Information and Software Technology 45 (2003) 539–546 www.elsevier.com/locate/infsof Code and data spatial complexity: two important software understandability measures Jitender Kumar Chhabraa‚*‚ K.K. Aggarwalb‚ Yogesh Singhc a Department of Computer Engineering‚ National Institute of Technology (Deemed University)‚ Kurukshetra 136119‚ India b Vice-Chancellor‚ GGS Indraprastha University‚ Delhi 110006‚ India c School of Information Technology‚ GGS Indraprastha University‚ Delhi 110006‚ India
Premium Computer program Computer software Software engineering
pressures in everyday managerial life. The authors see organizations as: 1. Complex—People are hard to understand and predict. Interactions among individuals and groups within organizations multiply human complexities‚ and connections among different organizations add still another level of complexity. 2. Surprising—Human nature is unpredictable‚ making it impossible to anticipate all the ramifications of any decision‚ and many of today’s solutions create tomorrow’s problems. 3. Deceptive—Organizations
Free Psychology Knowledge Complexity
advantages disadvantages of alternative methods Metrics used to measure efficiency and effectiveness of a File structure-1 simplicity‚ reliability‚ time complexities‚ space complexities‚ scalability‚ programmability‚ and maintainability. *Note that the domains of the efficiency and effectiveness concerns rely on time and space complexity more than any other factor. Metrics used to measure efficiency and effectiveness of a File structure-2 The file structures involve two domains: hardware
Premium Data Computer Computational complexity theory
ABSTRACT: We study complexity of finding a local minimum in the worst and the average cases. We introduce several neighborhoods and show that the corresponding. In the average case we note that standard local descent algorithm is polynomial. INTRODUCTION: An algorithm is a set of instructions to be followed to solve a problem Worst‚ Average and Best Cases In the previous post‚ we discussed how asymptotic analysis overcomes the problems of naive way of analyzing algorithms
Premium Computational complexity theory
number of nodes generated‚ which is a function of the branching factor b and the solution d. Since the number of nodes at level d is bd‚ the total number of nodes generated in the worst case is b + b2 + b3 +… + bd i.e. O(bd) ‚ the asymptotic time complexity of breadth first search. Breadth First Search Look at the above tree with nodes starting from root node‚ R at the first level‚ A and B at the second level and C‚ D‚ E and F at the third level. If we want to search for node E then BFS will search
Premium Graph theory Computational complexity theory
the “intrinsic” worth of jobs‚ based on systematic assessment of the degree of complexity of job content and requirement‚ and to do this independently of any pre-conceived standards of remuneration and without regard to the qualities and performance of the actual personnel who perform the jobs. Secondary Aims • To relate jobs to each other in terms of their intrinsic worth‚ and hence to determine relative complexities of different jobs and a rational job structure within an organisation. •
Premium Computational complexity theory
recommendations and only participation involves is asking employees for information. Discussion Question 2 The first factor led me to choose high involvement is the decision structure; this problem is not programmed decision but a little bit complexity and more opportunity. This product need to take some source away from other projects in order to required some time and resources before it would be commercially stage. Second‚ source of decision knowledge could show that the leader lack sufficient
Premium Risk Decision making Decision theory
Michigan Manufacturing Corporation’s: The Pontiac Plant‚ 1992 Overhead costs of plants in the Michigan Manufacturing (MM) system vary greatly from plant to plant for several reasons‚ but the major one is that the varying complexity of the mission of each plant. Exhibits 2A and 2B show that different plants vary greatly in the number of product families they produce‚ and then also in the number of product models. We did not calculate the correlation between these numbers and the burden rates‚ but
Premium Plant Computational complexity theory
Introduction to Algorithms‚ Second Edition Thomas H. Cormen Charles E. Leiserson Ronald L. Rivest Clifford Stein The MIT Press Cambridge ‚ Massachusetts London‚ England McGraw-Hill Book Company Boston Burr Ridge ‚ IL Dubuque ‚ IA Madison ‚ WI New York San Francisco St. Louis Montréal Toronto This book is one of a series of texts written by faculty of the Electrical Engineering and Computer Science Department at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. It was edited and produced by The MIT Press
Premium Algorithm Computational complexity theory
T H O M A S H. C O R M E N C H A R L E S E. L E I S E R S O N R O N A L D L. R I V E S T C L I F F O R D STEIN INTRODUCTION TO ALGORITHMS T H I R D E D I T I O N Introduction to Algorithms Third Edition Thomas H. Cormen Charles E. Leiserson Ronald L. Rivest Clifford Stein Introduction to Algorithms Third Edition The MIT Press Cambridge‚ Massachusetts London‚ England c 2009 Massachusetts Institute of Technology All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced
Premium Algorithm Computational complexity theory