.png){kind=icon}
返回
Software defect number prediction: Unsupervised vs supervised methods
.png){kind=icon}
PRE
AI
DOI：10.1016/j.infsof.2018.10.003.png)
.png){kind=icon}
原文求助.png){kind=icon}
分享.png){kind=icon}
收藏
摘要
En 中文
Context: Software defect number prediction (SDNP) can rank the program modules according to the prediction results and is helpful for the optimization of testing resource allocation. Objective: In previous studies, supervised methods vs unsupervised methods is an active issue for just-in-time defect prediction and file-level defect prediction based on effort-aware performance measures. However, this issue has not been investigated for SDNP. To the best of our knowledge, we are the first to make a thorough comparison for these two different types of methods. Method: In our empirical studies, we consider 7 real open-source projects with 24 versions in total, use FPA and Kendall as our effort-aware performance measures, and consider three different performance evaluation scenarios (i.e., within-version scenario, cross-version scenario, and cross-project scenario). Result: We first identify two unsupervised methods with best performance. These two methods simply rank modules according to the value of metric LOC and metric RFC from large to small respectively. Then we compare 9 state-of-the-art supervised methods incorporating SMOTEND, which is used for handling class imbalance problem, with the unsupervised method based on LOC metric (i.e., LOC_D method). Final results show that LOC_D method can perform significantly better than or the same as these supervised methods. Later motivated by a recent study conducted by Agrawla and Menzies, we apply differential evolutionary (DE) to optimize parameter value of SMOTEND used by these supervised methods and find that using DE can effectively improve the performance of these supervised methods for SDNP too. Finally, we continue to compare LOC_D with these optimized supervised methods using DE, and LOC_D method still has advantages in the performance, especially in the cross-version and cross-project scenarios. Conclusion: Based on these results, we suggest that researchers need to use the unsupervised method LOC_D as the baseline method, which is used for comparing their proposed novel methods for SDNP problem in the future.
Keyword:
Software defect prediction
Software defect number prediction
Supervised method
Unsupervised method
Class imbalance learning
Differential evolutionary
Empirical study
AI总结
对已上传原文的论文进行重点信息的提取，主要内容包括：简要概述、研究摘要、背景介绍、关键亮点、图文解析、展望与总结。
期刊
IF:
4.3
论文数:
3.8K
被引数:
7.7K
机构
引用论文
A Systematic Literature Review on Fault Prediction Performance in Software Engineering软件工程中故障预测性能的系统文献综述
OAAI
OAAI分享收藏分享收藏Arsenic removal from aqueous solutions by adsorption using novel MIL-53(Fe) as a highly efficient adsorbent使用新型MIL-53(Fe) 作为高效吸附剂通过吸附从水溶液中去除砷.png)
RSC Advances
RSC AdvancesIF0
PREAI
分享收藏分享收藏
查看更多内容