The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Empirical Analysis of Software Fault Content and Fault Proneness Using Bayesian Methods
Abstract
We present a methodology for Bayesian analysis of software quality. We cast our research in the broader context of constructing a causal framework that can include process, product, and other diverse sources of information regarding fault introduction during the software development process. In this paper, we discuss the aspect of relating internal product metrics to external quality metrics. Specifically, we build a Bayesian network (BN) model to relate object-oriented software metrics to software fault content and fault proneness. Assuming that the relationship can be described as a generalized linear model, we derive parametric functional forms for the target node conditional distributions in the BN. These functional forms are shown to be able to represent linear, Poisson, and binomial logistic regression. The models are empirically evaluated using a public domain data set from a software subsystem. The results show that our approach produces statistically significant estimations and that our overall modeling method performs no worse than existing techniques.
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
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
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
A Survey on Software Fault Localization
Wong, W. E., Gao, R., Li, Y., Abreu, R., & Wotawa, F. (2016) · IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering · doi:10.1109/tse.2016.2521368 · Cited by 1,110
A systematic review of machine learning techniques for software fault prediction
Malhotra, R. (2015) · Applied Soft Computing · doi:10.1016/j.asoc.2014.11.023 · Cited by 620
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
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
Metadata
- Authors
- J. Pai, G., & Bechta Dugan, J.
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering
- Published
- 2007-10
- Volume
- 33
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 675-686
- ISSN
- 0098-5589 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-3520
- OpenAlex
- W2163590173
- Cited by
- 203
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 28.40
- 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: Empirical Analysis of Software Fault Content and Fault Proneness Using Bayesian Methods. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/tse.2007.70722
- The paper
- J. Pai, G., & Bechta Dugan, J. (2007). Empirical Analysis of Software Fault Content and Fault Proneness Using Bayesian Methods. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering. https://doi.org/10.1109/tse.2007.70722
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.