On the role of pre and post-processing in environmental data mining

The quality of discovered knowledge is highly depending on data quality. Unfortunately real data use to contain noise, uncertainty, errors, redundancies or even irrelevant information. The more complex is the reality to be analyzed, the higher the risk of getting low quality data. Knowledge Discovery from Databases (KDD) offers a global framework to prepare data in the right form to perform correct analyses. On the other hand, the quality of decisions taken upon KDD results, depend not only on the quality of the results themselves, but on the capacity of the system to communicate those results in an understandable form. Environmental systems are particularly complex and environmental users particularly require clarity in their results. In this paper some details about how this can be achieved are provided. The role of the pre and post processing in the whole process of Knowledge Discovery in environmental systems is discussed

Data sets and data quality in software engineering

OBJECTIVE - to assess the extent and types of techniques used to manage quality within software engineering data sets. We consider this a particularly interesting question in the context of initiatives to promote sharing and secondary analysis of data sets. METHOD - we perform a systematic review of available empirical software engineering studies. RESULTS - only 23 out of the many hundreds of studies assessed, explicitly considered data quality. CONCLUSIONS - first, the community needs to consider the quality and appropriateness of the data set being utilised; not all data sets are equal. Second, we need more research into means of identifying, and ideally repairing, noisy cases. Third, it should become routine to use sensitivity analysis to assess conclusion stability with respect to the assumptions that must be made concerning noise levels

Towards Automated Performance Bug Identification in Python

Context: Software performance is a critical non-functional requirement, appearing in many fields such as mission critical applications, financial, and real time systems. In this work we focused on early detection of performance bugs; our software under study was a real time system used in the advertisement/marketing domain. Goal: Find a simple and easy to implement solution, predicting performance bugs. Method: We built several models using four machine learning methods, commonly used for defect prediction: C4.5 Decision Trees, Na\"{\i}ve Bayes, Bayesian Networks, and Logistic Regression. Results: Our empirical results show that a C4.5 model, using lines of code changed, file's age and size as explanatory variables, can be used to predict performance bugs (recall=0.73, accuracy=0.85, and precision=0.96). We show that reducing the number of changes delivered on a commit, can decrease the chance of performance bug injection. Conclusions: We believe that our approach can help practitioners to eliminate performance bugs early in the development cycle. Our results are also of interest to theoreticians, establishing a link between functional bugs and (non-functional) performance bugs, and explicitly showing that attributes used for prediction of functional bugs can be used for prediction of performance bugs

What Causes My Test Alarm? Automatic Cause Analysis for Test Alarms in System and Integration Testing

Driven by new software development processes and testing in clouds, system and integration testing nowadays tends to produce enormous number of alarms. Such test alarms lay an almost unbearable burden on software testing engineers who have to manually analyze the causes of these alarms. The causes are critical because they decide which stakeholders are responsible to fix the bugs detected during the testing. In this paper, we present a novel approach that aims to relieve the burden by automating the procedure. Our approach, called Cause Analysis Model, exploits information retrieval techniques to efficiently infer test alarm causes based on test logs. We have developed a prototype and evaluated our tool on two industrial datasets with more than 14,000 test alarms. Experiments on the two datasets show that our tool achieves an accuracy of 58.3% and 65.8%, respectively, which outperforms the baseline algorithms by up to 13.3%. Our algorithm is also extremely efficient, spending about 0.1s per cause analysis. Due to the attractive experimental results, our industrial partner, a leading information and communication technology company in the world, has deployed the tool and it achieves an average accuracy of 72% after two months of running, nearly three times more accurate than a previous strategy based on regular expressions.Comment: 12 page