his c h ar a ct eristi c r e pr es e nts t h e p erf or m a n c e r el ati v e t o t h e a m o u nt of r es o ur c es us e d u n d er st at e d c o n diti o ns. • • • • •
Us e a bilit y - Us a bilit y r ef ers t o h o w w ell a pr o d u ct or s yst e m c a n b e us e d t o a c hi e v e s p e cifi e d g o als eff e cti v el y, effi ci e ntl y, a n d s atisf a ct oril y.
S e c urit y - S e c urit y r ef ers t o h o w w ell a
pr o d u ct or s yst e m pr ot e cts i nf or m ati o n a n d d at a
fr o m s e c urit y v ul n er a biliti es[
C o m p ati bilit y - C o m p ati bilit y r ef ers t o h o w w ell a pr o d u ct, s yst e m, or c o m p o n e nt c a n e x c h a n g e i nf or m ati o n as r e q uir e d f u n cti o ns w hil e w ell as p erf or m its s h ari n g t h e s a m e h ar d w ar e or s oft w ar e e n vir o n m e nt[ 1 0 ,1 1].
M a i nt ai n a bilit y - M ai nt ai n a bilit y r ef ers t o h o w w ell a pr o d u ct or s yst e m c a n b e m o difi e d t o f e at ur es of s oft w ar e o p er ati o n a n d n o n-f u n cti o n al f e at ur es t h at c h ar a ct eri z e t h e b e h a vi or of t h e s oft w ar e pr o d u ct d uri n g d ail y us e. N o n -f u n cti o n al f e at ur es r el at e d t o r eli a bilit y, us a bilit y
a n d effi ci e n c y s h o ul d b e cl assifi e d as r e q uir e m e nts t h at a s oft w ar e pr o d u ct, m ust m e et i n t h e c o urs e of its o p er ati o n. T o d et er mi n e t h at a s oft w ar e pr o d u ct
m e ets diff er e nt q u alit y c h ar a ct eristi cs, t h er e ar e diff er e nt pr o c ess es q u alit y. T his m e a ns t h at t h e hi g h -q u alit y pr o c ess of cr e ati n g a pr o d u ct cr e at es a hi g h -q u alit y i m pr o v e, c orr e ct, or a d a pt t o c h a n g es i n t h e pr o d u ct. T h at is w h y s p e ci al att e nti o n is p ai d t o e n vir o n m e nt as w ell as r e q uir e m e nts.
P ort a bilit y - P ort a bilit y r ef ers t o h o w w ell a s yst e m, pr o d u ct, or c o m p o n e nt
c a n tr a nsf err e d fr o m o n e e n vir o n m e nt t o a n ot h er.
b e
T h es e f e at ur es
c a n
b e
di vi d e d i nt o t w o
t h e pr o c ess es [
T h e
F C M
m o d el is a g e n er al m o d el f or e v al u ati n g s oft w ar e q u alit y, i n t h e
m o d el t h e s oft w ar e t er mi n ati o n f a ct or is o n e f a ct or, o n e f a ct or is t h e d e cisi v e crit eri o n, s e v er al crit eri a ar e c at e g ori es: f u n cti o n al f e at ur es w hi c h ar e t h e m ai n d e ci d e d b y s o m e m etri cs.
Fi g ur e 1 : F C M m o d el [
If w e l o o k at t h e s oft w ar e q u alit y e v al u ati o n m o d el pr es e nt e d a b o v e, w e
will s e e t h at its str u ct ur e is si mil ar t o t h e str u ct ur e of a m ulti crit eri a d e cisi o n a n al ysis t as k. B e c a us e i n di vi d u al q u alit y c h ar a ct eristi cs ar e c h ar a ct eri z e d
b y diff er e nt crit eri a, c o m pil e a d e cisi o n m atri x f or a p arti c ul ar q u alit y c h ar a ct eristi c ( c o nsisti n g of alt er n ati v es ( q u alit y c h ar a ct eristi c) a n d e v al u ati o n crit eri a f or alt er n ati v es).
B as e d o n
w hi c h t h e m ulti -crit eri a d e cisi o n a n al ysis T O P SI S m et h o d [ 6,7 ,8] c a n b e us e d t o d et er mi n e t h e q u a ntit ati v e e v al u ati o n r at e f or t h e q u alit y c h ar a ct eristi c (i n t h e r a n g e 0 -1). ️© 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 3 3 1 1 1 2 2 2 3 2 ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯
1 2 3
( 1)
I n t his c as e, t h e m atri x c o nsists of o n e r e al alt er n ati v e ( q u alit y c h ar a ct eristi c - q 1) a n d t w o f or m al alt er n ati v es ( q 2 - wit h t h e
m a xi m u m p ossi bl e v al u es a c c or di n g t o t h e crit eri a, a n d q 3 wit h t h e mi ni m u m v al u es). F or t h e r e al alt er n ati v e, t h e x 1j v al u es ar e d et er mi n e d usi n g n u m b ers o bt ai n e d fr o m m etri cs a n d usi n g v ari o us t y p es of t esti n g m et h o ds ( w hi c h m ust b e r e pr es e nt e d o n a 1 0 0 -p oi nt s c al e).
O n c e w e h a v e d efi n e d t h e d e cisi o n m atri x, t h e 1+ = √ ∑ = 1 ( 1 − ∗ ) 2 d e cisi o n m atri x a c c or di n g t o t h e f oll o wi n g f or m ul a:
= ∗
St a g e 4. D efi n e p ositi v e i d e al a n d n e g ati v e i d e al s ol uti o ns:
P ositi v e I d e al D e cisi o n:
W h er e: N e g ati v e i d e al s ol uti o n: + = { 1+ , 2+ ,… , + }
+ = m a x ( ) − = { 1− , 2− ,… , − }
− = mi n ( ) i d e al s ol uti o n. f oll o wi n g f or m ul a:
St a g e 6. C al c ul at e t h e alt er n ati v e cl os est t o t h e
W hi c h is c al c ul at e d b y t h e 1 = 1− + 1+
1− W h er e:
0 ≤ 1 ≤ 1
I n or d er t o e v al u at e all q u alit y c h ar a ct eristi cs a c c or di n g t o I S O / I E C 2 5 0 1 0 st a n d ar d, it is q 1 (r el e a bili t y) [ 1 , 2 ,… , ] f or t h e e v al u ati o n crit eri a, w hi c h i n di vi d u al c h ar a ct eristi cs a n d p erf or m t h e a b o v e m ust s atisf y t h e f oll o wi n g c o n diti o n: st e ps b as e d o n it.
St a g e 2 . N or m ali z e t h e d e cisi o n m atri x usi n g t h e f oll o wi n g f or m ul a:
Denfie positive ideal and negative ideal Inf01 mation Technologies"(IT&QM&IS) solutions as follows: (pp. 496-499). EIEE . positive ideal solution - [ 0.25, 0.24, 0.26 ] [5] Hovornshchenko, T. (2018)M.ethodologyof negativeideal solution - [ 0, 0, O ] evaluating the sufficiency of info1mationfor sowftare quality assessment according to
Calculate the distance to the ideal positive and ISO 25010.Jownal of info1mationand ideal negative solution for the q1alternative, in organizational sciences, 42(1),63-85. our case the distance to the ideal solution is [6]Pamucar, D. S., Bozanic, D., & Randelovic 0.06681,and the distance to the negative ideal A. (2017).Multi-crite1iadecision making'. solution is 0.37916. Usingthis to calculate the An example of sensitivity analysis. Serbian coeficient of proximity to the ideal solution for journal of management,12(11), -27. the q1alternative, which is equal to 0.850187T.his is the targetvalue for us by the proximity of which [7]eBxapseh1eledtieschivsiioli,n- mI. ak(2in0g20a)l.goDreitvhemloupsiinngg tthhee we detennine the level of evaluation of the quality methods of multi-c1ite1ia analysis. characteristic. Cybernetics and Info1mation Technologies, 20(2), 22-29. [8]I. Basheleishvili , S. Tsiramua (2019), 5. Conclusion Development of Method of Multifunctional Personnel Assessment Using a Topsis
The work presents a software quality Method. Journ al of Technical Science and assessment method based on the FCM (Factor Technologies,7(1),31-36. Criteria-Metrics) sowftare quality assessment [9]Madler, J., Viedt, I., & Urbas, L. (2021). Applying quality assurance concepts from model, ISO/ IEC25010software quality standard software development to simulation model and multi-criteria solution analysis method, assessmentin smait equipment. InComputer allows us to evaluate software quality afetures, Aided Chemical Engineering (Vol. 50, pp. which is an imp01tanttool for the sowftare quality 8138-18).Elsevier. managementprocess, which aims to develop and [10]Estdale, J., & Georgiadou, E. (2018, managesoftware quality so that the product meets September). Applying the ISO/CIE 25010 the quality standards required by the user as much qEuuaroliptyeanmCoodnelfseretoncesooftwnmSeoftwapi·eroduPcrot.ceIssn as possible. Improvement (pp. 492-503). Sp1ing,er Cham. 6. References [l1 ]https://iso25000.com/index.php/en/iso25000-standards/iso-2501O?stait=3 [12 ]Fraser, G., & Rojas, J. M. (2019).Softwai·e testing. In Handbook of Software
Engineering(pp. 123-192S).pringer, Cham. [13 ]Kassab, M., Defranco, J. F., & Laplante, P.
A. (2017).Softwai·e testing: The state of the practice. IEEESoftwai·e, 34(5), 46-52. [14 ]Jainil, M. A., Alif, M., Abubakai·, N. S. A., & Ahmad, A. (2016,November). Software testing techniques: A literature review. In 2016 6th international conference on inf01mation and communicationtechnology for the Muslim world (ICT4M) (pp. 177182)IEE.E. [15]Molnai·, A. J., Neamtu, A., & Motogna, s.
(2019, May). Longitudinal Evaluation of Softwai·e Quality Metiics in Open-Source Applications. InENASE (pp. 80-91).