<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Applying Software Defect Estimations: Using a Risk Matrix for Tuning Test Effort · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/0711.1669/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/0711.1669/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Applying Software Defect Estimations: Using a Risk Matrix for Tuning Test Effort — mentioned by dredmorbius</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7216046</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:0711.1669:7216046</guid><pubDate>Tue, 11 Feb 2014 05:57:38 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;It&amp;#x27;s a known thing. Look up &amp;quot;software defect estimation&amp;quot;. The methods aren&amp;#x27;t too dissimilar to how population ecologists estimate the population of a wild animal population (you tag individuals and note the rate at which you&amp;#x27;re repeated re-tagging the same ones), the estimated total falls out via statistics. It&amp;#x27;s not a method that&amp;#x27;s applied frequently even within organizations (I&amp;#x27;ve worked in and with QA numerous times), and my copy of Cem Kaner&amp;#x27;s Testing Computer Software doesn&amp;#x27;t seem to address the matter. Boehm&amp;#x27;s Software Engineering Economics discusses software reliability modelling at…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/0711.1669/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>cs.SE</category></item></channel></rss>
