Paper detail

HEDP: A Method for Early Forecasting Software Defects based on Human Error Mechanisms

As the primary cause of software defects, human error is the key to understanding, and perhaps to predicting and avoiding them. Little research has been done to predict defects on the basis of the cognitive errors that cause them. This paper proposes an approach to predicting software defects through knowledge about the cognitive mechanisms of human errors. Our theory is that the main process behind a software defect is that an error-prone scenario triggers human error modes, which psychologists have observed to recur across diverse activities. Software defects can then be predicted by identifying such scenarios, guided by this knowledge of typical error modes. The proposed idea emphasizes predicting the exact location and form of a possible defect. We conducted two case studies to demonstrate and validate this approach, with 55 programmers in a programming competition and 5 analysts serving as the users of the approach. We found it impressive that the approach was able to predict, at the requirement phase, the exact locations and forms of 7 out of the 22 (31.8%) specific types of defects that were found in the code. The defects predicted tended to be common defects: their occurrences constituted 75.7% of the total number of defects in the 55 developed programs; each of them was introduced by at least two persons. The fraction of the defects introduced by a programmer that were predicted was on average (over all programmers) 75%. Furthermore, these predicted defects were highly persistent through the debugging process. If the prediction had been used to successfully prevent these defects, this could have saved 46.2% of the debugging iterations. This excellent capability of forecasting the exact locations and forms of possible defects at the early phases of software development recommends the approach for substantial benefits to defect prevention and early detection.

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.