Advertisement

Classification of Software Defects Triggers: A Case Study of School Resource Management System

  • Nico HillahEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 918)

Abstract

In this work, we identify trigger factors of software defects that are responsible for severe defects. We conducted a case study on a system by classifying 842 defects according to their trigger factors and then identified the level of severity they have on this system. Knowing these types of triggers helps software maintenance teams improving the management of software defects by reducing the cost of maintaining the system, consequently the cost of software projects.

Keywords

Software defect triggers Software severity Defects classification 

References

  1. 1.
    1044-2009 IEEE Standard Classification for Software Anomalies (2009)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Grady, R.B.: Software failure analysis for high-return process improvement decisions. Hewlett Packard J. 47, 15–24 (1996)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Grottke, M., Trivedi, K.S.: A Classification of software faults. J. Reliab. Eng. Assoc. Jpn. 27(7), 425–438 (2005)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Duda, R.O., Hart, P.E., Stork, D.G.: Pattern Classification. Wiley, Hoboken (2000)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Leszak, M., Perry, D.E., Stoll, D.: Classification and evaluation of defects in a project retrospective. J. Syst. Softw. 61, 173–187 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chillarege, R., et al.: Orthogonal defect classification-a concept for in-process measurements. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 18(11), 943–956 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Métrailler, A., Estier, T.: EVOLIS framework: a method to study information systems evolution records. In: 2014 47th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS), pp. 3798–3807 (2014)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Huber, J.T.: A Comparison of IBM’s Orthogonal Defect Classification to Hewlett Packard’s Defect Origins, Types, and Modes. Hewlett Packard Company (1999)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Murphy, G., Cubranic, D.: Automatic bug triage using text categorization. In: Proceedings of the Sixteenth International Conference on Software Engineering & Knowledge Engineering (2004)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dickinson, W., Leon, D., Fodgurski, A.: Finding failures by cluster analysis of execution profiles. In: Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Software Engineering, ICSE 2001, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, pp. 339–348 (2001)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Rajbahadur, G.K., Wang, S., Kamei, Y., Hassan, A.E.: The impact of using regression models to build defect classifiers. In: Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Mining Software Repositories, pp. 135–145 (2017)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Wagner, S.: Defect classification and defect types revisited. In: Proceedings of the 2008 Workshop on Defects in Large Software Systems, pp. 39–40 (2008)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hossain, E., Babar, M.A., Paik, H.: Using Scrum in Global Software Development: A Systematic Literature Review, pp. 175–184 (2009)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Atlassian: Jira | Logiciel de suivi des tickets et des projets. Atlassian. https://fr.atlassian.com/software/jira. Accessed 06 Apr 2018
  15. 15.
    Hillah, N.: Severe software defects trigger factors: a case study of a school management system. In: Antipova, T., Rocha, A. (eds.) Digital Science, vol. 850, pp. 389–396. Springer, Cham (2019)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.DESIUniversity of LausanneLausanneSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations