Too Trivial To Test? An Inverse View on Defect Prediction to Identify Methods with Low Fault Risk

November 02, 2018 Β· Declared Dead Β· πŸ› PeerJ Preprints

πŸ‘» CAUSE OF DEATH: Ghosted
No code link whatsoever

"No code URL or promise found in abstract"

Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner

Authors Rainer Niedermayr, Tobias RΓΆhm, Stefan Wagner arXiv ID 1811.00820 Category cs.SE: Software Engineering Citations 6 Venue PeerJ Preprints Last Checked 4 months ago
Abstract
Background. Test resources are usually limited and therefore it is often not possible to completely test an application before a release. To cope with the problem of scarce resources, development teams can apply defect prediction to identify fault-prone code regions. However, defect prediction tends to low precision in cross-project prediction scenarios. Aims. We take an inverse view on defect prediction and aim to identify methods that can be deferred when testing because they contain hardly any faults due to their code being "trivial". We expect that characteristics of such methods might be project-independent, so that our approach could improve cross-project predictions. Method. We compute code metrics and apply association rule mining to create rules for identifying methods with low fault risk. We conduct an empirical study to assess our approach with six Java open-source projects containing precise fault data at the method level. Results. Our results show that inverse defect prediction can identify approx. 32-44% of the methods of a project to have a low fault risk; on average, they are about six times less likely to contain a fault than other methods. In cross-project predictions with larger, more diversified training sets, identified methods are even eleven times less likely to contain a fault. Conclusions. Inverse defect prediction supports the efficient allocation of test resources by identifying methods that can be treated with less priority in testing activities and is well applicable in cross-project prediction scenarios.
Community shame:
Not yet rated
Community Contributions

Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!

πŸ“œ Similar Papers

In the same crypt β€” Software Engineering

Died the same way β€” πŸ‘» Ghosted