GitHub is the largest source code repository in the world. It provides a git-based source code management platform and also many features inspired by social networks. For example, GitHub users can show appreciation to projects by adding stars to them. Therefore, the number of stars of a repository is a direct measure of its popularity. In this paper, we use multiple linear regressions to predict the number of stars of GitHub repositories. These predictions are useful both to repository owners and clients, who usually want to know how their projects are performing in a competitive open source development market. In a large-scale analysis, we show that the proposed models start to provide accurate predictions after being trained with the number of stars received in the last six months. Furthermore, specific models---generated using data from repositories that share the same growth trends---are recommended for repositories with slow growth and or for repositories with less stars. Finally, we evaluate the ability to predict not the number of stars of a repository but its rank among the GitHub repositories. We found a very strong correlation between predicted and real rankings (Spearman's rho greater than 0.95).
Our work was inspired by the vast literature on defect prediction. For example, a systematic literature review listed 208 defect prediction studies @cite_5 , which differ regarding the software metrics used for prediction, the modeling technique, the granularity of the independent variable, and the validation technique. As independent variables, the studies use source code metrics (size, cohesion, coupling, etc), change metrics, process metrics, code smells instances, etc. The modeling techniques vary with respect to linear regression, logistic regression, naive bayes, neural networks, etc. In this paper, instead of predicting the future number of defects of a system, we rely on multiple linear regressions to predict the number of stars of GitHub repositories.
@cite_5
2127623179 2101728371 2080521990 2170866915
There are lots of different software metrics discovered and used for defect prediction in the literature. Instead of dealing with so many metrics, it would be practical and easy if we could determine the set of metrics that are most important and focus on them more to predict defectiveness. We use Bayesian networks to determine the probabilistic influential relationships among software metrics and defect proneness. In addition to the metrics used in Promise data repository, we define two more metrics, i.e. NOD for the number of developers and LOCQ for the source code quality. We extract these metrics by inspecting the source code repositories of the selected Promise data repository data sets. At the end of our modeling, we learn the marginal defect proneness probability of the whole software system, the set of most effective metrics, and the influential relationships among metrics and defectiveness. Our experiments on nine open source Promise data repository data sets show that response for class (RFC), lines of code (LOC), and lack of coding quality (LOCQ) are the most effective metrics whereas coupling between objects (CBO), weighted method per class (WMC), and lack of cohesion of methods (LCOM) are less effective metrics on defect proneness. Furthermore, number of children (NOC) and depth of inheritance tree (DIT) have very limited effect and are untrustworthy. On the other hand, based on the experiments on Poi, Tomcat, and Xalan data sets, we observe that there is a positive correlation between the number of developers (NOD) and the level of defectiveness. However, further investigation involving a greater number of projects is needed to confirm our findings. Many organizations want to predict the number of defects (faults) in software systems, before they are deployed, to gauge the likely delivered quality and maintenance effort. To help in this numerous software metrics and statistical models have been developed, with a correspondingly large literature. We provide a critical review of this literature and the state-of-the-art. Most of the wide range of prediction models use size and complexity metrics to predict defects. Others are based on testing data, the "quality" of the development process, or take a multivariate approach. The authors of the models have often made heroic contributions to a subject otherwise bereft of empirical studies. However, there are a number of serious theoretical and practical problems in many studies. The models are weak because of their inability to cope with the, as yet, unknown relationship between defects and failures. There are fundamental statistical and data quality problems that undermine model validity. More significantly many prediction models tend to model only part of the underlying problem and seriously misspecify it. To illustrate these points the Goldilock's Conjecture, that there is an optimum module size, is used to show the considerable problems inherent in current defect prediction approaches. Careful and considered analysis of past and new results shows that the conjecture lacks support and that some models are misleading. We recommend holistic models for software defect prediction, using Bayesian belief networks, as alternative approaches to the single-issue models used at present. We also argue for research into a theory of "software decomposition" in order to test hypotheses about defect introduction and help construct a better science of software engineering. The selection of software metrics for building software quality prediction models is a search-based software engineering problem. An exhaustive search for such metrics is usually not feasible due to limited project resources, especially if the number of available metrics is large. Defect prediction models are necessary in aiding project managers for better utilizing valuable project resources for software quality improvement. The efficacy and usefulness of a fault-proneness prediction model is only as good as the quality of the software measurement data. This study focuses on the problem of attribute selection in the context of software quality estimation. A comparative investigation is presented for evaluating our proposed hybrid attribute selection approach, in which feature ranking is first used to reduce the search space, followed by a feature subset selection. A total of seven different feature ranking techniques are evaluated, while four different feature subset selection approaches are considered. The models are trained using five commonly used classification algorithms. The case study is based on software metrics and defect data collected from multiple releases of a large real-world software system. The results demonstrate that while some feature ranking techniques performed similarly, the automatic hybrid search algorithm performed the best among the feature subset selection methods. Moreover, performances of the defect prediction models either improved or remained unchanged when over 85were eliminated. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Software repositories with defect logs are main resource for defect prediction. In recent years, researchers have used the vast amount of data that is contained by software repositories to predict the location of defect in the code that caused problems. In this paper we evaluate the effectiveness of software fault prediction with Naive-Bayes classifiers and J48 classifier by integrating with supervised discretization algorithm developed by Fayyad and Irani. Public datasets from the promise repository have been explored for this purpose. The repository contains software metric data and error data at the function method level. Our experiment shows that integration of discretization method improves the software fault prediction accuracy when integrated with Naive-Bayes and J48 classifiers