MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2059600393 · doi:10.1145/2555596

Predicting Stability of Open-Source Software Systems Using Combination of Bayesian Classifiers

2014· article· en· W2059600393 on OpenAlexaff
Salah Bouktif, Houari Sahraoui, Faheem Ahmed

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Management Information Systems · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware Engineering Research
Canadian institutionsThompson Rivers UniversityUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInterpretabilityMachine learningComputer scienceSoftware qualityArtificial intelligenceClassifier (UML)Software systemSoftwareSoftware evolutionData miningSearch-based software engineeringStability (learning theory)Software sizingSoftware metricComponent-based software engineeringContext (archaeology)Naive Bayes classifierBayesian probabilitySoftware developmentSoftware constructionSupport vector machineOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The use of free and Open-Source Software (OSS) systems is gaining momentum. Organizations are also now adopting OSS, despite some reservations, particularly about the quality issues. Stability of software is one of the main features in software quality management that needs to be understood and accurately predicted. It deals with the impact resulting from software changes and argues that stable components lead to a cost-effective software evolution. Changes are most common phenomena present in OSS in comparison to proprietary software. This makes OSS system evolution a rich context to study and predict stability. Our objective in this work is to build stability prediction models that are not only accurate but also interpretable, that is, able to explain the link between the architectural aspects of a software component and its stability behavior in the context of OSS. Therefore, we propose a new approach based on classifiers combination capable of preserving prediction interpretability. Our approach is classifier-structure dependent. Therefore, we propose a particular solution for combining Bayesian classifiers in order to derive a more accurate composite classifier that preserves interpretability. This solution is implemented using a genetic algorithm and applied in the context of an OSS large-scale system, namely the standard Java API. The empirical results show that our approach outperforms state-of-the-art approaches from both machine learning and software engineering.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0060.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.235 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations17
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM Transactions on Management Information SystemsSame topicSoftware Engineering ResearchFrench-language works237,207