Skip Navigation

The Computer Journal 1988 31(3):248-252; doi:10.1093/comjnl/31.3.248
© 1988 by British Computer Society
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (8)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Prather, R. E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Comparison and Extension of Theories of Zipf and Halstead

R. E. Prather *

Computing and Information Sciences, Trinity University, 715 Stadium Drive, San Antonio, Texas 78284, USA

The length estimates of Zipf (behavioural psychology) and Halstead (software science) are shown to emerge from a single empirical law, providing a unified approach to the software metrication problem. Alternatively, both estimates may be derived from a probabilistic hypothesis concerning the programming process. On the other hand, it is shown that these two models (those of Zipf and Halstead) yield quite different token frequency distributions. It is suggested – and empirical evidence serves to support the claim – that the real situation lies somewhere between the two theories. A series of inequalities is proposed for guiding future research along these more realistic lines.

Received June 1986. revised February 1987.

* Computing and Information Sciences, Trinity University, 715 Stadium Drive, San Antonio, Texas 78284, USA


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.