Data Transformation in Cross-project Defect Prediction

Article

DOI: 10.1007/s10664-017-9516-2

Cite this article as:
Zhang, F., Keivanloo, I. & Zou, Y. Empir Software Eng (2017). doi:10.1007/s10664-017-9516-2
  • 99 Downloads

Abstract

Software metrics rarely follow a normal distribution. Therefore, software metrics are usually transformed prior to building a defect prediction model. To the best of our knowledge, the impact that the transformation has on cross-project defect prediction models has not been thoroughly explored. A cross-project model is built from one project and applied on another project. In this study, we investigate if cross-project defect prediction is affected by applying different transformations (i.e., log and rank transformations, as well as the Box-Cox transformation). The Box-Cox transformation subsumes log and other power transformations (e.g., square root), but has not been studied in the defect prediction literature. We propose an approach, namely Multiple Transformations (MT), to utilize multiple transformations for cross-project defect prediction. We further propose an enhanced approach MT+ to use the parameter of the Box-Cox transformation to determine the most appropriate training project for each target project. Our experiments are conducted upon three publicly available data sets (i.e., AEEEM, ReLink, and PROMISE). Comparing to the random forest model built solely using the log transformation, our MT+ approach improves the F-measure by 7, 59 and 43% for the three data sets, respectively. As a summary, our major contributions are three-fold: 1) conduct an empirical study on the impact that data transformation has on cross-project defect prediction models; 2) propose an approach to utilize the various information retained by applying different transformation methods; and 3) propose an unsupervised approach to select the most appropriate training project for each target project.

Keywords

Defect prediction Data transformation Software metrics Box-cox 

Supplementary material

10664_2017_9516_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (211 kb)
(PDF 211 KB)

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of ComputingQueen’s UniversityKingstonCanada
  2. 2.Department of Electrical and Computer EngineeringQueen’s UniversityKingstonCanada

Personalised recommendations