Abstract
AbstractThe accuracy of the SZZ algorithm is pivotal for just-in-time defect prediction because most prior studies have used the SZZ algorithm to detect defect-inducing commits to construct and evaluate their defect prediction models. The SZZ algorithm has two phases to detect defect-inducing commits: (1) linking issue reports in an issue-tracking system to possible defect-fixing commits in a version control system by using an issue-link algorithm (ILA); and (2) tracing the modifications of defect-fixing commits back to possible defect-inducing commits. Researchers and practitioners can address the second phase by using existing solutions such as a tool called . In contrast, although various ILAs have been proposed for the first phase, no large-scale studies exist in which such ILAs are evaluated under the same experimental conditions. Hence, we still have no conclusions regarding the best-performing ILA for the first phase. In this paper, we compare 10 ILAs collected from our systematic literature study with regards to the accuracy of detecting defect-fixing commits. In addition, we compare the defect prediction performance of ILAs and their combinations that can detect defect-fixing commits accurately. We conducted experiments on five open-source software projects. We found that all ILAs and their combinations prevented the defect prediction model from being affected by missing defect-fixing commits. In particular, the combination of a natural language text similarity approach, Phantom heuristics, a random forest approach, and a support vector machine approach is the best way to statistically significantly reduced the absolute differences from the ground-truth defect prediction performance. We summarized the guidelines to use ILAs as our recommendations.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference88 articles.
1. Agrawal A, Menzies T (2018) Is “better data” better than “better data miners”?. In: Proceedings of the 40th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE). IEEE, pp 1050–1061
2. Apache Software Foundation (2009a) Apache AvroTM Releases, https://avro.apache.org/releases.html
3. Apache Software Foundation (2009b) Avro, https://avro.apache.org/
4. Apache Software Foundation (2009) Chukwa, http://chukwa.apache.org/
5. Apache Software Foundation (2020) HowToContribute, https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ZOOKEEPER/HowToContribute
Cited by
6 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
1. An empirical study of token-based micro commits;Empirical Software Engineering;2024-09-04
2. An empirical study on the state-of-the-art methods for requirement-to-code traceability link recovery;Journal of King Saud University - Computer and Information Sciences;2024-07
3. Benefits and Pitfalls of Token-Level SZZ: An Empirical Study on OSS Projects;2024 IEEE International Conference on Software Analysis, Evolution and Reengineering (SANER);2024-03-12
4. A Practical Human Labeling Method for Online Just-in-Time Software Defect Prediction;Proceedings of the 31st ACM Joint European Software Engineering Conference and Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering;2023-11-30
5. Towards Privacy Preserving Cross Project Defect Prediction with Federated Learning;2023 IEEE International Conference on Software Analysis, Evolution and Reengineering (SANER);2023-03