\relax 
\citation{Boehm1981}
\citation{kemerer87}
\citation{Boehm2000,Jorgensen2007,Shepperd2007,Mendes2007}
\citation{Auer2006}
\citation{Menzies2006}
\citation{baker07}
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {section}{\numberline {1}Introduction}{1}}
\newlabel{sec:introduction}{{1}{1}}
\citation{Scott1992}
\citation{Wand1994}
\citation{Palpanas2003,John1995,Frank03}
\citation{Kadoda2000}
\citation{Kadoda2000,Mendes2003,Li2009}
\citation{Briand1999,jeffery2001}
\citation{Shepperd1997,Mendes2003}
\citation{Mendes2002,Mendes2003}
\citation{Shepperd2007}
\citation{Jorgensen2004}
\citation{Boehm2000}
\citation{Jorgensen2009}
\citation{Boehm1981}
\citation{Menzies2006,Kadoda2001}
\citation{Boehm1981,Kitchenham2009}
\citation{Myrtveit}
\citation{Myrtveit}
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {section}{\numberline {2}Background}{3}}
\newlabel{sec:background}{{2}{3}}
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {subsection}{\numberline {2.1}Software Effort Estimation}{3}}
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {subsection}{\numberline {2.2}ABE}{3}}
\newlabel{subsec:ABE}{{2.2}{3}}
\citation{Shepperd1996}
\citation{Mendes2003}
\citation{Li2009}
\newlabel{equ:euclid}{{1}{4}}
\citation{Mendes2003}
\citation{Wand1994}
\citation{Wand1994,Scott1992}
\citation{Wand1994}
\citation{Palpanas2003}
\citation{Frank03}
\citation{John1995}
\newlabel{equ:irwm}{{2}{5}}
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {subsection}{\numberline {2.3}Kernel Density Estimation}{5}}
\newlabel{subsec:kernel-estimation}{{2.3}{5}}
\newlabel{equ:kde}{{3}{5}}
\citation{Wand1994}
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {section}{\numberline {3}Methodology}{6}}
\newlabel{sec:methodology}{{3}{6}}
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {subsection}{\numberline {3.1}Weighting Method}{6}}
\newlabel{subsec:weighting-method}{{3.1}{6}}
\newlabel{equ:wkde}{{4}{6}}
\citation{Boehm1981}
\citation{Desharnais1989}
\citation{Kitchenham2007}
\citation{Cressie1993}
\citation{Mendes2002,Mendes2003}
\newlabel{equ:weight}{{5}{7}}
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {subsection}{\numberline {3.2}Data}{7}}
\@writefile{lof}{\contentsline {figure}{\numberline {1}{\ignorespaces We used 237 projects coming from 3 datasets. Datasets have different characteristics in terms of the number of attributes as well as the measures of these attributes.}}{7}}
\newlabel{fig:datasets}{{1}{7}}
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {subsection}{\numberline {3.3}Experiments}{7}}
\citation{Scott1992,Cressie1993}
\citation{John1995}
\citation{Molokken-Ostvold2004}
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {subsection}{\numberline {3.4}Performance Criteria}{8}}
\newlabel{EquationMRE}{{6}{8}}
\newlabel{EquationMdRE}{{7}{8}}
\newlabel{EquationMMRE}{{8}{8}}
\@writefile{lof}{\contentsline {figure}{\numberline {2}{\ignorespaces Pseudocode for Win-Tie-Loss Calculation Between Method \textit  {i} and \textit  {j}}}{9}}
\newlabel{FigureWinTieLossPseudocode}{{2}{9}}
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {section}{\numberline {4}Results}{9}}
\newlabel{sec:results}{{4}{9}}
\citation{Cressie1993}
\citation{Cressie1993,Scott1992,Wand1994}
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {subsection}{\numberline {4.1}Evaluation of WIN-TIE-LOSS Results}{10}}
\citation{Mendes2002,Mendes2003}
\@writefile{lof}{\contentsline {figure}{\numberline {3}{\ignorespaces Win-tie-loss results for Cocomo81. The WABE experiments are shown with a \textit  {+W} sign, whereas the dynamic \textit  {k} is represented with a \textit  {d} under the column \textbf  {\textit  {k}}. We used 5 different bandwidhts (represented with \textbf  {\textit  {h}}) for 4 different kernels. Similar to other data types, for Cocomo81 we do not see an improvement coming from different kernels. However, unlike other data types, we are unable to observe an improvement coming from change of bandwidht values.}}{11}}
\newlabel{fig:win-tie-loss-coc81}{{3}{11}}
\@writefile{lof}{\contentsline {figure}{\numberline {4}{\ignorespaces Win-tie-loss results for Nasa93. Results we have for Nasa93 are very similar to Cocomo81 dataset: Neither changing kernels nor the bandwidhts provides a noticable change in win-tie-loss values. Also ABE0 results are better than the WABE values.}}{12}}
\newlabel{fig:win-tie-loss-nasa93}{{4}{12}}
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {subsection}{\numberline {4.2}Evaluation of MRE-Based Measures}{12}}
\@writefile{lof}{\contentsline {figure}{\numberline {5}{\ignorespaces Win-tie-loss results for Desharnais. The implications we have observed in Cocomo81 and Nasa93 repeats for Desharnais dataset: Change of kernels does not provide a significant change in win-tie-loss values and neither does changing bandwidth. There are some small changes in different kernel-bandwidht combinations but we can not observe a pattern. Furthermore, ABE0 has a better estimation performance than WABE.}}{13}}
\newlabel{fig:win-tie-loss-desharnais}{{5}{13}}
\@writefile{lof}{\contentsline {figure}{\numberline {6}{\ignorespaces Win-tie-loss results of Cocomo81, Nasa93 and Desharnais for IRWM weighted WABE. The notation in this figure is similar to previous figures: Weighting is represented by a $+W$ sign and dynamic kernel is represented by a $d$ sign. IRWM is a different weighting strategy than kernel weighting, hence we do not see kernel or bandwidht information in this figure. Results are similar to previous scenarios: Lower \textit  {k} values attain higher $win$ values and lower $loss$ values. Furhermore, most importantly WABE is unable to outperform ABE0. }}{14}}
\newlabel{fig:irwm-win-tie-loss}{{6}{14}}
\@writefile{lof}{\contentsline {figure}{\numberline {7}{\ignorespaces MdMRE and MMRE results for Cocomo81 dataset. The column \textbf  {\textit  {k}} lists the \textit  {k} values. $+W$ stands for weighting, i.e. WABE. Cocomo81 results confirm the previous conclusions: 1) Neither the bandwidht nor the kernel type have a significant effect on the performance and 2) WABE via kernel methods do not outperform ABE0.}}{15}}
\newlabel{fig:mre-coc81}{{7}{15}}
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {section}{\numberline {5}Threats to Validity}{15}}
\newlabel{sec:threats-to-validity}{{5}{15}}
\citation{Alpaydin2004}
\citation{Milic2004}
\citation{Robson2002}
\@writefile{lof}{\contentsline {figure}{\numberline {8}{\ignorespaces MdMRE and MMRE results for Nasa93 dataset. Neither change of kernel nor the change of bandwidht generates a considerable difference in results. Furthermore, small changes in MdMRE and MMRE values due to different kernel-bandwidth combinations do not follow a regular pattern. Another cocnlusions from this figure is that WABE fails to improve ABE0 and lower \textit  {k} values generate lower MdMRE-MMRE values.}}{16}}
\newlabel{fig:mre-nasa93}{{8}{16}}
\@writefile{lof}{\contentsline {figure}{\numberline {9}{\ignorespaces MdMRE and MMRE results for Desharnais dataset. None of the different kernel-bandwidth combinations can improve the performance of WABE to a point better than ABE0 method.}}{17}}
\newlabel{fig:mre-desharnais}{{9}{17}}
\citation{Myrtveit,Foss}
\citation{Foss}
\citation{Premraj2007,Lum2008,Li2006}
\citation{Wand1994}
\citation{Palpanas2003,John1995}
\@writefile{lof}{\contentsline {figure}{\numberline {10}{\ignorespaces MdMRE and MMRE results of Cocomo81, Nasa93 and Desharnais for IRWM weighted WABE. \textbf  {\textit  {k}} stands for the number of analogies used for estimation and $+W$ sign means that IRWM weighted WABE is used for estimation. Similar to kernel weighted WABE, expert weighted WABE can not perform an improvement to ABE0 method. }}{18}}
\newlabel{fig:irwm-mdmre-mmre}{{10}{18}}
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {section}{\numberline {6}Conclusions}{18}}
\newlabel{sec:conclusions}{{6}{18}}
\citation{Cressie1993,Palpanas2003}
\citation{Cressie1993,Palpanas2003}
\citation{Frank03,John1995,Palpanas2003}
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {subsection}{\numberline {6.1}Answers To Research Questions}{19}}
\bibstyle{abbrv}
\bibdata{myref}
\bibcite{Alpaydin2004}{1}
\bibcite{Auer2006}{2}
\bibcite{baker07}{3}
\bibcite{Boehm2000}{4}
\bibcite{Boehm1981}{5}
\bibcite{Briand1999}{6}
\bibcite{Cressie1993}{7}
\bibcite{Desharnais1989}{8}
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {section}{\numberline {7}Future Work}{20}}
\newlabel{sec:future-work}{{7}{20}}
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {section}{\numberline {8}Acknowledgements}{20}}
\newlabel{sec:acknowledgements}{{8}{20}}
\bibcite{Foss}{9}
\bibcite{Frank03}{10}
\bibcite{jeffery2001}{11}
\bibcite{John1995}{12}
\bibcite{Jorgensen2004}{13}
\bibcite{Jorgensen2009}{14}
\bibcite{Jorgensen2007}{15}
\bibcite{Kadoda2000}{16}
\bibcite{kemerer87}{17}
\bibcite{Kitchenham2009}{18}
\bibcite{Mendes2007}{19}
\bibcite{Kitchenham2007}{20}
\bibcite{Li2006}{21}
\bibcite{Li2009}{22}
\bibcite{Lum2008}{23}
\bibcite{Mendes2002}{24}
\bibcite{Mendes2003}{25}
\bibcite{Menzies2006}{26}
\bibcite{Milic2004}{27}
\bibcite{Molokken-Ostvold2004}{28}
\bibcite{Myrtveit}{29}
\bibcite{Palpanas2003}{30}
\bibcite{Premraj2007}{31}
\bibcite{Robson2002}{32}
\bibcite{Scott1992}{33}
\bibcite{Shepperd2007}{34}
\bibcite{Kadoda2001}{35}
\bibcite{Shepperd1997}{36}
\bibcite{Shepperd1996}{37}
\bibcite{Wand1994}{38}