Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 236

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Studying just-in-time defect prediction using cross-project models

Kamei, Yasutaka, Fukushima, Takafumi, McIntosh, Shane, Yamashita, Kazuhiro, Ubayashi, Naoyasu, Hassan, Ahmed E.·2016·Empirical Software Engineering
DOI 10.1007/s10664-015-9400-x
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10664-015-9400-x

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Research works printed but not linked: 48

  1. Basili VR, Briand LC, Melo WL (1996) A validation of object-oriented design metrics as quality indicators. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 22(10):751–761 · DOI · Paper page
  2. Bettenburg N, Nagappan M, Hassan AE (2012) Think locally, act globally: Improving defect and effort prediction models. In: Proc. Int’l Working Conf. on Mining Software Repositories (MSR’12), pp 60–69 · DOI
  3. Breiman L (2001) Random forests. Mach Learn 45(1):5–32 · DOI · Paper page
  4. Briand LC, Melo WL, Wüst J (2002) Assessing the applicability of fault-proneness models across object-oriented software projects. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 28(7):706–720 · DOI · Paper page
  5. Coolidge FL (2012) Statistics: A Gentle Introduction. SAGE Publications (3rd ed.)
  6. D’Ambros M, Lanza M, Robbes R (2010) An extensive comparison of bug prediction approaches. In: Proc. Int’l Working Conf. on Mining Software Repositories (MSR’10), pp 31–41 · DOI · Paper page
  7. Fukushima T, Kamei Y, McIntosh S, Yamashita K, Ubayashi N (2014) An empirical study of just-in-time defect prediction using cross-project models. In: Proc. Int’l Working Conf. on Mining Software Repositories (MSR’14), pp 172–181 · DOI · Paper page
  8. Graves TL, Karr AF, Marron JS, Siy H (2000) Predicting fault incidence using software change history. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 26(7):653–661 · DOI · Paper page
  9. Guo P J, Zimmermann T, Nagappan N, Murphy B (2010) Characterizing and predicting which bugs get fixed: An empirical study of microsoft windows. In: Proc. Int’l Conf. on Softw. Eng. (ICSE’10) vol 1, pp 495–504 · DOI · Paper page
  10. Hassan AE (2009) Predicting faults using the complexity of code changes. In: Proc. Int’l Conf. on Softw. Eng. (ICSE’09), pp 78–88 · DOI · Paper page
  11. He Z, Shu F, Yang Y, Li M, Wang Q (2012) An investigation on the feasibility of cross-project defect prediction. Automated Software Engg 19(2):167–199 · DOI · Paper page
  12. Jiang Y, Cukic B, Menzies T (2008) Can data transformation help in the detection of fault-prone modules?. In: Proc. Workshop on Defects in Large Software Systems (DEFECTS’08), pp 16–20 · DOI
  13. Kamei Y, Monden A, Matsumoto S, Kakimoto T, Matsumoto Ki (2007) The effects of over and under sampling on fault-prone module detection. In: Proc. Int’l Symposium on Empirical Softw. Eng. and Measurement (ESEM’07), pp 196–204 · DOI
  14. Kamei Y, Matsumoto S, Monden A, Matsumoto K, Adams B, Hassan AE (2010) Revisiting common bug prediction findings using effort aware models. In: Proc. Int’l Conf. on Software Maintenance (ICSM’10), pp 1–10 · DOI · Paper page
  15. Kamei Y, Shihab E, Adams B, Hassan AE, Mockus A, Sinha A, Ubayashi N (2013) A large-scale empirical study of just-in-time quality assurance. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 39(6):757–773 · DOI · Paper page
  16. Kampstra P (2008) Beanplot: A boxplot alternative for visual comparison of distributions. J Stat Softw,Code Snippets 28(1):1–9
  17. Kim S, Whitehead EJ, Zhang Y (2008) Classifying software changes: Clean or buggy IEEE Trans Softw Eng 34(2):181–196 · DOI · Paper page
  18. Kocaguneli E, Menzies T, Keung J (2012) On the value of ensemble effort estimation. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 38(6):1403–1416 · DOI · Paper page
  19. Koru AG, Zhang D, El Emam K, Liu H (2009) An investigation into the functional form of the size-defect relationship for software modules. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 35(2):293–304 · DOI
  20. Lessmann S, Baesens B, Mues C, Pietsch S (2008) Benchmarking classification models for software defect prediction: A proposed framework and novel findings. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 34(4):485–496 · DOI · Paper page
  21. Li PL, Herbsleb J, Shaw M, Robinson B (2006) Experiences and results from initiating field defect prediction and product test prioritization efforts at ABB Inc. In: Proc. Int’l Conf. on Softw. Eng. (ICSE’06), pp 413–422 · DOI
  22. Matsumoto S, Kamei Y, Monden A, Matsumoto K (2010) An analysis of developer metrics for fault prediction. In: Proc. Int’l Conf. on Predictive Models in Softw. Eng. (PROMISE’10), pp 18:1–18:9 · DOI
  23. McIntosh S, Nagappan M, Adams B, Mockus A, Hassan A E (2014) A large-scale empirical study of the relationship between build technology and build maintenance. Empirical Software Engineering. doi: 10.1.1/jpb001 . http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007
  24. Menzies T, Turhan B, Bener A, Gay G, Cukic B, Jiang Y (2008) Implications of ceiling effects in defect predictors. In: Proc. Int’l Conf. on Predictive Models in Softw. Eng. (PROMISE’10), pp 47–54 · DOI · Paper page
  25. Menzies T, Butcher A, Marcus A, Zimmermann T, Cok D (2011) Local vs. global models for effort estimation and defect prediction. In: Proc. Int’l Conf. on Automated Software Engineering (ASE’11), pp 343–351 · DOI · Paper page
  26. Menzies T, Butcher A, Cok D, Marcus A, Layman L, Shull F, Turhan B, Zimmermann T (2013) Local versus global lessons for defect prediction and effort estimation. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 39(6):822–834 · DOI · Paper page
  27. Minku LL, Yao X (2014) How to make best use of cross-company data in software effort estimation?. In: Proc. Int’l Conf. on Software Engineering (ICSE’14), pp 446–456 · DOI
  28. Mısırlı AT, Bener AB, Turhan B (2011) An industrial case study of classifier ensembles for locating software defects. Softw Qual J 19(3):515–536 · DOI
  29. Mockus A (2009) Amassing and indexing a large sample of version control systems: Towards the census of public source code history. In: Proc. Int’l Working Conf. on Mining Software Repositories (MSR’09), pp 11–20 · DOI
  30. Mockus A, Weiss DM (2000) Predicting risk of software changes. Bell Labs Tech J 5(2):169–180 · DOI · Paper page
  31. Moser R, Pedrycz W, Succi G (2008) A comparative analysis of the efficiency of change metrics and static code attributes for defect prediction. In: Proc. Int’l Conf. on Softw. Eng. (ICSE’08), 181–190 · DOI · Paper page
  32. Nagappan N, Ball T, Zeller A (2006) Mining metrics to predict component failures. In: Proc. Int’l Conf. on Softw. Eng. (ICSE’06), pp 452–461 · DOI · Paper page
  33. Nam J, Pan S J, Kim S (2013) Transfer defect learning. In: Proc. Int’l Conf. on Softw. Eng. (ICSE’13), pp 382–391 · DOI · Paper page
  34. Purushothaman R, Perry DE (2005) Toward understanding the rhetoric of small source code changes. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 31(6):511–526 · DOI · Paper page
  35. Rahman F, Posnett D, Devanbu P (2012) Recalling the ”imprecision” of cross-project defect prediction. In: Proc. Int’l Symposium on the Foundations of Softw. Eng. (FSE’12), pp 61:1–61:11 · DOI · Paper page
  36. Ratzinger J, Sigmund T, Gall HC (2008) On the relation of refactorings and software defect prediction. In: Proc. Int’l Working Conf. on Mining Software Repositories (MSR’08), pp 35–38 · DOI
  37. Shihab E (2012) An exploration of challenges limiting pragmatic software defect prediction. PhD thesis, Queen’s University
  38. Shihab E, Hassan AE, Adams B, Jiang ZM (2012) An industrial study on the risk of software changes. In: Proc. Int’l Symposium on the Foundations of Softw. Eng. (FSE’12), pp 62:1–62:11 · DOI
  39. Śliwerski J, Zimmermann T, Zeller A (2005) When do changes induce fixes?. In: Proc. Int’l Working Conf. on Mining Software Repositories (MSR’05), pp 1–5 · DOI · Paper page
  40. Tan M, Tan L, Dara S, Mayuex C (2015) Online defect prediction for imbalanced data. In: Proc. Int’l Conf. on Softw. Eng. (ICSE’13 SEIP), (To appear) · DOI · Paper page
  41. Thomas SW, Nagappan M, Blostein D, Hassan AE (2013) The impact of classifier configuration and classifier combination on bug localization. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 39(10):1427–1443 · DOI
  42. Turhan B (2012) On the dataset shift problem in software engineering prediction models. Empirical Softw Engg 17(1-2):62–74 · DOI
  43. Turhan B, Menzies T, Bener AB, Di Stefano J (2009) On the relative value of cross-company and within-company data for defect prediction. Empir Softw Eng 14 (5):540–578 · DOI · Paper page
  44. Turhan B, Tosun A, Bener A (2011) Empirical evaluation of mixed-project defect prediction models. In: Proc. EUROMICRO Conf. on Software Engineering and Advanced Applications (SEAA’11), pp 396–403 · doi:10.1109/seaa.2011.59
  45. Wu R, Zhang H, Kim S, Cheung SC (2011) Relink: recovering links between bugs and changes. In: Proc. European Softw. Eng. Conf. and Symposium on the Foundations of Softw. Eng. (ESEC/FSE’11), pp 15–25 · DOI · Paper page
  46. Zhang F, Mockus A, Zou Y, Khomh F, Hassan AE (2013) How does context affect the distribution of software maintainability metrics?. In: Proc. Int’l Conf. on Software Maintenance (ICSM’13), pp 350–359 · DOI
  47. Zhang F, Mockus A, Keivanloo I, Zou Y (2014) Towards building a universal defect prediction model. In: Proc. Int’l Working Conf. on Mining Software Repositories (MSR’14), pp 182–191 · doi:10.1145/2597073.2597078
  48. Zimmermann T, Nagappan N, Gall H, Giger E, Murphy B (2009) Cross-project defect prediction: a large scale experiment on data vs. domain vs. process. In: Proc. European Softw. Eng. Conf. and Symposium on the Foundations of Softw. Eng. (ESEC/FSE’09), pp 91–100 · DOI

Cited by

See all 236

Metadata

Authors
Kamei, Y., Fukushima, T., McIntosh, S., Yamashita, K., Ubayashi, N., & Hassan, A. E.
Venue
Empirical Software Engineering
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2015-09-14
Volume
21
Issue
5
Pages
2072-2106
ISSN
  • 1382-3256 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-7616
DOI
10.1007/s10664-015-9400-x
OpenAlex
W2276400542
Cited by
236
References
2
FWCI
33.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Studying just-in-time defect prediction using cross-project models. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/s10664-015-9400-x
The paper
Kamei, Y., Fukushima, T., McIntosh, S., Yamashita, K., Ubayashi, N., & Hassan, A. E. (2016). Studying just-in-time defect prediction using cross-project models. Empirical Software Engineering. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10664-015-9400-x

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.