Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Software Engineering 2006
DOI: 10.1145/1134285.1134349
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Mining metrics to predict component failures

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

6
383
1
8

Year Published

2011
2011
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 622 publications
(413 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
6
383
1
8
Order By: Relevance
“…Approaches range from static code analysis and mining of software repositories and bug databases [8,9,10] to dynamic program verification. The latter focus on the data flow [11,12] or, like all call graph based techniques, on the control flow [13,14].…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Approaches range from static code analysis and mining of software repositories and bug databases [8,9,10] to dynamic program verification. The latter focus on the data flow [11,12] or, like all call graph based techniques, on the control flow [13,14].…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Nagappan et al [31] used catalog of source code metrics to predict post release defects at module level on five Microsoft systems and found it was possible to build predictors for one individual project, but that no predictor would perform well on all projects.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Dagpinar et al [15] investigate the significance of different OO metrics for the purpose of predicting maintainability of software. Nagappan et al [25] focus on mining metrics to predict component failures. The authors noted that there is no a single set of complexity metrics that could be used as a universally best defect predictor.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%