...
首页> 外文期刊>Software Quality Journal >Which process metrics can significantly improve defect prediction models? An empirical study
【24h】

Which process metrics can significantly improve defect prediction models? An empirical study

机译:哪些过程指标可以显着改善缺陷预测模型?实证研究

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

The knowledge about the software metrics which serve as defect indicators is vital for the efficient allocation of resources for quality assurance. It is the process metrics, although sometimes difficult to collect, which have recently become popular with regard to defect prediction. However, in order to identify rightly the process metrics which are actually worth collecting, we need the evidence validating their ability to improve the product metric-based defect prediction models. This paper presents an empirical evaluation in which several process metrics were investigated in order to identify the ones which significantly improve the defect prediction models based on product metrics. Data from a wide range of software projects (both, industrial and open source) were collected. The predictions of the models that use only product metrics (simple models) were compared with the predictions of the models which used product metrics, as well as one of the process metrics under scrutiny (advanced models). To decide whether the improvements were significant or not, statistical tests were performed and effect sizes were calculated. The advanced defect prediction models trained on a data set containing product metrics and additionally Number of Distinct Committers (NDC) were significantly better than the simple models without NDC, while the effect size was medium and the probability of superiority (PS) of the advanced models over simple ones was high ((p=.016), (r=-.29), (hbox {PS}=.76)), which is a substantial finding useful in defect prediction. A similar result with slightly smaller PS was achieved by the advanced models trained on a data set containing product metrics and additionally all of the investigated process metrics ((p=.038), (r=-.29), (hbox {PS}=.68)). The advanced models trained on a data set containing product metrics and additionally Number of Modified Lines (NML) were significantly better than the simple models without NML, but the effect size was small ((p=.038), (r=.06)). Hence, it is reasonable to recommend the NDC process metric in building the defect prediction models.
机译:关于作为缺陷指标的软件指标的知识对于有效分配质量保证资源至关重要。尽管有时难以收集,但它是过程度量标准,最近在缺陷预测方面变得很流行。但是,为了正确地确定实际值得收集的过程指标,我们需要证据来验证其改进基于产品指标的缺陷预测模型的能力。本文提出了一项实证评估,其中对几个过程指标进行了研究,以找出可以显着改善基于产品指标的缺陷预测模型的过程指标。收集了来自各种软件项目(工业和开放源代码)的数据。将仅使用产品指标的模型的预测(简单模型)与使用产品指标的模型的预测以及经过审查的过程指标之一(高级模型)进行了比较。为了确定这些改进是否显着,进行了统计测试并计算了效果大小。在包含产品指标以及独特提交者数量(NDC)的数据集上训练的高级缺陷预测模型明显优于不具有NDC的简单模型,而效果量为中等,高级模型的优势概率(PS)比简单的高((p = .016),(r =-。29),(hbox {PS} =。76)),这是对缺陷预测有用的重要发现。通过在包含产品指标以及所有调查的过程指标((p = .038),(r =-。29),(hbox {PS} = .68))。在包含产品指标和另外的修改行数(NML)的数据集上训练的高级模型明显优于没有NML的简单模型,但是效果大小很小((p = .038),(r = .06) )。因此,在建立缺陷预测模型时,建议使用NDC过程度量是合理的。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号