23,108 research outputs found
Is One Hyperparameter Optimizer Enough?
Hyperparameter tuning is the black art of automatically finding a good
combination of control parameters for a data miner. While widely applied in
empirical Software Engineering, there has not been much discussion on which
hyperparameter tuner is best for software analytics. To address this gap in the
literature, this paper applied a range of hyperparameter optimizers (grid
search, random search, differential evolution, and Bayesian optimization) to
defect prediction problem. Surprisingly, no hyperparameter optimizer was
observed to be `best' and, for one of the two evaluation measures studied here
(F-measure), hyperparameter optimization, in 50\% cases, was no better than
using default configurations.
We conclude that hyperparameter optimization is more nuanced than previously
believed. While such optimization can certainly lead to large improvements in
the performance of classifiers used in software analytics, it remains to be
seen which specific optimizers should be applied to a new dataset.Comment: 7 pages, 2 columns, accepted for SWAN1
Report from GI-Dagstuhl Seminar 16394: Software Performance Engineering in the DevOps World
This report documents the program and the outcomes of GI-Dagstuhl Seminar
16394 "Software Performance Engineering in the DevOps World".
The seminar addressed the problem of performance-aware DevOps. Both, DevOps
and performance engineering have been growing trends over the past one to two
years, in no small part due to the rise in importance of identifying
performance anomalies in the operations (Ops) of cloud and big data systems and
feeding these back to the development (Dev). However, so far, the research
community has treated software engineering, performance engineering, and cloud
computing mostly as individual research areas. We aimed to identify
cross-community collaboration, and to set the path for long-lasting
collaborations towards performance-aware DevOps.
The main goal of the seminar was to bring together young researchers (PhD
students in a later stage of their PhD, as well as PostDocs or Junior
Professors) in the areas of (i) software engineering, (ii) performance
engineering, and (iii) cloud computing and big data to present their current
research projects, to exchange experience and expertise, to discuss research
challenges, and to develop ideas for future collaborations
Is "Better Data" Better than "Better Data Miners"? (On the Benefits of Tuning SMOTE for Defect Prediction)
We report and fix an important systematic error in prior studies that ranked
classifiers for software analytics. Those studies did not (a) assess
classifiers on multiple criteria and they did not (b) study how variations in
the data affect the results. Hence, this paper applies (a) multi-criteria tests
while (b) fixing the weaker regions of the training data (using SMOTUNED, which
is a self-tuning version of SMOTE). This approach leads to dramatically large
increases in software defect predictions. When applied in a 5*5
cross-validation study for 3,681 JAVA classes (containing over a million lines
of code) from open source systems, SMOTUNED increased AUC and recall by 60% and
20% respectively. These improvements are independent of the classifier used to
predict for quality. Same kind of pattern (improvement) was observed when a
comparative analysis of SMOTE and SMOTUNED was done against the most recent
class imbalance technique. In conclusion, for software analytic tasks like
defect prediction, (1) data pre-processing can be more important than
classifier choice, (2) ranking studies are incomplete without such
pre-processing, and (3) SMOTUNED is a promising candidate for pre-processing.Comment: 10 pages + 2 references. Accepted to International Conference of
Software Engineering (ICSE), 201
Is "Better Data" Better than "Better Data Miners"? (On the Benefits of Tuning SMOTE for Defect Prediction)
We report and fix an important systematic error in prior studies that ranked
classifiers for software analytics. Those studies did not (a) assess
classifiers on multiple criteria and they did not (b) study how variations in
the data affect the results. Hence, this paper applies (a) multi-criteria tests
while (b) fixing the weaker regions of the training data (using SMOTUNED, which
is a self-tuning version of SMOTE). This approach leads to dramatically large
increases in software defect predictions. When applied in a 5*5
cross-validation study for 3,681 JAVA classes (containing over a million lines
of code) from open source systems, SMOTUNED increased AUC and recall by 60% and
20% respectively. These improvements are independent of the classifier used to
predict for quality. Same kind of pattern (improvement) was observed when a
comparative analysis of SMOTE and SMOTUNED was done against the most recent
class imbalance technique. In conclusion, for software analytic tasks like
defect prediction, (1) data pre-processing can be more important than
classifier choice, (2) ranking studies are incomplete without such
pre-processing, and (3) SMOTUNED is a promising candidate for pre-processing.Comment: 10 pages + 2 references. Accepted to International Conference of
Software Engineering (ICSE), 201
- …