ATDM — Predictive model informative sub-clause misaligned with normative content

§ Predictive model sub-clause used to detail adjustment factors.
Adjustment factors are now part of the normative section of the document
Alternative adjustment factors formula (that is, formula different from the standard one specified in the normative section) as well as additional adjustment factors (e.g., Evolution Status) can be moved to § Calculating a Contextual Technical Debt (CTDM) sub-clause

Proposition to
1/ remove the § Predictive model sub-clause
2/ move alternative adjustment factors formula as well as additional adjustment factors to § Calculating a Contextual Technical Debt (CTDM) sub-clause
From
<<<
The Contextual Technical Debt Measure (CTDM) is an alternative to the Automated Technical Debt Measure, because it is adapted to the context of a specific organization or application. The adaptation process is multifaceted and concerns one or more of the following aspects:
the list of patterns to consider: a subset of the patterns from ASCMM, ASCRM, ASCPEM, and ASCSM; or a set including source code patterns not included in these Quality Characteristic measures.
different values for remediation effort: different Remediation Effort formulas, different Remediation Effort unit values, etc.
the use of adjustment factors, as illustrated in previous sub-clause
the evolution of the configuration over time.
However, these adjustments are incorporated at the expense of benchmarking, which cannot be accomplished with CTDM except among applications where the CTDM adjustments are identical.
>>>
To
<<<
The Contextual Technical Debt Measure (CTDM) is an alternative to the Automated Technical Debt Measure, because it is adapted to the context of a specific organization or application. The adaptation process is multifaceted and concerns one or more of the following non mutually exclusive aspects:
the list of patterns to consider: a subset of the patterns from ASCMM, ASCRM, ASCPEM, and ASCSM; or a set including source code patterns not included in these Quality Characteristic measures.
different values for remediation effort: different unadjusted Remediation Effort formulas, different unadjusted Remediation Effort values,
the use of different formulas for adjustment factors, or their deactivation
the use of additional adjustment factors
However, these adjustments are incorporated at the expense of benchmarking, which cannot be accomplished with CTDM except among applications where the CTDM adjustments are identical.
The following sub-sub-clauses illustrates sample variations regarding adjustment factors.

8.4.1 Technological Diversity
Principle
Adjust the Technological Diversity adjustment factor to better reflect the organization’s ability to deal with occurrences involving multiple technologies.
Illustrations
Turn off (that is, ignore from computation) the Technological Diversity adjustment factor if the organization is organized around cross-technology teams.
Compute an alternative technological diversity penalty factor equal to the power of the number of distinct technologies, with a power value smaller than 1, to model a smooth coordination of different teams, and greater than 1, to model the infrequent involvement of different teams.

8.4.2 Exposure
Principle
Adjust the Exposure adjustment factor to better reflect the organization’s ability to avoid destabilization of the software via automated testing.
Illustrations
Turn off (that is, ignore from computation) the Exposure adjustment factor if the organization is so mature regarding automated non-regression testing that teams can update the code without fear of side effects
Compute an alternative exposure adjustment factor using one of the following formulas:
with an asymptote: max-1/(range number+1)power
without an asymptote: (range number)power
where range number is a logarithmic transformation of the exposure values, to account for combinatorial nature of the exposure and make them human-friendly: |log (exposure + 1)|

8.4.3 Concentration
Principle
Adjust the Concentration adjustment factor to better reflect the organization’s strategy regarding the removal of Technical Debt occurrences.
Illustration
Turn off (that is, ignore from computation) the Concentration adjustment factor if the organization is willing to remove occurrences one at a time, that is, without considerations about other occurrences involving the same code elements.

8.4.4 Evolution Status
8.4.4.1 Occurrence
Principle
Adjust the remediation effort for a Technical Debt Item with an evolution qualification measure to factor in the opportunity to remove an occurrence more easily when it was injected into the software during the current release cycle.
Illustration
Consider an occurrence evolution reward factor of .50 for added occurrences.

8.4.4.2 Code elements
Principle
Adjust the remediation effort for a Technical Debt Item with an evolution qualification measure to factor in the opportunity to remove an occurrence more easily when the code elements involved were recently updated.
Illustration
Consider a code element evolution reward factor of .75 for updated code elements.

8.4.4.3 Limitation
Please note that the use of such adjustment factors makes the measures evolve over time, even if the software is not evolved in any way, as the occurrences “grow old” and the opportunity to remove them more easily vanishes.

>>>

Old 8.4 misaligned and should be replaced with a section for calculating CTDM which is a non-normative measure referenced in section 6.

Provide a better description of CTDM for readers to use in implementing CTDM measures.