Towards a framework for reliable performance evaluation in defect prediction

Abstract

Enhancing software reliability, dependability, and security requires effective identification and mitigation of defects during early development stages. Software defect prediction (SDP) models have emerged as valuable tools for this purpose. However, there is currently a lack of consensus in evaluating the predictive performance of newly proposed models, which hinders accurate measurement of progress and can lead to misleading conclusions. To tackle this challenge, we present MATTER (a fraMework towArd a consisTenT pErformance compaRison), which aims to provide reliable and consistent performance comparisons for SDP models. MATTER incorporates three key considerations. First, it establishes a global reference point, ONE (glObal baseliNe modEl), which possesses the 3S properties (Simplicity in implementation, Strong predictive ability, and Stable prediction performance), to serve as the baseline for evaluating other models. Second, it proposes using the SQA-effort-aligned threshold setting to ensure fair performance comparisons. Third, it advocates for consistent performance evaluation by adopting a set of core performance indicators that reflect the practical value of prediction models in achieving tangible progress. Through the application of MATTER to the same benchmark data sets, researchers and practitioners can obtain more accurate and meaningful insights into the performance of defect prediction models, thereby facilitating informed decision-making and improving software quality. When evaluating representative SDP models from recent years using MATTER, we surprisingly observed that: none of these models demonstrated a notable enhancement in prediction performance compared to the simple baseline model ONE. In future studies, we strongly recommend the adoption of MATTER to assess the actual usefulness of newly proposed models, promoting reliable scientific progress in defect prediction.