High-impact defects: a study of breakage and surprise defects

Emad Shihab, A. Mockus, Yasutaka Kamei, Bram Adams, A. Hassan
{"title":"High-impact defects: a study of breakage and surprise defects","authors":"Emad Shihab, A. Mockus, Yasutaka Kamei, Bram Adams, A. Hassan","doi":"10.1145/2025113.2025155","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The relationship between various software-related phenomena (e.g., code complexity) and post-release software defects has been thoroughly examined. However, to date these predictions have a limited adoption in practice. The most commonly cited reason is that the prediction identifies too much code to review without distinguishing the impact of these defects. Our aim is to address this drawback by focusing on high-impact defects for customers and practitioners. Customers are highly impacted by defects that break pre-existing functionality (breakage defects), whereas practitioners are caught off-guard by defects in files that had relatively few pre-release changes (surprise defects). The large commercial software system that we study already had an established concept of breakages as the highest-impact defects, however, the concept of surprises is novel and not as well established. We find that surprise defects are related to incomplete requirements and that the common assumption that a fix is caused by a previous change does not hold in this project. We then fit prediction models that are effective at identifying files containing breakages and surprises. The number of pre-release defects and file size are good indicators of breakages, whereas the number of co-changed files and the amount of time between the latest pre-release change and the release date are good indicators of surprises. Although our prediction models are effective at identifying files that have breakages and surprises, we learn that the prediction should also identify the nature or type of defects, with each type being specific enough to be easily identified and repaired.","PeriodicalId":184518,"journal":{"name":"ESEC/FSE '11","volume":"430 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-09-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"92","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ESEC/FSE '11","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/2025113.2025155","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 92

Abstract

The relationship between various software-related phenomena (e.g., code complexity) and post-release software defects has been thoroughly examined. However, to date these predictions have a limited adoption in practice. The most commonly cited reason is that the prediction identifies too much code to review without distinguishing the impact of these defects. Our aim is to address this drawback by focusing on high-impact defects for customers and practitioners. Customers are highly impacted by defects that break pre-existing functionality (breakage defects), whereas practitioners are caught off-guard by defects in files that had relatively few pre-release changes (surprise defects). The large commercial software system that we study already had an established concept of breakages as the highest-impact defects, however, the concept of surprises is novel and not as well established. We find that surprise defects are related to incomplete requirements and that the common assumption that a fix is caused by a previous change does not hold in this project. We then fit prediction models that are effective at identifying files containing breakages and surprises. The number of pre-release defects and file size are good indicators of breakages, whereas the number of co-changed files and the amount of time between the latest pre-release change and the release date are good indicators of surprises. Although our prediction models are effective at identifying files that have breakages and surprises, we learn that the prediction should also identify the nature or type of defects, with each type being specific enough to be easily identified and repaired.
高冲击缺陷:断裂缺陷和意外缺陷的研究
各种软件相关现象(例如,代码复杂性)和发布后软件缺陷之间的关系已经被彻底地检查过。然而,到目前为止,这些预测在实践中的应用有限。最常见的原因是预测识别了太多的代码,而没有区分这些缺陷的影响。我们的目标是通过关注客户和从业者的高影响缺陷来解决这个缺陷。客户受到破坏预先存在的功能的缺陷的严重影响(破坏缺陷),而从业者则被具有相对较少的发布前更改的文件中的缺陷所措手不及(意外缺陷)。我们所研究的大型商业软件系统已经建立了将破坏作为影响最大的缺陷的概念,然而,意外的概念是新颖的,并没有很好地建立起来。我们发现意外缺陷与不完整的需求有关,并且修复是由以前的更改引起的这种常见假设在这个项目中不成立。然后,我们拟合预测模型,有效地识别包含破损和意外的文件。预发布缺陷的数量和文件大小是中断的良好指示器,而共同更改文件的数量和最近的预发布更改和发布日期之间的时间量是惊喜的良好指示器。尽管我们的预测模型在识别具有破坏和意外的文件方面是有效的,但是我们知道预测还应该识别缺陷的性质或类型,每种类型都足够具体,以便容易地识别和修复。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信