Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 170

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Local vs. global models for effort estimation and defect prediction

Menzies, Tim, Butcher, Andrew, Marcus, Andrian, Zimmermann, Thomas, Cok, David·2011·2011 26th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE 2011)

Abstract

Data miners can infer rules showing how to improve either (a) the effort estimates of a project or (b) the defect predictions of a software module. Such studies often exhibit conclusion instability regarding what is the most effective action for different projects or modules. This instability can be explained by data heterogeneity. We show that effort and defect data contain many local regions with markedly different properties to the global space. In other words, what appears to be useful in a global context is often irrelevant for particular local contexts. This result raises questions about the generality of conclusions from empirical SE. At the very least, SE researchers should test if their supposedly general conclusions are valid within subsets of their data. At the very most, empirical SE should become a search for local regions with similar properties (and conclusions should be constrained to just those regions).

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 · 10.1109/ase.2011.6100072

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.

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

Cited by

See all 170

Metadata

Authors
Menzies, T., Butcher, A., Marcus, A., Zimmermann, T., & Cok, D.
Venue
2011 26th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE 2011)
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2011-11
Pages
343-351
OpenAlex
W2078619945
Cited by
170
References
0
FWCI
12.74
Type
conference paper
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: Local vs. global models for effort estimation and defect prediction. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/ase.2011.6100072
The paper
Menzies, T., Butcher, A., Marcus, A., Zimmermann, T., & Cok, D. (2011). Local vs. global models for effort estimation and defect prediction. 2011 26th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE 2011). https://doi.org/10.1109/ase.2011.6100072

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.