Abstract

Defect prediction is the process of predicting the fault prone module using some pre-mined patterns or rules. Several statistical and mathematical strategies have been used in recent past to mine these rules. However, the interpretability of these rules is the matter of concern. In real development process an expert is required to demonstrate the working of mined patterns which prevents the use of these mined patterns in software development process. Considering these facts, in this study we tried to find the combination of attribute-value pair which indicates the bug. These attribute-value pair is known as defect pattern. For defect pattern mining we used GUHA (General Unary Hypothesis Automaton) procedure which is oldest yet very powerful method of pattern mining. The basic idea of GUHA procedure is to mine the entire possible and interesting hypothesis supported by the data in predefined logical form. The experimental results show that the mined patterns can be used as a rule to identify the defective module. Moreover, the mined patterns do not suffer from the interpretability problems.

References

• Promise. http://promisedata. org/repository/.
• Weka. http: //www. cs. waikato. ac. nz /.
• Menzies, T. , Dekhtyar, A. , Distefano, J. , and Greenwald, J. 2007. Problems with Precision: A Response to Comments on Data Mining Static Code Attributes to Learn Defect Predictors. IEEE Trans. Software Eng. , vol. 33, no. 9,pp. 637-640, Sept.
• Zhong, S. , Khoshgoftaar, T. M. , Seliya, N. 2002. Analyzing software measurement data with clustering techniques, IEEE Intelligent System 19 20–27.
• Thwin, M. M. , Quah, T. S. 2005. Application of neural networks for software quality prediction using object-oriented metrics, The Journal of Systems and Software 76 147–156.
• Khoshgoftaar, T. M. , Lanning, D. L. 1995. A neural network approach for early detection of program modules having high risk in the maintenance phase, Journal of Systems and Software 29 (1) 85–91.
• Bibi, S. , Tsoumakas, G. , Stamelos, I. , Vlahavas, I. 2008. Regression via classification applied on software defect estimation, Expert Systems with Applications 34 2091–2101.
• Graves, T. , Karr, J. A. , Marron, H. S. 2000. Predicting fault incidence using software change history, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 26 (7) 653– 661.
• Salem, A. M. , Rekabb, K. , Whittakerc, J. A. 2004. Prediction of software failures through logistic regression, Information and Software Technology 46 519–523.
• Hand, D. , Mannila, H. , Smyth, P. 2001. Principles of Data Mining, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
• Agrawal, R. , Srikant, R. 1994. Fast algorithm for mining association rules, Proceeding of the 20th VLDB conference, Morgan Kaufmann, Santiago, Chile, pp. 487– 499.
• Hajek, P. , Hole?na, M. , Raucha, J. , 2010. The GUHA method and its meaning for data miningJournal of Computer and System Sciences 76 34–48
• Chidamber, S. R. , Kemerer, C. F. , 1994. A metrics suite for object oriented design. IEEE Transaction on Software Engineering 20 (6), 476–493.
• Hajek, P. , Havel, I. , Chytil, M. 1996. The GUHA method of automatic hypotheses determination, Computing .
• Huntley, C. L. 2003. Organizational learning in open-source software projects: an analysis of debugging data, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 50 (4) 485–493.
• R. Holte, R. 1993"Very simple classification rules perform well on most commonly used datasets," Machine Learning, vol. 11, p. 63.
• Quinlan, R. 1992. C4. 5: Programs for Machine Learning. Morgan Kaufman.
• Witten I. H. , and Frank, E. , 2005. Data mining. 2nd edition. Los Altos, US: Morgan Kaufmann.
• Lispminer:http://lispminer. vse. cz/