Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorHall, T-
dc.identifier.citationSoftware Quality Journalen_US
dc.description.abstractDuring 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.en_US
dc.subjectSoftware defect predictionen_US
dc.subjectPrediction modellingen_US
dc.subjectMachine learningen_US
dc.titleSoftware Defect Prediction: Do Different Classifiers Find the Same Defects?en_US
dc.relation.isPartOfSoftware Quality Journal-
Appears in Collections:Dept of Computer Science Research Papers

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
FullText.pdf2.44 MBAdobe PDFView/Open

Items in BURA are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.