The Research of Compilation Optimization on Software Defect Prediction

被引：0
|
作者：
Chen Y. [1 ]
Xu C. [1 ]
He Y.-X. [2 ]
Shen F.-F. [1 ]
机构：
[1] School of Information Engineering, Nanjing Audit University, Nanjing
[2] School of Computer Science, Wuhan University, Wuhan
来源：
Tien Tzu Hsueh Pao/Acta Electronica Sinica | 2021年 / 49卷 / 02期
关键词：
Compilation optimization; Software defect prediction; Software metrics;
D O I：
10.12236/DZXB.20200607
中图分类号：
学科分类号：
摘要：
Software defect prediction helps improve software quality and allocate software test resources reasonably.Many defect prediction models based on software metrics have been proposed.However, the existing software metrics are mainly focused on structure information of source code, and the semantic information is lacking.Compilation optimization is the result of deep analysis of program semantics, and intuitively we believe that it should reflect the semantic information of the program in some ways to help defect prediction.Based on the optimization options widely used in the current compiler, this paper extracts 9 compilation optimization metrics, and proposes five types of metrics models that designed by different metrics sets.The relationship between compilation optimization metrics and software defect predictions was evaluated by 13 commonly used classifiers in weka, and also compared with DP-CNN.Experimental results show: (1) Compilation optimization metrics have a significant impact on the recall rate of software defect prediction; (2)Static code metrics combined with compilation optimization metrics can improve the performance of software defect prediction in all classifiers, which can improve the performance of prediction by about 5%; (3) Code size based optimization metrics and performance based optimization metrics have their characteristics, combined both of them can get better performance in software defect prediction. © 2021, Chinese Institute of Electronics. All right reserved.
引用
收藏
页码：216 / 224
页数：8
相关论文
共 17 条
  • [1] Duksan R, Jong I J, Jongmoon B., A transfer cost-sensitive boosting approach for cross-project defect prediction, Software Quality Journal, 25, 1, pp. 235-272, (2017)
  • [2] Chakkrit T, Shane M, Ahmed E H, Et al., An empirical comparison of model validation techniques for defect prediction models, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 43, 1, pp. 1-18, (2017)
  • [3] Zhang F, Ahmed E H, Shane M, Et al., The use of summation to aggregate software metrics hinders the performance of defect prediction models, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 43, 5, pp. 476-491, (2017)
  • [4] Zaheed M, David B, Tracy H, Et al., Reproducibility and replicability of software defect prediction studies, Information & Software Technology, 99, 7, pp. 148-163, (2018)
  • [5] Chakkrit T, Shane M, Ahmed E H, Et al., The impact of automated parameter optimization on defect prediction models, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 45, 7, pp. 683-711, (2019)
  • [6] Toshiki M, Naoshi U., Balancing the trade-off between accuracy and interpretability in software defect prediction, Empirical Software Engineering, 24, 4, pp. 779-825, (2019)
  • [7] Thomas J M., A complexity measure, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, SE2, 4, pp. 308-320, (1977)
  • [8] Chidamber S R, Kemerer C F., A metrics suite for object oriented design, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 20, 6, pp. 476-493, (1994)
  • [9] D'Ambros M, Lanza M, Robbes R., An extensive comparison of bug prediction approaches, Proceedings of the 7th Working Conference on Mining Software Repositories, pp. 31-41, (2010)
  • [10] Mockus A., Organizational volatility and its effects on software defects, Proceedings of the 18th International Symposium on Foundations of Software Engineering, pp. 117-126, (2010)
12