ArticleScientific reports2023
Software defect prediction using learning to rank approach.
Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Semantic and traditional feature fusion for software defect prediction using hybrid deep learning model.Scientific reports · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Software defect prediction (SDP) plays a significant role in detecting the most likely defective software modules and optimizing the allocation of testing resources. In practice, though, project managers must not only identify defective modules, but also rank them in a specific order to optimize the resource allocation and minimize testing costs, especially for projects with limited budgets. This vital task can be accomplished using Learning to Rank (LTR) algorithm. This algorithm is a type of machine learning methodology that pursues two important tasks: prediction and learning. Although this algorithm is commonly used in information retrieval, it also presents high efficiency for other problems, like SDP. The LTR approach is mainly used in defect prediction to predict and rank the most likely buggy modules based on their bug count or bug density. This research paper conducts a comprehensive comparison study on the behavior of eight selected LTR models using two target variables: bug count and bug density. It also studies the effect of using imbalance learning and feature selection on the employed LTR models. The models are empirically evaluated using Fault Percentile Average. Our results show that using bug count as ranking criteria produces higher scores and more stable results across multiple experiment settings. Moreover, using imbalance learning has a positive impact for bug density, but on the other hand it leads to a negative impact for bug count. Lastly, using the feature selection does not show significant improvement for bug density, while there is no impact when bug count is used. Therefore, we conclude that using feature selection and imbalance learning with LTR does not come up with superior or significant results.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.