The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Predicting fault-prone software modules in telephone switches
Abstract
An empirical study was carried out at Ericsson Telecom AB to investigate the relationship between several design metrics and the number of function test failure reports associated with software modules. A tool, ERIMET, was developed to analyze the design documents automatically. Preliminary results from the study of 130 modules showed that: based on fault and design data one can satisfactorily build, before coding has started, a prediction model for identifying the most fault-prone modules. The data analyzed show that 20 percent of the most fault-prone modules account for 60 percent of all faults. The prediction model built in this paper would have identified 20 percent of the modules accounting for 47 percent of all faults. At least four design measures can alternatively be used as predictors with equivalent performance. The size (with respect to the number of lines of code) used in a previous prediction model was not significantly better than these four measures. The Alberg diagram introduced in this paper offers a way of assessing a predictor based on historical data, which is a valuable complement to linear regression when prediction data is ordinal. Applying the method described in this paper makes it possible to use measures at the design phase to predict the most fault-prone modules.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Cited by
Predicting the location and number of faults in large software systems
Ostrand, T. J., Weyuker, E. J., & Bell, R. M. (2005) · IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering · doi:10.1109/tse.2005.49 · Cited by 720
Quantitative analysis of faults and failures in a complex software system
Fenton, N. E., & Ohlsson, N. (2000) · IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering · doi:10.1109/32.879815 · Cited by 699
Self-citationPredicting defects using network analysis on dependency graphs
Zimmermann, T., & Nagappan, N. (2008) · Proceedings of the 13th international conference on Software engineering - ICSE '08 · doi:10.1145/1368088.1368161 · Cited by 580
Software fault prediction metrics: A systematic literature review
Radjenović, D., Heričko, M., Torkar, R., & Živkovič, A. (2013) · Information and Software Technology · doi:10.1016/j.infsof.2013.02.009 · Cited by 538
Detection of logical coupling based on product release history
Gall, H., Hajek, K., & Jazayeri, M. (2002) · Proceedings. International Conference on Software Maintenance (Cat. No. 98CB36272) · doi:10.1109/icsm.1998.738508 · Cited by 447
Metadata
- Authors
- Ohlsson, N., & Alberg, H.
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering
- Published
- 1996
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 886-894
- ISSN
- 0098-5589 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2110656807
- Cited by
- 346
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 13.40
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Predicting fault-prone software modules in telephone switches. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/32.553637
- The paper
- Ohlsson, N., & Alberg, H. (1996). Predicting fault-prone software modules in telephone switches. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering. https://doi.org/10.1109/32.553637
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.