An empirical study of data sampling techniques for just-in-time software defect prediction

IF 2 2区 计算机科学 Q3 COMPUTER SCIENCE, SOFTWARE ENGINEERING
Zhiqiang Li, Qiannan Du, Hongyu Zhang, Xiao-Yuan Jing, Fei Wu
{"title":"An empirical study of data sampling techniques for just-in-time software defect prediction","authors":"Zhiqiang Li,&nbsp;Qiannan Du,&nbsp;Hongyu Zhang,&nbsp;Xiao-Yuan Jing,&nbsp;Fei Wu","doi":"10.1007/s10515-024-00455-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Just-in-time software defect prediction (JIT-SDP) is a fine-grained, easy-to-trace, and practical method. Unfortunately, JIT-SDP usually suffers from the class imbalance problem, which affects the performance of the models. Data sampling is one of the commonly used class imbalance techniques to overcome this problem. However, there is a lack of comprehensive empirical studies to compare different data sampling techniques on the performance of JIT-SDP. In this paper, we consider both defect classification and defect ranking, two typical application scenarios. To this end, we performed an empirical comparison of 10 data sampling algorithms on the performance of JIT-SDP. Extensive experiments on 10 open-source projects with 12 performance measures show that the effectiveness of data sampling techniques can indeed vary relying on the specific evaluation measures in both defect classification and defect ranking scenarios. Specifically, the RUM algorithm has demonstrated superior performance overall in the context of defect classification, particularly in <i>F-measure</i>, <i>AUC</i>, and <i>MCC</i>. On the other hand, for defect ranking, the ENN algorithm has emerged as the most favorable option, exhibiting perfect results in <span>\\(P_{opt}\\)</span>, <i>Recall@20%</i>, and <i>F-measure@20%</i>. However, data sampling techniques can lead to an increase in false alarms and require the inspection of a higher number of changes. These findings highlight the importance of carefully selecting the appropriate data sampling technique based on the specific evaluation measures for different scenarios.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":55414,"journal":{"name":"Automated Software Engineering","volume":"31 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Automated Software Engineering","FirstCategoryId":"94","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10515-024-00455-8","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"计算机科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, SOFTWARE ENGINEERING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Just-in-time software defect prediction (JIT-SDP) is a fine-grained, easy-to-trace, and practical method. Unfortunately, JIT-SDP usually suffers from the class imbalance problem, which affects the performance of the models. Data sampling is one of the commonly used class imbalance techniques to overcome this problem. However, there is a lack of comprehensive empirical studies to compare different data sampling techniques on the performance of JIT-SDP. In this paper, we consider both defect classification and defect ranking, two typical application scenarios. To this end, we performed an empirical comparison of 10 data sampling algorithms on the performance of JIT-SDP. Extensive experiments on 10 open-source projects with 12 performance measures show that the effectiveness of data sampling techniques can indeed vary relying on the specific evaluation measures in both defect classification and defect ranking scenarios. Specifically, the RUM algorithm has demonstrated superior performance overall in the context of defect classification, particularly in F-measure, AUC, and MCC. On the other hand, for defect ranking, the ENN algorithm has emerged as the most favorable option, exhibiting perfect results in \(P_{opt}\), Recall@20%, and F-measure@20%. However, data sampling techniques can lead to an increase in false alarms and require the inspection of a higher number of changes. These findings highlight the importance of carefully selecting the appropriate data sampling technique based on the specific evaluation measures for different scenarios.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

及时软件缺陷预测的数据抽样技术实证研究
准时软件缺陷预测(JIT-SDP)是一种细粒度、易于跟踪且实用的方法。遗憾的是,JIT-SDP 通常存在类不平衡问题,这会影响模型的性能。数据抽样是克服这一问题的常用类不平衡技术之一。然而,目前还缺乏全面的实证研究来比较不同数据抽样技术对 JIT-SDP 性能的影响。在本文中,我们考虑了缺陷分类和缺陷排序这两种典型的应用场景。为此,我们对 10 种数据采样算法在 JIT-SDP 性能方面的表现进行了实证比较。在 10 个开源项目中对 12 个性能指标进行的广泛实验表明,在缺陷分类和缺陷排序场景中,数据抽样技术的有效性确实会因具体评估指标的不同而不同。具体来说,RUM 算法在缺陷分类方面表现出了更优越的整体性能,尤其是在 F-measure、AUC 和 MCC 方面。另一方面,在缺陷排序方面,ENN 算法成为最有利的选择,在 \(P_{opt}\)、Recall@20% 和 F-measure@20% 方面都表现出完美的结果。然而,数据采样技术可能会导致误报增加,并需要检查更多的变化。这些发现凸显了根据不同场景的具体评估指标仔细选择合适的数据抽样技术的重要性。
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
Automated Software Engineering
Automated Software Engineering 工程技术-计算机:软件工程
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
11.80%
发文量
51
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: This journal details research, tutorial papers, survey and accounts of significant industrial experience in the foundations, techniques, tools and applications of automated software engineering technology. This includes the study of techniques for constructing, understanding, adapting, and modeling software artifacts and processes. Coverage in Automated Software Engineering examines both automatic systems and collaborative systems as well as computational models of human software engineering activities. In addition, it presents knowledge representations and artificial intelligence techniques applicable to automated software engineering, and formal techniques that support or provide theoretical foundations. The journal also includes reviews of books, software, conferences and workshops.
×
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