MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3214476327 · doi:10.3390/sym13112166

Software Defect Prediction Using Wrapper Feature Selection Based on Dynamic Re-Ranking Strategy

2021· article· en· W3214476327 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSymmetry · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware Engineering Research
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersYayasan UTPUniversiti Teknologi Petronas
KeywordsComputer scienceFeature selectionOverfittingData miningMaxima and minimaCurse of dimensionalityMachine learningRanking (information retrieval)Artificial intelligenceSoftwareClassifier (UML)Feature (linguistics)Process (computing)Pattern recognition (psychology)Artificial neural networkMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Finding defects early in a software system is a crucial task, as it creates adequate time for fixing such defects using available resources. Strategies such as symmetric testing have proven useful; however, its inability in differentiating incorrect implementations from correct ones is a drawback. Software defect prediction (SDP) is another feasible method that can be used for detecting defects early. Additionally, high dimensionality, a data quality problem, has a detrimental effect on the predictive capability of SDP models. Feature selection (FS) has been used as a feasible solution for solving the high dimensionality issue in SDP. According to current literature, the two basic forms of FS approaches are filter-based feature selection (FFS) and wrapper-based feature selection (WFS). Between the two, WFS approaches have been deemed to be superior. However, WFS methods have a high computational cost due to the unknown number of executions available for feature subset search, evaluation, and selection. This characteristic of WFS often leads to overfitting of classifier models due to its easy trapping in local maxima. The trapping of the WFS subset evaluator in local maxima can be overcome by using an effective search method in the evaluator process. Hence, this study proposes an enhanced WFS method that dynamically and iteratively selects features. The proposed enhanced WFS (EWFS) method is based on incrementally selecting features while considering previously selected features in its search space. The novelty of EWFS is based on the enhancement of the subset evaluation process of WFS methods by deploying a dynamic re-ranking strategy that iteratively selects germane features with a low subset evaluation cycle while not compromising the prediction performance of the ensuing model. For evaluation, EWFS was deployed with Decision Tree (DT) and Naïve Bayes classifiers on software defect datasets with varying granularities. The experimental findings revealed that EWFS outperformed existing metaheuristics and sequential search-based WFS approaches established in this work. Additionally, EWFS selected fewer features with less computational time as compared with existing metaheuristics and sequential search-based WFS methods.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.768
Threshold uncertainty score0.744

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.255 · 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