A parallel framework for software defect detection and metric selection on cloud computing
- 352 Downloads
With the continued growth of Internet of Things (IoT) and its convergence with the cloud, numerous interoperable software are being developed for cloud. Therefore, there is a growing demand to maintain a better quality of software in the cloud for improved service. This is more crucial as the cloud environment is growing fast towards a hybrid model; a combination of public and private cloud model. Considering the high volume of the available software as a service (SaaS) in the cloud, identification of non-standard software and measuring their quality in the SaaS is an urgent issue. Manual testing and determination of the quality of the software is very expensive and impossible to accomplish it to some extent. An automated software defect detection model that is capable to measure the relative quality of software and identify their faulty components can significantly reduce both the software development effort and can improve the cloud service. In this paper, we propose a software defect detection model that can be used to identify faulty components in big software metric data. The novelty of our proposed approach is that it can identify significant metrics using a combination of different filters and wrapper techniques. One of the important contributions of the proposed approach is that we designed and evaluated a parallel framework of a hybrid software defect predictor in order to deal with big software metric data in a computationally efficient way for cloud environment. Two different hybrids have been developed using Fisher and Maximum Relevance (MR) filters with a Artificial Neural Network (ANN) based wrapper in the parallel framework. The evaluations are performed with real defect-prone software datasets for all parallel versions. Experimental results show that the proposed parallel hybrid framework achieves a significant computational speedup on a computer cluster with a higher defect prediction accuracy and smaller number of software metrics compared to the independent filter or wrapper approaches.
The authors would like to extend their sincere appreciation to the Deanship of Scientific Research at King Saud University for its participation in funding this research group (RGP-1436-039).
- 1.NCI: National computational infrastructure. http://nci.org.au/raijin/
- 3.Aparisi, F., Sanz, J.: Interpreting the out-of-control signals of multivariate control charts employing neural networks. Int. J. Comput. Electr. Autom. Control Inf. Eng. 4(1), 24–28 (2010)Google Scholar
- 4.Arar, O.F., Ayan, K.: Software defect prediction using cost-sensitive neural network. Appl. Soft Comput. 33(C), 263–277 (2015)Google Scholar
- 5.Asad, A.A., Alsmadi, I.: Evaluating the impact of software metrics on defects prediction, part 2. Comput. Sci. J. Mold. 22(1), 127–144 (2014)Google Scholar
- 17.Guo, L., Ma, Y., Cukic, B., Singh, H.: Robust prediction of fault-proneness by random forests. In: Proceedings of the 15th International Symposium on Software Reliability Engineering (ISSRE 2004). pp. 417–428 (2004)Google Scholar
- 18.Hassan, A.E.: Predicting faults using the complexity of code changes. In: Proceedings of the 31st International Conference on Software Engineering. pp. 78–88. IEEE Computer Society (2009)Google Scholar
- 21.Jiang, Y., Cukic, B.: Misclassification cost-sensitive fault prediction models. In: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Predictor Models in Software Engineering. pp. 20:1–20:10. PROMISE ’09 (2009)Google Scholar
- 24.Kröse, B., Smagt, P.V.D.: An introduction to Neural Networks. The University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam (1993)Google Scholar
- 27.Li, Z., Reformat, M.: A practical method for the software fault-prediction. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Information Reuse and Integration (IRI 2007). pp. 659–666 (2007)Google Scholar
- 31.Pelayo, L., Dick, S.: Applying novel resampling strategies to software defect prediction. In: Proceedings of the 2007 Annual Meeting of the North American Fuzzy Information Processing Society (NAFIPS 2007). pp. 69–72 (2007)Google Scholar
- 32.Quinlan, J.R.: Induction of decision trees. Mach. Learn. 1(1), 81–106 (1986)Google Scholar
- 33.Radjenović, D., Heričko, M., Torkar, R., Živkovič, A.: Software fault prediction metrics: a systematic literature review. Inf. Softw. Technol. 55(8), 1397–1418 (2013)Google Scholar