The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Predicting fault incidence using software change history
Abstract
This paper is an attempt to understand the processes by which software ages. We define code to be aged or decayed if its structure makes it unnecessarily difficult to understand or change and we measure the extent of decay by counting the number of faults in code in a period of time. Using change management data from a very large, long-lived software system, we explore the extent to which measurements from the change history are successful in predicting the distribution over modules of these incidences of faults. In general, process measures based on the change history are more useful in predicting fault rates than product metrics of the code: For instance, the number of times code has been changed is a better indication of how many faults it will contain than is its length. We also compare the fault rates of code of various ages, finding that if a module is, on the average, a year older than an otherwise similar module, the older module will have roughly a third fewer faults. Our most successful model measures the fault potential of a module as the sum of contributions from all of the times the module has been changed, with large, recent changes receiving the most weight.
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
Cites
McCullagh, P., & Nelder, J. A. (1989) · doi:10.1007/978-1-4899-3242-6 · Cited by 16,836
Cited by
A Systematic Literature Review on Fault Prediction Performance in Software Engineering
Hall, T., Beecham, S., Bowes, D., Gray, D., & Counsell, S. (2012) · IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering · doi:10.1109/tse.2011.103 · Cited by 1,154
Use of relative code churn measures to predict system defect density
Nagappan, N., & Ball, T. (2005) · Proceedings of the 27th international conference on Software engineering - ICSE '05 · doi:10.1145/1062455.1062514 · Cited by 775
Predicting Faults from Cached History
Kim, S., Zimmermann, T., Whitehead Jr., E. J., & Zeller, A. (2007) · 29th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE'07) · doi:10.1109/icse.2007.66 · Cited by 486
A survey of AIOps methods for failure management
Notaro, P., Cardoso, J., & Gerndt, M. (2021) · ACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology · doi:10.1145/3483424 · Cited by 142
An empirical study of software reuse vs. defect-density and stability
Mohagheghi, P., Conradi, R., Killi, O. M., & Schwarz, H. (2004) · Proceedings. 26th International Conference on Software Engineering · doi:10.1109/icse.2004.1317450 · Cited by 84
Metadata
- Authors
- Graves, T. L., Karr, A. F., Marron, J. S., & Siy, H.
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering
- Published
- 2000-07
- Volume
- 26
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 653-661
- ISSN
- 0098-5589 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2147105902
- Cited by
- 753
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 31.42
- 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 incidence using software change history. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/32.859533
- The paper
- Graves, T. L., Karr, A. F., Marron, J. S., & Siy, H. (2000). Predicting fault incidence using software change history. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering. https://doi.org/10.1109/32.859533
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.