ScholarGate
アシスタント

手法を比較

選択した手法を並べて確認できます。異なる行はハイライト表示されます。

欠陥予測モデル×コードカバレッジ分析×
分野ソフトウェア工学ソフトウェア工学
系統Process / pipelineProcess / pipeline
提唱年20051988
提唱者Thomas Ostrand, Elaine Weyuker, Robert BellTest Coverage Community
種類machine learning modelmeasurement and analysis
原典Ostrand, T. J., Weyuker, E. J., & Bell, R. M. (2005). Predicting the location and number of faults in large software systems. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 31(4), 340–355. DOI ↗Zhu, H., Hall, P. A. V., & May, J. H. R. (1997). Software unit test coverage and adequacy. ACM Computing Surveys, 29(4), 366–427. DOI ↗
別名fault prediction, bug prediction, defect classificationcoverage metrics, test coverage, instrumentation-based measurement
関連44
概要Defect prediction models forecast the likelihood of software faults in code modules using statistical or machine learning approaches. Pioneered by Ostrand, Weyuker, and Bell (2005), these models correlate code metrics (complexity, churn, coupling) with historical defect data to identify high-risk components. Organizations use predictions to allocate testing resources, guide code review, and prioritize refactoring.Code coverage analysis measures the extent to which source code is executed by a test suite, quantifying which lines, branches, or paths are exercised. Tools instrument code to track execution, reporting coverage percentages and identifying untested regions. Coverage analysis guides test creation, detects dead code, and validates test adequacy in quality assurance processes.
ScholarGateデータセット
  1. v1
  2. 3 出典
  3. PUBLISHED
  1. v1
  2. 3 出典
  3. PUBLISHED

検索へ スライドをダウンロード

ScholarGate手法を比較: Defect Prediction Model · Code Coverage Analysis. 2026-06-15に以下より取得 https://scholargate.app/ja/compare