Software Requirement Risk Prediction Using Enhanced Fuzzy Induction Models
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The development of most modern software systems is accompanied by a significant level of uncertainty, which can be attributed to the unanticipated activities that may occur throughout the software development process. As these modern software systems become more complex and drawn out, escalating software project failure rates have become a critical concern. These unforeseeable uncertainties are known as software risks, and they emerge from many risk factors inherent to the numerous activities comprising the software development lifecycle (SDLC). Consequently, these software risks have resulted in massive revenue losses for software organizations. Hence, it is imperative to address these software risks, to curb future software system failures. The subjective risk assessment (SRM) method is regarded as a viable solution to software risk problems. However, it is inherently reliant on humans and, therefore, in certain situations, imprecise, due to its dependence on an expert’s knowledge and experience. In addition, the SRM does not allow repeatability, as expertise is not easily exchanged across the different units working on a software project. Developing intelligent modelling methods that may offer more unbiased, reproducible, and explainable decision-making assistance in risk management is crucial. Hence, this research proposes enhanced fuzzy induction models for software requirement risk prediction. Specifically, the fuzzy unordered rule induction algorithm (FURIA), and its enhanced variants based on nested subset selection dichotomies, are developed for software requirement risk prediction. The suggested fuzzy induction models are based on the use of effective rule-stretching methods for the prediction process. Additionally, the proposed FURIA method is enhanced through the introduction of nested subset selection dichotomy concepts into its prediction process. The prediction performances of the proposed models are evaluated using a benchmark dataset, and are then compared with existing machine learning (ML)-based and rule-based software risk prediction models. From the experimental results, it was observed that the FURIA performed comparably, in most cases, to the rule-based and ML-based models. However, the FURIA nested dichotomy variants were superior in performance to the conventional FURIA method, and rule-based and ML-based methods, with the least accuracy, area under the curve (AUC), and Mathew’s correlation coefficient (MCC), with values of approximately 98%.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».