Software defect prediction: do different classifiers find the same defects?

Open Access: This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License CC BY 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.During the last 10 years, hundreds of different defect prediction models have been published. The performance of the classifiers used in these models is reported to be similar with models rarely performing above the predictive performance ceiling of about 80% recall. We investigate the individual defects that four classifiers predict and analyse the level of prediction uncertainty produced by these classifiers. We perform a sensitivity analysis to compare the performance of Random Forest, Naïve Bayes, RPart and SVM classifiers when predicting defects in NASA, open source and commercial datasets. The defect predictions that each classifier makes is captured in a confusion matrix and the prediction uncertainty of each classifier is compared. Despite similar predictive performance values for these four classifiers, each detects different sets of defects. Some classifiers are more consistent in predicting defects than others. Our results confirm that a unique subset of defects can be detected by specific classifiers. However, while some classifiers are consistent in the predictions they make, other classifiers vary in their predictions. Given our results, we conclude that classifier ensembles with decision-making strategies not based on majority voting are likely to perform best in defect prediction.Peer reviewedFinal Published versio

Choosing software metrics for defect prediction: an investigation on feature selection techniques

The selection of software metrics for building software quality prediction models is a search-based software engineering problem. An exhaustive search for such metrics is usually not feasible due to limited project resources, especially if the number of available metrics is large. Defect prediction models are necessary in aiding project managers for better utilizing valuable project resources for software quality improvement. The efficacy and usefulness of a fault-proneness prediction model is only as good as the quality of the software measurement data. This study focuses on the problem of attribute selection in the context of software quality estimation. A comparative investigation is presented for evaluating our proposed hybrid attribute selection approach, in which feature ranking is first used to reduce the search space, followed by a feature subset selection. A total of seven different feature ranking techniques are evaluated, while four different feature subset selection approaches are considered. The models are trained using five commonly used classification algorithms. The case study is based on software metrics and defect data collected from multiple releases of a large real-world software system. The results demonstrate that while some feature ranking techniques performed similarly, the automatic hybrid search algorithm performed the best among the feature subset selection methods. Moreover, performances of the defect prediction models either improved or remained unchanged when over 85were eliminated. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/83475/1/1043_ftp.pd

Software Defect Prediction: Do Different Classifiers Find the Same Defects?

During the last 10 years, hundreds of different defect prediction models have been published. The performance of the classifiers used in these models is reported to be similar with models rarely performing above the predictive performance ceiling of about 80% recall. We investigate the individual defects that four classifiers predict and analyse the level of prediction uncertainty produced by these classifiers. We perform a sensitivity analysis to compare the performance of Random Forest, Na¨ıve Bayes, RPart and SVM classifiers when predicting defects in NASA, open source and commercial datasets. The defect predictions that each classifier makes is captured in a confusion matrix and the prediction uncertainty of each classifier is compared. Despite similar predictive performance values for these four classifiers, each detects different sets of defects. Some classifiers are more consistent in predicting defects than others. Our results confirm that a unique subset of defects can be detected by specific classifiers. However, while some classifiers are consistent in the predictions they make, other classifiers vary in their predictions. Given our results, we conclude that classifier ensembles with decision-making strategies not based on majority voting are likely to perform best in defect prediction

Evaluation of Classifiers in Software Fault-Proneness Prediction

Reliability of software counts on its fault-prone modules. This means that the less software consists of fault-prone units the more we may trust it. Therefore, if we are able to predict the number of fault-prone modules of software, it will be possible to judge the software reliability. In predicting software fault-prone modules, one of the contributing features is software metric by which one can classify software modules into fault-prone and non-fault-prone ones. To make such a classification, we investigated into 17 classifier methods whose features (attributes) are software metrics (39 metrics) and instances (software modules) of mining are instances of 13 datasets reported by NASA. However, there are two important issues influencing our prediction accuracy when we use data mining methods: (1) selecting the best/most influent features (i.e. software metrics) when there is a wide diversity of them and (2) instance sampling in order to balance the imbalanced instances of mining; we have two imbalanced classes when the classifier biases towards the majority class. Based on the feature selection and instance sampling, we considered 4 scenarios in appraisal of 17 classifier methods to predict software fault-prone modules. To select features, we used Correlation-based Feature Selection (CFS) and to sample instances we did Synthetic Minority Oversampling Technique (SMOTE). Empirical results showed that suitable sampling software modules significantly influences on accuracy of predicting software reliability but metric selection has not considerable effect on the prediction

Improving Defect Prediction Models by Combining Classifiers Predicting Different Defects

Background: The software industry spends a lot of money on finding and fixing defects. It utilises software defect prediction models to identify code that is likely to be defective. Prediction models have, however, reached a performance bottleneck. Any improvements to prediction models would likely yield less defects-reducing costs for companies. Aim: In this dissertation I demonstrate that different families of classifiers find distinct subsets of defects. I show how this finding can be utilised to design ensemble models which outperform other state-of-the-art software defect prediction models. Method: This dissertation is supported by published work. In the first paper I explore the quality of data which is a prerequisite for building reliable software defect prediction models. The second and third papers explore the ability of different software defect prediction models to find distinct subsets of defects. The fourth paper explores how software defect prediction models can be improved by combining a collection of classifiers that predict different defective components into ensembles. An additional, non-published work, presents a visual technique for the analysis of predictions made by individual classifiers and discusses some possible constraints for classifiers used in software defect prediction. Result: Software defect prediction models created by classifiers of different families predict distinct subsets of defects. Ensembles composed of classifiers belonging to different families outperform other ensemble and standalone models. Only a few highly diverse and accurate base models are needed to compose an effective ensemble. This ensemble can consistently predict a greater number of defects compared to the increase in incorrect predictions. Conclusion: Ensembles should not use the majority-voting techniques to combine decisions of classifiers in software defect prediction as this will miss correct predictions of classifiers which uniquely identify defects. Some classifiers could be less successful for software defect prediction due to complex decision boundaries of defect data. Stacking based ensembles can outperform other ensemble and stand-alone techniques. I propose new possible avenues of research that could further improve the modelling of ensembles in software defect prediction. Data quality should be explicitly considered prior to experiments for researchers to establish reliable results