Systematic mapping study of missing values techniques in software engineering data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Missing Values (MV) present a serious problem facing research in software engineering (SE) which is mainly based on statistical and/or data mining analysis of SE data. The simple method of dealing with MV is to ignore data with missing observations. This leads to losing valuable information and then obtaining biased results. Therefore, various techniques have been developed to deal adequately with MV, especially those based on imputation methods. In this paper, a systematic mapping study was carried out to summarize the existing techniques dealing with MV in SE datasets and to classify the selected studies according to six classification criteria: research type, research approach, MV technique, MV type, data types and MV objective. Publication channels and trends were also identified. As results, 35 papers concerning MV treatments of SE data were selected. This study shows an increasing interest in machine learning (ML) techniques especially the K-nearest neighbor algorithm (KNN) to deal with MV in SE datasets and found that most of the MV techniques are used to serve software development effort estimation techniques.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".