Paper detail

Does chronology matter in JIT defect prediction? A Partial Replication Study

Just-In-Time (JIT) models detect the fix-inducing changes (or defect-inducing changes). These models are designed based on the assumption that past code change properties are similar to future ones. However, as the system evolves, the expertise of developers and/or the complexity of the system also changes. In this work, we aim to investigate the effect of code change properties on JIT models over time. We also study the impact of using recent data as well as all available data on the performance of JIT models. Further, we analyze the effect of weighted sampling on the performance of fix-inducing properties of JIT models. For this purpose, we used datasets from Eclipse JDT, Mozilla, Eclipse Platform, and PostgreSQL. We used five families of change-code properties such as size, diffusion, history, experience, and purpose. We used Random Forest to train and test the JIT model and Brier Score and the area under the ROC curve for performance measurement. Our paper suggests that the predictive power of JIT models does not change over time. Furthermore, we observed that the chronology of data in JIT defect prediction models can be discarded by considering all the available data. On the other hand, the importance score of families of code change properties is found to oscillate over time. To mitigate the impact of the evolution of code change properties, it is recommended to use a weighted sampling approach in which more emphasis is placed upon the changes occurring closer to the current time. Moreover, since properties such as "Expertise of the Developer" and "Size" evolve with time, the models obtained from old data may exhibit different characteristics compared to those employing the newer dataset. Hence, practitioners should constantly retrain JIT models to include fresh data.

preprint2021arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.