Local versus Global Lessons for Defect Prediction and Effort Estimation
Jun 1, 2013·,,,,,,,·
0 min read
Tim Menzies
Andrew Butcher
David Cok
Andrian Marcus
Lucas Layman
Forrest Shull
Burak Turhan
Thomas Zimmermann
Abstract
Existing research is unclear on how to generate lessons learned for defect prediction and effort estimation. Should we seek lessons that are global to multiple projects or just local to particular projects? This paper aims to comparatively evaluate local versus global lessons learned for effort estimation and defect prediction. We applied automated clustering tools to effort and defect datasets from the PROMISE repository. Rule learners generated lessons learned from all the data, from local projects, or just from each cluster. The results indicate that the lessons learned after combining small parts of different data sources (i.e., the clusters) were superior to either generalizations formed over all the data or local lessons formed from particular projects. We conclude that when researchers attempt to draw lessons from some historical data source, they should 1) ignore any existing local divisions into multiple sources, 2) cluster across all available data, then 3) restrict the learning of lessons to the clusters from other sources that are nearest to the test data.
Type
Publication
IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering
Context
Data Models
Estimation
Java
Measurement
PROMISE Repository
Software
Telecommunications
Agile
Automated Clustering Tools
Automatic Test Pattern Generation
Clustering
Data Mining
Data Source
Defect Dataset
Defect Prediction
Effort Estimation
Global Lessons
Learned Lesson Generated Rule
Local Lessons
Mypubs
Nsf
Pattern Clustering