RESL combines two scale factors; "Design Thoroughness by Product Design Review (PDR)" and "Risk Elimination by PDR". The next table combines these ratings factors to form a more comprehensive characterization for the COCOMO II RESL ranking. It moreover narrates the ranking levels to the MBASE/RUP Life Cycle Architecture (LCA) milestone above and beyond the waterfall PDR milestone. RESL ranking should be subjectively weighted in order to average the outlined distinctiveness.
| Feature | Very Low | Low | Nominal | High | Very High | Extra High |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Risk Management Plan identifies all critical risk items, establishes milestones for resolving them by PDR or LCA. | None | Little | Some | Generally | Mostly | Fully |
| Schedule, budget, and internal milestones through PDR or LCA compatible with Risk Management Plan. | None | Little | Some | Generally | Mostly | Fully |
| Percent of development schedule devoted to establishing architecture, given general product objectives. | 5 | 10 | 17 | 25 | 33 | 40 |
| Percent of required top software architects available to project. | 20 | 40 | 60 | 80 | 100 | 120 |
| Tool support available for resolving risk items, developing and verifying architectural specs. | None | Little | Some | Good | Strong | Full |
| Level of uncertainty in key architecture drivers: mission, user interface, COTS, hardware, technology, performance. | Extreme | Significant | Considerable | Some | Little | Very Little |
| Number and criticality of risk items. | > 10 Critical | 5-10 Critical | 2-4 Critical | 1 Critical | > 5 Non-Critical | < 5 Non-Critical |
Scale Factors for COCOMO.II Early Design and Post-Architecture Models
| RESL Descriptors | little (20%) | some (40%) | often (60%) | generally (75%) | mostly (90%) | full (100%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rating Levels | Very Low | Low | Nominal | High | Very High | Extra High |
| Value | 7.07 | 5.65 | 4.24 | 2.83 | 1.41 | 0.00 |