Empirical analysis of network measures for predicting high severity software faults

Network measures are useful for predicting fault-prone modules. However, existing work has not distinguished faults according to their severity. In practice, high severity faults cause serious problems and require further attention. In this study, we explored the utility of network measures in high severity faultproneness prediction. We constructed software source code networks for four open-source projects by extracting the dependencies between modules. We then used univariate logistic regression to investigate the associations between each network measure and fault-proneness at a high severity level. We built multivariate prediction models to examine their explanatory ability for fault-proneness, as well as evaluated their predictive effectiveness compared to code metrics under forward-release and cross-project predictions. The results revealed the following: (1) most network measures are significantly related to high severity fault-proneness; (2) network measures generally have comparable explanatory abilities and predictive powers to those of code metrics; and (3) network measures are very unstable for cross-project predictions. These results indicate that network measures are of practical value in high severity fault-proneness prediction.     

An empirical analysis of package-modularization metrics: Implications for software fault-proneness

ContextIn a large object-oriented software system, packages play the role of modules which group related classes together to provide well-identified services to the rest of the system. In this context, it is widely believed that modularization has a large influence on the quality of packages. Recently, Sarkar, Kak, and Rama proposed a set of new metrics to characterize the modularization quality of packages from important perspectives such as inter-module call traffic, state access violations, fragile base-class design, programming to interface, and plugin pollution. These package-modularization metrics are quite different from traditional package-level metrics, which measure software quality mainly from size, extensibility, responsibility, independence, abstractness, and instability perspectives. As such, it is expected that these package-modularization metrics should be useful predictors for fault-proneness. However, little is currently known on their actual usefulness for fault-proneness prediction, especially compared with traditional package-level metrics.ObjectiveIn this paper, we examine the role of these new package-modularization metrics for determining software fault-proneness in object-oriented systems.MethodWe first use principal component analysis to analyze whether these new package-modularization metrics capture additional information compared with traditional package-level metrics. Second, we employ univariate prediction models to investigate how these new package-modularization metrics are related to fault-proneness. Finally, we build multivariate prediction models to examine the ability of these new package-modularization metrics for predicting fault-prone packages.ResultsOur results, based on six open-source object-oriented software systems, show that: (1) these new package-modularization metrics provide new and complementary views of software complexity compared with traditional package-level metrics; (2) most of these new package-modularization metrics have a significant association with fault-proneness in an expected direction; and (3) these new package-modularization metrics can substantially improve the effectiveness of fault-proneness prediction when used with traditional package-level metrics together.ConclusionsThe package-modularization metrics proposed by Sarkar, Kak, and Rama are useful for practitioners to develop quality software systems.     

Empirical Validation of Three Software Metrics Suites to Predict Fault-Proneness of Object-Oriented Classes Developed Using Highly Iterative or Agile Software Development Processes

Empirical validation of software metrics suites to predict fault proneness in object-oriented (OO) components is essential to ensure their practical use in industrial settings. In this paper, we empirically validate three OO metrics suites for their ability to predict software quality in terms of fault-proneness: the Chidamber and Kemerer (CK) metrics, Abreu's Metrics for Object-Oriented Design (MOOD), and Bansiya and Davis' Quality Metrics for Object-Oriented Design (QMOOD). Some CK class metrics have previously been shown to be good predictors of initial OO software quality. However, the other two suites have not been heavily validated except by their original proposers. Here, we explore the ability of these three metrics suites to predict fault-prone classes using defect data for six versions of Rhino, an open-source implementation of JavaScript written in Java. We conclude that the CK and QMOOD suites contain similar components and produce statistical models that are effective in detecting error-prone classes. We also conclude that the class components in the MOOD metrics suite are not good class fault-proneness predictors. Analyzing multivariate binary logistic regression models across six Rhino versions indicates these models may be useful in assessing quality in OO classes produced using modern highly iterative or agile software development processes.     

Evaluating the impact of design pattern and anti-pattern dependencies on changes and faults

On the one hand, design patterns are solutions to recurring design problems, aimed at increasing reuse, flexibility, and maintainability. However, much prior work found that some patterns, such as the Observer and Singleton, are correlated with large code structures and argued that they are more likely to be fault prone. On the other hand, anti-patterns describe poor solutions to design and implementation problems that highlight weaknesses in the design of software systems and that may slow down maintenance and increase the risk of faults. They have been found to negatively impact change and fault-proneness. Classes participating in design patterns and anti-patterns have dependencies with other classes, e.g., static and co-change dependencies, that may propagate problems to other classes. We investigate the impact of such dependencies in object-oriented systems by studying the relations between the presence of static and co-change dependencies and (1) the fault-proneness, (2) the types of changes, and (3) the types of faults that these classes exhibit. We analyze six design patterns and 10 anti-patterns in 39 releases of ArgoUML, JFreeChart, and XercesJ, and investigate to what extent classes having dependencies with design patterns or anti-patterns have higher odds of faults than other classes. We show that in almost all releases of the three systems, classes having dependencies with anti-patterns are more fault-prone than others while this is not always true for classes with dependencies with design patterns. We also observe that structural changes are the most common changes impacting classes having dependencies with anti-patterns. Software developers could use this knowledge about the impact of design pattern and anti-pattern dependencies to better focus their testing and reviewing activities towards the most risky classes and to propagate changes adequately.     

Assessing the applicability of fault-proneness models across object-oriented software projects

A number of papers have investigated the relationships between design metrics and the detection of faults in object-oriented software. Several of these studies have shown that such models can be accurate in predicting faulty classes within one particular software product. In practice, however, prediction models are built on certain products to be used on subsequent software development projects. How accurate can these models be, considering the inevitable differences that may exist across projects and systems? Organizations typically learn and change. From a more general standpoint, can we obtain any evidence that such models are economically viable tools to focus validation and verification effort? This paper attempts to answer these questions by devising a general but tailorable cost-benefit model and by using fault and design data collected on two mid-size Java systems developed in the same environment. Another contribution of the paper is the use of a novel exploratory analysis technique - MARS (multivariate adaptive regression splines) to build such fault-proneness models, whose functional form is a-priori unknown. The results indicate that a model built on one system can be accurately used to rank classes within another system according to their fault proneness. The downside, however, is that, because of system differences, the predicted fault probabilities are not representative of the system predicted. However, our cost-benefit model demonstrates that the MARS fault-proneness model is potentially viable, from an economical standpoint. The linear model is not nearly as good, thus suggesting a more complex model is required.     

Empirical validation of object-oriented metrics for predicting fault proneness models

Empirical validation of software metrics used to predict software quality attributes is important to ensure their practical relevance in software organizations. The aim of this work is to find the relation of object-oriented (OO) metrics with fault proneness at different severity levels of faults. For this purpose, different prediction models have been developed using regression and machine learning methods. We evaluate and compare the performance of these methods to find which method performs better at different severity levels of faults and empirically validate OO metrics given by Chidamber and Kemerer. The results of the empirical study are based on public domain NASA data set. The performance of the predicted models was evaluated using Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) analysis. The results show that the area under the curve (measured from the ROC analysis) of models predicted using high severity faults is low as compared with the area under the curve of the model predicted with respect to medium and low severity faults. However, the number of faults in the classes correctly classified by predicted models with respect to high severity faults is not low. This study also shows that the performance of machine learning methods is better than logistic regression method with respect to all the severities of faults. Based on the results, it is reasonable to claim that models targeted at different severity levels of faults could help for planning and executing testing by focusing resources on fault-prone parts of the design and code that are likely to cause serious failures.     

On the ability of complexity metrics to predict fault-prone classes in object-oriented systems

Many studies use logistic regression models to investigate the ability of complexity metrics to predict fault-prone classes. However, it is not uncommon to see the inappropriate use of performance indictors such as odds ratio in previous studies. In particular, a recent study by Olague et al. uses the odds ratio associated with one unit increase in a metric to compare the relative magnitude of the associations between individual metrics and fault-proneness. In addition, the percents of concordant, discordant, and tied pairs are used to evaluate the predictive effectiveness of a univariate logistic regression model. Their results suggest that lesser known complexity metrics such as standard deviation method complexity (SDMC) and average method complexity (AMC) are better predictors than the two commonly used metrics: lines of code (LOC) and weighted method McCabe complexity (WMC). In this paper, however, we show that (1) the odds ratio associated with one standard deviation increase, rather than one unit increase, in a metric should be used to compare the relative magnitudes of the effects of individual metrics on fault-proneness. Otherwise, misleading results may be obtained; and that (2) the connection of the percents of concordant, discordant, and tied pairs with the predictive effectiveness of a univariate logistic regression model is false, as they indeed do not depend on the model. Furthermore, we use the data collected from three versions of Eclipse to re-examine the ability of complexity metrics to predict fault-proneness. Our experimental results reveal that: (1) many metrics exhibit moderate or almost moderate ability in discriminating between fault-prone and not fault-prone classes; (2) LOC and WMC are indeed better fault-proneness predictors than SDMC and AMC; and (3) the explanatory power of other complexity metrics in addition to LOC is limited.     

基于支持向量机的面向对象软件易发性故障预测

本文考虑软件故障严重程度,并采用C＆K面向对象度量集,以支持向量机分析方法为数学工具,建立一种基于面向对象软件易发性故障预测模型。实验结果表明,与基于朴素贝叶斯的预测模型、随机预测模型和NNge预测模型相比,本文提出的预测模型对于高严重程度故障、低严重程度故障以及未划分故障严重程度的情形均获得较好的预测效果。     

An exploratory study of the impact of antipatterns on class change- and fault-proneness

Antipatterns are poor design choices that are conjectured to make object-oriented systems harder to maintain. We investigate the impact of antipatterns on classes in object-oriented systems by studying the relation between the presence of antipatterns and the change- and fault-proneness of the classes. We detect 13 antipatterns in 54 releases of ArgoUML, Eclipse, Mylyn, and Rhino, and analyse (1) to what extent classes participating in antipatterns have higher odds to change or to be subject to fault-fixing than other classes, (2) to what extent these odds (if higher) are due to the sizes of the classes or to the presence of antipatterns, and (3) what kinds of changes affect classes participating in antipatterns. We show that, in almost all releases of the four systems, classes participating in antipatterns are more change-and fault-prone than others. We also show that size alone cannot explain the higher odds of classes with antipatterns to underwent a (fault-fixing) change than other classes. Finally, we show that structural changes affect more classes with antipatterns than others. We provide qualitative explanations of the increase of change- and fault-proneness in classes participating in antipatterns using release notes and bug reports. The obtained results justify a posteriori previous work on the specification and detection of antipatterns and could help to better focus quality assurance and testing activities.     

Predicting fault-prone software modules in telephone switches

An empirical study was carried out at Ericsson Telecom AB to investigate the relationship between several design metrics and the number of function test failure reports associated with software modules. A tool, ERIMET, was developed to analyze the design documents automatically. Preliminary results from the study of 130 modules showed that: based on fault and design data one can satisfactorily build, before coding has started, a prediction model for identifying the most fault-prone modules. The data analyzed show that 20 percent of the most fault-prone modules account for 60 percent of all faults. The prediction model built in this paper would have identified 20 percent of the modules accounting for 47 percent of all faults. At least four design measures can alternatively be used as predictors with equivalent performance. The size (with respect to the number of lines of code) used in a previous prediction model was not significantly better than these four measures. The Alberg diagram introduced in this paper offers a way of assessing a predictor based on historical data, which is a valuable complement to linear regression when prediction data is ordinal. Applying the method described in this paper makes it possible to use measures at the design phase to predict the most fault-prone modules     

An effective fault prediction model developed using an extreme learning machine with various kernel methods

System analysts often use software fault prediction models to identify fault-prone modules during the design phase of the software development life cycle. The models help predict faulty modules based on the software metrics that are input to the models. In this study, we consider 20 types of metrics to develop a model using an extreme learning machine associated with various kernel methods. We evaluate the effectiveness of the mode using a proposed framework based on the cost and efficiency in the testing phases. The evaluation process is carried out by considering case studies for 30 object-oriented software systems. Experimental results demonstrate that the application of a fault prediction model is suitable for projects with the percentage of faulty classes below a certain threshold, which depends on the efficiency of fault identification (low: 47.28%; median: 39.24%; high: 25.72%). We consider nine feature selection techniques to remove the irrelevant metrics and to select the best set of source code metrics for fault prediction.     

A validation of object-oriented design metrics as qualityindicators

This paper presents the results of a study in which we empirically investigated the suite of object-oriented (OO) design metrics introduced in (Chidamber and Kemerer, 1994). More specifically, our goal is to assess these metrics as predictors of fault-prone classes and, therefore, determine whether they can be used as early quality indicators. This study is complementary to the work described in (Li and Henry, 1993) where the same suite of metrics had been used to assess frequencies of maintenance changes to classes. To perform our validation accurately, we collected data on the development of eight medium-sized information management systems based on identical requirements. All eight projects were developed using a sequential life cycle model, a well-known OO analysis/design method and the C++ programming language. Based on empirical and quantitative analysis, the advantages and drawbacks of these OO metrics are discussed. Several of Chidamber and Kemerer's OO metrics appear to be useful to predict class fault-proneness during the early phases of the life-cycle. Also, on our data set, they are better predictors than “traditional” code metrics, which can only be collected at a later phase of the software development processes     

The confounding effect of class size on the validity ofobject-oriented metrics

Much effort has been devoted to the development and empirical validation of object-oriented metrics. The empirical validations performed thus far would suggest that a core set of validated metrics is close to being identified. However, none of these studies allow for the potentially confounding effect of class size. We demonstrate a strong size confounding effect and question the results of previous object-oriented metrics validation studies. We first investigated whether there is a confounding effect of class size in validation studies of object-oriented metrics and show that, based on previous work, there is reason to believe that such an effect exists. We then describe a detailed empirical methodology for identifying those effects. Finally, we perform a study on a large C++ telecommunications framework to examine if size is really a confounder. This study considered the Chidamber and Kemerer metrics and a subset of the Lorenz and Kidd metrics. The dependent variable was the incidence of a fault attributable to a field failure (fault-proneness of a class). Our findings indicate that, before controlling for size, the results are very similar to previous studies. The metrics that are expected to be validated are indeed associated with fault-proneness     

Quantitative analysis of faults and failures in a complex softwaresystem

The authors describe a number of results from a quantitative study of faults and failures in two releases of a major commercial software system. They tested a range of basic software engineering hypotheses relating to: the Pareto principle of distribution of faults and failures; the use of early fault data to predict later fault and failure data; metrics for fault prediction; and benchmarking fault data. For example, we found strong evidence that a small number of modules contain most of the faults discovered in prerelease testing and that a very small number of modules contain most of the faults discovered in operation. We found no evidence to support previous claims relating module size to fault density nor did we find evidence that popular complexity metrics are good predictors of either fault-prone or failure-prone modules. We confirmed that the number of faults discovered in prerelease testing is an order of magnitude greater than the number discovered in 12 months of operational use. The most important result was strong evidence of a counter-intuitive relationship between pre- and postrelease faults; those modules which are the most fault-prone prerelease are among the least fault-prone postrelease, while conversely, the modules which are most fault-prone postrelease are among the least fault-prone prerelease. This observation has serious ramifications for the commonly used fault density measure. Our results provide data-points in building up an empirical picture of the software development process     

A symbolic fault-prediction model based on multiobjective particle swarm optimization

In the literature the fault-proneness of classes or methods has been used to devise strategies for reducing testing costs and efforts. In general, fault-proneness is predicted through a set of design metrics and, most recently, by using Machine Learning (ML) techniques. However, some ML techniques cannot deal with unbalanced data, characteristic very common of the fault datasets and, their produced results are not easily interpreted by most programmers and testers. Considering these facts, this paper introduces a novel fault-prediction approach based on Multiobjective Particle Swarm Optimization (MOPSO). Exploring Pareto dominance concepts, the approach generates a model composed by rules with specific properties. These rules can be used as an unordered classifier, and because of this, they are more intuitive and comprehensible. Two experiments were accomplished, considering, respectively, fault-proneness of classes and methods. The results show interesting relationships between the studied metrics and fault prediction. In addition to this, the performance of the introduced MOPSO approach is compared with other ML algorithms by using several measures including the area under the ROC curve, which is a relevant criterion to deal with unbalanced data.     

Application of multivariate analysis for software fault prediction

Prediction of fault-prone modules provides one way to support software quality engineering through improved scheduling and project control. The primary goal of our research was to develop and refine techniques for early prediction of fault-prone modules. The objective of this paper is to review and improve an approach previously examined in the literature for building prediction models, i.e. principal component analysis (PCA) and discriminant analysis (DA). We present findings of an empirical study at Ericsson Telecom AB for which the previous approach was found inadequate for predicting the most fault-prone modules using software design metrics. Instead of dividing modules into fault-prone and not-fault-prone, modules are categorized into several groups according to the ordered number of faults. It is shown that the first discriminant coordinates (DC) statistically increase with the ordering of modules, thus improving prediction and prioritization efforts. The authors also experienced problems with the smoothing parameter as used previously for DA. To correct this problem and further improve predictability, separate estimation of the smoothing parameter is shown to be required.     

Empirical analysis of network measures for effort-aware fault-proneness prediction

ContextRecently, network measures have been proposed to predict fault-prone modules. Leveraging the dependency relationships between software entities, network measures describe the structural features of software systems. However, there is no consensus about their effectiveness for fault-proneness prediction. Specifically, the predictive ability of network measures in effort-aware context has not been addressed.ObjectiveWe aim to provide a comprehensive evaluation on the predictive effectiveness of network measures with the effort needed to inspect the code taken into consideration.MethodWe first constructed software source code networks of 11 open-source projects by extracting the data and call dependencies between modules. We then employed univariate logistic regression to investigate how each single network measure was correlated with fault-proneness. Finally, we built multivariate prediction models to examine the usefulness of network measures under three prediction settings: cross-validation, across-release, and inter-project predictions. In particular, we used the effort-aware performance indicators to compare their predictive ability against the commonly used code metrics in both ranking and classification scenarios.ResultsBased on the 11 open-source software systems, our results show that: (1) most network measures are significantly positively related to fault-proneness; (2) the performance of network measures varies under different prediction settings; (3) network measures have inconsistent effects on various projects.ConclusionNetwork measures are of practical value in the context of effort-aware fault-proneness prediction, but researchers and practitioners should be careful of choosing whether and when to use network measures in practice.     

Deriving a Fault Architecture to Guide Testing

Defect analysis of software components can be used to guide testing, with the goal of focusing on parts of the software that were fault-prone in earlier releases or earlier life cycle phases, such as development. We replicate a study that adapted a reverse architecting technique using defect reports to derive fault architectures. A fault architecture determines and visualizes components that are fault-prone in their relationships with other components, as well as those that are locally fault-prone. Our case study uses defect data from three releases of a large medical record system to identify relationships among system components, based on whether they are involved in the same defect report.We investigate measures that assess the fault-proneness of components and component relationships. Component relationships are used to derive a fault architecture. The resulting fault architecture indicates what the most fault-prone relationships are in a release. We also apply the technique in a new way. Not only do we derive fault architectures for each release, we derive fault architectures for the development, system test and post release phases within each release. Comparing across releases, makes it possible to see whether some components are repeatedly in fault-prone relationships. Comparing across phases, makes it possible to see whether development fault architectures can be used to identify those parts of the software that need to be tested more. We validate our predictions using system test data from the same release. We also use the development and system test fault architectures to identify fault-prone components after release, and validate our predictions using post release data.     

Software fault prediction metrics: A systematic literature review

ContextSoftware metrics may be used in fault prediction models to improve software quality by predicting fault location.ObjectiveThis paper aims to identify software metrics and to assess their applicability in software fault prediction. We investigated the influence of context on metrics’ selection and performance.MethodThis systematic literature review includes 106 papers published between 1991 and 2011. The selected papers are classified according to metrics and context properties.ResultsObject-oriented metrics (49%) were used nearly twice as often compared to traditional source code metrics (27%) or process metrics (24%). Chidamber and Kemerer’s (CK) object-oriented metrics were most frequently used. According to the selected studies there are significant differences between the metrics used in fault prediction performance. Object-oriented and process metrics have been reported to be more successful in finding faults compared to traditional size and complexity metrics. Process metrics seem to be better at predicting post-release faults compared to any static code metrics.ConclusionMore studies should be performed on large industrial software systems to find metrics more relevant for the industry and to answer the question as to which metrics should be used in a given context.     

Examining the Potentially Confounding Effect of Class Size on the Associations between Object-Oriented Metrics and Change-Proneness

Previous research shows that class size can influence the associations between object-oriented (OO) metrics and fault-proneness and therefore proposes that it should be controlled as a confounding variable when validating OO metrics on fault-proneness. Otherwise, their true associations may be distorted. However, it has not been determined whether this practice is equally applicable to other external quality attributes. In this paper, we use three size metrics, two of which are available during the high-level design phase, to examine the potentially confounding effect of class size on the associations between OO metrics and change-proneness. The OO metrics that are investigated include cohesion, coupling, and inheritance metrics. Our results, based on Eclipse, indicate that: 1) The confounding effect of class size on the associations between OO metrics and change-proneness, in general, exists, regardless of whichever size metric is used; 2) the confounding effect of class size generally leads to an overestimate of the associations between OO metrics and change-proneness; and 3) for many OO metrics, the confounding effect of class size completely accounts for their associations with change-proneness or results in a change of the direction of the associations. These results strongly suggest that studies validating OO metrics on change-proneness should also consider class size as a confounding variable.