Proceedings of the 2006 International Workshop on Mining Software Repositories 2006
DOI: 10.1145/1137983.1138012
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Predicting defect densities in source code files with decision tree learners

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
58
0

Year Published

2008
2008
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 98 publications
(61 citation statements)
references
References 14 publications
3
58
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Results clearly underline that defect prediction models have to take into account different aspects and measures of the software development and maintenance [1]. In extension to our previous work on predicting defect density of source files [2] we use detailed evolution data from an industrial software project and include team structure and process measures.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 92%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Results clearly underline that defect prediction models have to take into account different aspects and measures of the software development and maintenance [1]. In extension to our previous work on predicting defect density of source files [2] we use detailed evolution data from an industrial software project and include team structure and process measures.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 92%
“…To build a balanced prediction model we create features to represent several important aspects of software development such as the complexity of the designed solution, process used for development, interrelation of classes, etc. As previous studies [2,3] discovered that relative features provide better performance in prediction than absolute ones, we decided that all our 63 features have to be relative. For EQ-Mina we set up the following categories of features for each file containing changes within the inspection period:…”
Section: Featuresmentioning
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%
“…Using standard complexity measures from software engineering, the source code is mined with regression models, which can then predict post-release failures for new software entities. A similar study uses decision trees to predict failure probabilities [9]. [10] uses regression techniques to predict the likelihood of bugs based on static usage relationships between software components.…”
Section: Mining Software Metrics and Invariantsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Knab and Pinzger [15] applied a decision tree-based algorithm to predict defect densities in source code files. They extracted modifications, defect report metrics, number of incoming and outgoing calls from source releases and version history database.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%