An Empirical Study of the Impact of Test Strategies on Online Optimization for Ensemble-Learning Defect Prediction

Kensei Hamamoto, Masateru Tsunoda, Amjed Tahir, Kwabena Ebo Bennin, Akito Monden, Koji Toda, Keitaro Nakasai, Kenichi Matsumoto
{"title":"An Empirical Study of the Impact of Test Strategies on Online Optimization for Ensemble-Learning Defect Prediction","authors":"Kensei Hamamoto, Masateru Tsunoda, Amjed Tahir, Kwabena Ebo Bennin, Akito Monden, Koji Toda, Keitaro Nakasai, Kenichi Matsumoto","doi":"arxiv-2409.06264","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Ensemble learning methods have been used to enhance the reliability of defect\nprediction models. However, there is an inconclusive stability of a single\nmethod attaining the highest accuracy among various software projects. This\nwork aims to improve the performance of ensemble-learning defect prediction\namong such projects by helping select the highest accuracy ensemble methods. We\nemploy bandit algorithms (BA), an online optimization method, to select the\nhighest-accuracy ensemble method. Each software module is tested sequentially,\nand bandit algorithms utilize the test outcomes of the modules to evaluate the\nperformance of the ensemble learning methods. The test strategy followed might\nimpact the testing effort and prediction accuracy when applying online\noptimization. Hence, we analyzed the test order's influence on BA's\nperformance. In our experiment, we used six popular defect prediction datasets,\nfour ensemble learning methods such as bagging, and three test strategies such\nas testing positive-prediction modules first (PF). Our results show that when\nBA is applied with PF, the prediction accuracy improved on average, and the\nnumber of found defects increased by 7% on a minimum of five out of six\ndatasets (although with a slight increase in the testing effort by about 4%\nfrom ordinal ensemble learning). Hence, BA with PF strategy is the most\neffective to attain the highest prediction accuracy using ensemble methods on\nvarious projects.","PeriodicalId":501278,"journal":{"name":"arXiv - CS - Software Engineering","volume":"11 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"arXiv - CS - Software Engineering","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/arxiv-2409.06264","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Ensemble learning methods have been used to enhance the reliability of defect prediction models. However, there is an inconclusive stability of a single method attaining the highest accuracy among various software projects. This work aims to improve the performance of ensemble-learning defect prediction among such projects by helping select the highest accuracy ensemble methods. We employ bandit algorithms (BA), an online optimization method, to select the highest-accuracy ensemble method. Each software module is tested sequentially, and bandit algorithms utilize the test outcomes of the modules to evaluate the performance of the ensemble learning methods. The test strategy followed might impact the testing effort and prediction accuracy when applying online optimization. Hence, we analyzed the test order's influence on BA's performance. In our experiment, we used six popular defect prediction datasets, four ensemble learning methods such as bagging, and three test strategies such as testing positive-prediction modules first (PF). Our results show that when BA is applied with PF, the prediction accuracy improved on average, and the number of found defects increased by 7% on a minimum of five out of six datasets (although with a slight increase in the testing effort by about 4% from ordinal ensemble learning). Hence, BA with PF strategy is the most effective to attain the highest prediction accuracy using ensemble methods on various projects.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
测试策略对集合学习缺陷预测在线优化影响的实证研究
集合学习方法已被用于提高缺陷预测模型的可靠性。然而,在各种软件项目中,单一方法获得最高准确率的稳定性并不稳定。这项工作旨在通过帮助选择准确率最高的集合方法,提高集合学习缺陷预测在此类项目中的性能。我们采用一种在线优化方法--强盗算法(BA)来选择精度最高的集合方法。每个软件模块按顺序进行测试,匪算法利用模块的测试结果来评估集合学习方法的性能。在应用在线优化时,测试策略可能会影响测试工作量和预测精度。因此,我们分析了测试顺序对 BA 性能的影响。在实验中,我们使用了 6 个流行的缺陷预测数据集、4 种集合学习方法(如 bagging)和 3 种测试策略(如先测试正预测模块 (PF))。实验结果表明,当应用带有 PF 的 BA 时,预测准确率平均有所提高,在六个数据集中的五个数据集上,发现的缺陷数量至少增加了 7%(尽管与顺序集合学习相比,测试工作量略微增加了约 4%)。因此,在各种项目中使用集合方法,使用 PF 策略的 BA 是获得最高预测精度的最有效方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Promise and Peril of Collaborative Code Generation Models: Balancing Effectiveness and Memorization Shannon Entropy is better Feature than Category and Sentiment in User Feedback Processing Motivations, Challenges, Best Practices, and Benefits for Bots and Conversational Agents in Software Engineering: A Multivocal Literature Review A Taxonomy of Self-Admitted Technical Debt in Deep Learning Systems Investigating team maturity in an agile automotive reorganization
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1