重新评估方法级bug预测

L. Pascarella, Fabio Palomba, Alberto Bacchelli
{"title":"重新评估方法级bug预测","authors":"L. Pascarella, Fabio Palomba, Alberto Bacchelli","doi":"10.1109/SANER.2018.8330264","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Bug prediction is aimed at supporting developers in the identification of code artifacts more likely to be defective. Researchers have proposed prediction models to identify bug prone methods and provided promising evidence that it is possible to operate at this level of granularity. Particularly, models based on a mixture of product and process metrics, used as independent variables, led to the best results. In this study, we first replicate previous research on method-level bug prediction on different systems/timespans. Afterwards, we reflect on the evaluation strategy and propose a more realistic one. Key results of our study show that the performance of the method-level bug prediction model is similar to what previously reported also for different systems/timespans, when evaluated with the same strategy. However—when evaluated with a more realistic strategy—all the models show a dramatic drop in performance exhibiting results close to that of a random classifier. Our replication and negative results indicate that method-level bug prediction is still an open challenge.","PeriodicalId":6602,"journal":{"name":"2018 IEEE 25th International Conference on Software Analysis, Evolution and Reengineering (SANER)","volume":"14 1","pages":"592-601"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-03-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"28","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Re-evaluating method-level bug prediction\",\"authors\":\"L. Pascarella, Fabio Palomba, Alberto Bacchelli\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/SANER.2018.8330264\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Bug prediction is aimed at supporting developers in the identification of code artifacts more likely to be defective. Researchers have proposed prediction models to identify bug prone methods and provided promising evidence that it is possible to operate at this level of granularity. Particularly, models based on a mixture of product and process metrics, used as independent variables, led to the best results. In this study, we first replicate previous research on method-level bug prediction on different systems/timespans. Afterwards, we reflect on the evaluation strategy and propose a more realistic one. Key results of our study show that the performance of the method-level bug prediction model is similar to what previously reported also for different systems/timespans, when evaluated with the same strategy. However—when evaluated with a more realistic strategy—all the models show a dramatic drop in performance exhibiting results close to that of a random classifier. Our replication and negative results indicate that method-level bug prediction is still an open challenge.\",\"PeriodicalId\":6602,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2018 IEEE 25th International Conference on Software Analysis, Evolution and Reengineering (SANER)\",\"volume\":\"14 1\",\"pages\":\"592-601\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-03-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"28\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2018 IEEE 25th International Conference on Software Analysis, Evolution and Reengineering (SANER)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/SANER.2018.8330264\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2018 IEEE 25th International Conference on Software Analysis, Evolution and Reengineering (SANER)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/SANER.2018.8330264","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 28

摘要

Bug预测的目的是支持开发人员识别更有可能存在缺陷的代码工件。研究人员提出了预测模型来识别容易出错的方法,并提供了有希望的证据,证明在这种粒度级别上操作是可能的。特别地,基于产品和过程度量的混合模型,作为独立变量使用,会产生最好的结果。在这项研究中,我们首先在不同的系统/时间跨度上复制了之前关于方法级bug预测的研究。随后,我们对评价策略进行了反思,并提出了较为现实的评价策略。我们研究的关键结果表明,当使用相同的策略进行评估时,方法级bug预测模型的性能与之前报道的不同系统/时间跨度的性能相似。然而,当使用更现实的策略进行评估时,所有模型都显示出性能的急剧下降,显示出接近随机分类器的结果。我们的复制和阴性结果表明,方法级bug预测仍然是一个开放的挑战。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Re-evaluating method-level bug prediction
Bug prediction is aimed at supporting developers in the identification of code artifacts more likely to be defective. Researchers have proposed prediction models to identify bug prone methods and provided promising evidence that it is possible to operate at this level of granularity. Particularly, models based on a mixture of product and process metrics, used as independent variables, led to the best results. In this study, we first replicate previous research on method-level bug prediction on different systems/timespans. Afterwards, we reflect on the evaluation strategy and propose a more realistic one. Key results of our study show that the performance of the method-level bug prediction model is similar to what previously reported also for different systems/timespans, when evaluated with the same strategy. However—when evaluated with a more realistic strategy—all the models show a dramatic drop in performance exhibiting results close to that of a random classifier. Our replication and negative results indicate that method-level bug prediction is still an open challenge.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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