MSE Presentation Phase III Pesticide Safety Consultant System

MSE Presentation (Phase III) Pesticide Safety Consultant System (PSCS) Fengyou Jia Oct. 20, 2003

Give my sincere thanks to: Major Professor: Dr. Bill Hankley Committee Member: Dr. Maria Zamfir Bleyberg Dr. Scott A. De. Loach

Presentation Outline • • • Formal Specification Modification (phase II) Project Overview Project Requirements Test and Reliability Evaluation Project Demo

Interface navigation

-- Counting pesticide products that are able to control the primary pest and -- secondary pest (option) thus far (prior to formulation selection) with -- considering mamtoxicity, ecotoxicity, and environment_hazard of -- pesticides. -- Class Product context Product: : count (p 1 : Pest, p 2 : Pest, mamvalue : String, ecovalue : String, envvalue : String) pre beforecontinue : result = ( pesticide. all. Istance -> select(p : Pesticide | p. control -> includes(p 1) and p. control -> includes(p 2) ) ) -> size post aftercontinue : result = ( pesticide. all. Istance -> select(p : Pesticide | p. control -> includes(p 1) and p. control -> includes(p 2) and p. contain. mamtoxicity = mamvalue and p. contain. ecotoxicity = ecovalue and p. contain. environment_hazard = envvalue)) -> size

Project Overview • Objective: To design a user-oriented pesticide safety consultant system in guidance of pesticide selection and application in pest management program. • Potential Users: Farmers/growers, Extension Professions, Government Agencies (EPA), Universities.

Project Requirements Pesticide Database Query Inputting Query Returning Inputs User Outputs PESTICIDE Querying Results

Project Requirements User Inputs Pesticide Database Query Inputting PESTICIDE Query Returning Outputs Querying Results

Test and Reliability Evaluation • Gives a detailed description of the testing done • GUI (Graphical User Interface) Testing: (Each of 43 GUI Items was tested in terms of functionality) • Unit Testing: (16 questions in a checking list was checked for testing units and interfaces between units) • Integration Testing: (19 test cases using for testing system integral functionality) • Number of errors decreased as the testing progressed and eventually ended up with no errors

Test evaluation (cont. ) In response to the comments and suggestions from the committee in phase II and before, I have added two important features for the PSCS. v Candidate pesticide counting This feature is to tell user whether he/she should continue to search. v Secondary pest selection This feature is to allow user to consider the secondary pest that is also need to be controlled at the same time (but limited to the same pest group as the primary pest).

Project Evaluation • Size of project – Estimated: 1. 6 k – Actual: 1. 8 k – This small difference is caused by the adding several new features for the PSCS. Overall, it is good matched between the estimated size and the actual size. • Cost effort – Estimated: 3. 7 months – Actual: 3. 9 months – Evaluation: match • Schedule – Phase I was modified following the presentation I and the project requirements and scopes were refined thereafter. – Phase II and Phase III were finished according the schedule.

Project Evaluation (cont. ) • Product Evaluation v. Meets all project requirements v. Successful through the test cases v. Stable: run good on Microsoft Explorer v. Performance result: • Table results performed as expected

Future PSCS: 1)Adding more safety features 2)Populating more data into database 3)Membership?

Demo (http: //www. oznet. ksu. edu/pesticidedatabase/main. asp)