<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title> &#187; Process metrics</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.kim-herzig.de/tag/process-metrics/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.kim-herzig.de</link>
	<description>Kim Herzig &#124; Software Engineering Chair &#124; Saarland University</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 05 May 2012 18:14:22 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Change Bursts as Defect Predictors &#8211; ISSRE 2010</title>
		<link>http://www.kim-herzig.de/2010/08/03/change-bursts-as-defect-predictors-issre-2010/</link>
		<comments>http://www.kim-herzig.de/2010/08/03/change-bursts-as-defect-predictors-issre-2010/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Aug 2010 20:00:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>kim</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Research]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[change history]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Defects]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[developers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[empirical studies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Process metrics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[product metrics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[software mining]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[software quality assurance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[version control]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kim-herzig.de/?p=499</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In software development, every change induces a risk. What happens if code changes again and again in some period of time? In an empirical study on Windows Vista, we found that the features of such change bursts have the highest predictive power for defect-prone components. With precision and recall values well above 90%, change bursts [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p></p><p>In software development, every change induces a risk. What happens if code changes again and again in some period of time? In an empirical study on Windows Vista, we found that the features of such change bursts have the highest predictive power for defect-prone components. With precision and recall values well above 90%, change bursts significantly improve upon earlier predictors such as complexity metrics, code churn, or organizational structure. As they only rely on version history and a controlled change process, change bursts are straight-forward to detect and deploy.<br />
<br/><br/></p>
<h4>Reference</h4>
<div>[2010]&nbsp;N. Nagappan, A. Zeller, T. Zimmermann, K. Herzig, and B. Murphy, &quot;Change Bursts as Defect Predictors&quot;, in <em>Proceedings of the 21st IEEE International Symposium on Software Reliability Engineering</em>,  2010.&nbsp;</div>
<h4>BibTeX Entry</h4>
<pre class="bibtexentry">@inproceedings{nagappan-issre-2010,<br/> title = "Change Bursts as Defect Predictors",<br/> author = "Nachiappan Nagappan and Andreas Zeller and Thomas Zimmermann and Kim Herzig and Brendan Murphy",<br/> year = "2010",<br/> month = "November",<br/> booktitle = "Proceedings of the 21st IEEE International Symposium on Software Reliability Engineering",<br/> location = "San Jose, California
}</pre>
<p>	Download <a href='http://www.kim-herzig.de/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/nagappan-issre-2010.pdf' title='nagappan-issre-2010'>PDF</a> version</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.kim-herzig.de/2010/08/03/change-bursts-as-defect-predictors-issre-2010/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Served from: www.kim-herzig.de @ 2012-05-20 06:31:31 -->
