The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Using Class Imbalance Learning for Software Defect Prediction
Abstract
To facilitate software testing, and save testing costs, a wide range of machine learning methods have been studied to predict defects in software modules. Unfortunately, the imbalanced nature of this type of data increases the learning difficulty of such a task. Class imbalance learning specializes in tackling classification problems with imbalanced distributions, which could be helpful for defect prediction, but has not been investigated in depth so far. In this paper, we study the issue of if and how class imbalance learning methods can benefit software defect prediction with the aim of finding better solutions. We investigate different types of class imbalance learning methods, including resampling techniques, threshold moving, and ensemble algorithms. Among those methods we studied, AdaBoost.NC shows the best overall performance in terms of the measures including balance, G-mean, and Area Under the Curve (AUC). To further improve the performance of the algorithm, and facilitate its use in software defect prediction, we propose a dynamic version of AdaBoost.NC, which adjusts its parameter automatically during training. Without the need to pre-define any parameters, it is shown to be more effective and efficient than the original AdaBoost.NC.
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
Breiman, L. (2001) · Machine Learning · doi:10.1023/a:1010933404324 · Cited by 133,538
SMOTE synthetic minority over-sampling technique
Chawla, N. V., Bowyer, K. W., Hall, L. O., & Kegelmeyer, W. P. (2002) · Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research · doi:10.1613/jair.953 · Cited by 32,865
The use of the area under the ROC curve in the evaluation of machine learning algorithms
Bradley, A. P. (1997) · Pattern Recognition · doi:10.1016/s0031-3203(96)00142-2 · Cited by 7,217
Rokach, L. (2010) · Artificial Intelligence Review · doi:10.1007/s10462-009-9124-7 · Cited by 2,657
Mining with rarity: a unifying framework
Weiss, G. M. (2004) · ACM SIGKDD Explorations Newsletter · doi:10.1145/1007730.1007734 · Cited by 1,393
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
Cited by
Learning from class-imbalanced data: Review of methods and applications
Haixiang, G., Yijing, L., Shang, J., Mingyun, G., Yuanyue, H., & Bing, G. (2017) · Expert Systems with Applications · doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2016.12.035 · Cited by 2,377
Bennin, K. E., Keung, J., Phannachitta, P., Monden, A., & Mensah, S. (2018) · IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering · doi:10.1109/tse.2017.2731766 · Cited by 298
Software Defect Prediction Using Ensemble Learning: A Systematic Literature Review
Matloob, F., Ghazal, T. M., Taleb, N., Aftab, S., Ahmad, M., Khan, M. A., Abbas, S., & Soomro, T. R. (2021) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2021.3095559 · Cited by 293
An under‐sampled software defect prediction method based on hybrid multi‐objective cuckoo search
Cai, X., Niu, Y., Geng, S., Zhang, J., Cui, Z., Li, J., & Chen, J. (2020) · Concurrency and Computation: Practice and Experience · doi:10.1002/cpe.5478 · Cited by 267
Software defect prediction using cost-sensitive neural network
Arar, Ö. F., & Ayan, K. (2015) · Applied Soft Computing · doi:10.1016/j.asoc.2015.04.045 · Cited by 255
Metadata
- Authors
- Wang, S., & Yao, X.
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Reliability
- Published
- 2013-06
- Volume
- 62
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 434-443
- ISSN
- 0018-9529 (ISSN-L)
- 1558-1721
- OpenAlex
- W2120457925
- Cited by
- 571
- References
- 6
- FWCI
- 72.13
- 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: Using Class Imbalance Learning for Software Defect Prediction. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/tr.2013.2259203
- The paper
- Wang, S., & Yao, X. (2013). Using Class Imbalance Learning for Software Defect Prediction. IEEE Transactions on Reliability. https://doi.org/10.1109/tr.2013.2259203
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.