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

Revisiting the conclusion instability issue in software effort estimation

Conclusion instability is the absence of observing the same effect under varying experimental conditions. Deep Neural Network (DNN) and ElasticNet software effort estimation (SEE) models were applied to two SEE datasets with the view of resolving the conclusion instability issue and assessing the suitability of ElasticNet as a viable SEE benchmark model. Results were mixed as both model types attain conclusion stability for the Kitchenham dataset whilst conclusion instability existed in the Desharnais dataset. ElasticNet was outperformed by DNN and as such it is not recommended to be used as a SEE benchmark model