Presentation

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Evaluation - accuracyAre all the methods the same ?SUMMARYGroups Count Sum Average Variancefiw 10 370 37 157.64pc 9 151.7 16.855556 168.11278vs 7 168.3 24.042857 20.599524ANOVASource of Variation SS df MS F P-value F critBetween Groups 1981.862 2 990.93109 7.8937886 0.002454 3.42213Within Groups 2887.259 23 125.53302Are there any differences between PC and VS?vs pcMean 24.04286 16.85556Variance 20.59952 168.1128Observations 7 9Hypothesized Mean Difference 0df 10t Stat 1.545675P(T
Why does it work?• Differences rather than absolute values• Explicit paired comparisons• Redundant values• The result is an average of many individual observationsEricsson Research Canada October 2000 E. Miranda, COCOMO/SCM 15
Page 1 and 2: Improving subjective estimationsusi
Page 3 and 4: Subjective estimations are a way of
Page 5 and 6: Can we do better? - The paired comp
Page 7 and 8: The math - judgement matrixArtifact
Page 9 and 10: Verbal scalesDefinitionSoftware Rel
Page 11: ExampleBGFCDEIJEricsson Research Ca
Page 14 and 15: Evaluation - geometric figures12010
Page 18 and 19: Summary and further research• The
Page 20: The EndEricsson Research Canada Oct

Presentation

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?