The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Are Fix-Inducing Changes a Moving Target? A Longitudinal Case Study of Just-In-Time Defect Prediction
Abstract
Just-In-Time (JIT) models identify fix-inducing code changes. JIT models are trained using techniques that assume that past fix-inducing changes are similar to future ones. However, this assumption may not hold, e.g., as system complexity tends to accrue, expertise may become more important as systems age. In this paper, we study JIT models as systems evolve. Through a longitudinal case study of 37,524 changes from the rapidly evolving Qt and OpenStack systems, we find that fluctuations in the properties of fix-inducing changes can impact the performance and interpretation of JIT models. More specifically: (a) the discriminatory power (AUC) and calibration (Brier) scores of JIT models drop considerably one year after being trained; (b) the role that code change properties (e.g., Size, Experience) play within JIT models fluctuates over time; and (c) those fluctuations yield over- and underestimates of the future impact of code change properties on the likelihood of inducing fixes. To avoid erroneous or misleading predictions, JIT models should be retrained using recently recorded data (within three months). Moreover, quality improvement plans should be informed by JIT models that are trained using six months (or more) of historical data, since they are more resilient to period-specific fluctuations in the importance of code change properties.
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
Deep Semantic Feature Learning for Software Defect Prediction
Wang, S., Liu, T., Nam, J., & Tan, L. (2020) · IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering · doi:10.1109/tse.2018.2877612 · Cited by 320
CCT5: A Code-Change-Oriented Pre-trained Model
Lin, B., Wang, S., Liu, Z., Liu, Y., Xia, X., & Mao, X. (2023) · Proceedings of the 31st ACM Joint European Software Engineering Conference and Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering · doi:10.1145/3611643.3616339 · Cited by 69
Metadata
- Authors
- McIntosh, S., & Kamei, Y.
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering
- Published
- 2018-05-01
- Volume
- 44
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 412-428
- ISSN
- 0098-5589 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-3520
- OpenAlex
- W2606150376
- Cited by
- 207
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 25.47
- 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: Are Fix-Inducing Changes a Moving Target? A Longitudinal Case Study of Just-In-Time Defect Prediction. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/tse.2017.2693980
- The paper
- McIntosh, S., & Kamei, Y. (2018). Are Fix-Inducing Changes a Moving Target? A Longitudinal Case Study of Just-In-Time Defect Prediction. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering. https://doi.org/10.1109/tse.2017.2693980
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.