SOFTWARE DEFECT PREDICTION

AND DETECTION USING ML WITH

MULTIPLE ALGORITHMS
A THESIS
Submitted by

SIRISHA.T
In partial fulfillment for the award of degree Of
BACHELOR OF ENGINEERING
In
COMPUTER SCIENCE ENGINEERING

GKM COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY

CHENNAI-63

ANNA UNIVERSITY : CHENNAI 600 025.

DECEMBER 2024
 i

BONAFIDE CERTIFICATE

Certified that this Report titled “SOFTWARE DEFECT PREDICTION

AND DETECTION WITH MULTIPLE ALGORITHMS” is the bonafide

work of SIRISHA T (410823405008) who carried out the work under my

supervision. Certified further that to the best of my knowledge the work

reported herein does not form part of any other thesis or dissertation on the

basis of which a degree or award was conferred on an earlier occasion on this

or any other candidate.

Supervisor Head of the Department

Mrs.K.ANITHA,M.E Mrs.K.M.Sai Kiruthika ,M.E,(Ph.D)
Department of Computer Science
GKM college of Engineering and
and Engineering Technology
GKM college of Engineering and
Anna University
Technology
Chennai – 600025 Chennai – 600 025
 ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

We thank God Almighty for enabling us to complete our project.We express our
deep sense of gratitude and thanks to our respected CEO Dr.SUJATHA
BALASUBRAMANIAN, G.K.M. Group of Educational institutions for her
constant support and educating us in her prestigious institution. Also, we take
This opportunity to thank our Managing Director,C.BALASUBRAMANIAN,
for his extended support to complete the project work.

We express our sincere thanks to our Principal, Dr N. S. BHUVANESWARI

for her continuous motivation, kind support and guidance throughout the project.

We feel immense and curious pleasure thanking our Head of the Department and
Project coordinator Mrs. K.M.SAI KIRUTHIKA, Asst.Prof., for the
continuous motivation, and support and for making us complete the project in
time. Also, we express our gratitude to our Project supervisor, Mrs.K.Anitha,
Asst.Prof., for giving innovative ideas and for the valuable guidance and the
support that hasadded a great deal to the substance of this report.

We also extend our thanks to all our FACULTIES in the department of

Computer Science and Engineering for helping us throughout the project work.

Further, the acknowledgement would be incomplete if we would not mention a

Word of thanks to our beloved family and friends whose continuous support and
Encouragement through the course has led us to pursue the degree and confidently
complete the project
 iii

TABLE OF CONTENT
CHAPTER NO. TITLE PAGE
NO.
ABSTRACT v

LIST OF FIGURES vii

1. INTRODUCTION 1

2. TERMINOLOGY AND PROCESS 4

2.1 TERMINOLOGY 4
2.2 PROCESS 4

3. LITERATURE 5

3.1 SOFTWARE DEFECT PREDICTION USING ENSEMBLE 5

LEARNING: A SYSTEMATIC LITERATURE REVIEW, IEEE
ACCESS 2021
3.2 THOTA, MAHESH KUMAR, ET AL. “SURVEY ON SOFTWARE 6
DEFECT PREDICTION TECHNIQUES.” INTERNATIONAL
JOURNAL OF APPLIED SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING, 2020, P.
331.
3.3 LI, NING, ET AL. “A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF UNSUPERVISED 7
LEARNING TECHNIQUES FOR SOFTWARE DEFECT
PREDICTION.” PREPRINT SUBMITTED TO INFORMATION &
SOFTWARE TECHNOLOGY, FEB. 2020
3.4 PAN, CONG, ET AL. “AN EMPIRICAL STUDY ON SOFTWARE 9
DEFECT PREDICTION USING CODEBERT MODEL.” APPLIED
SCIENCES, EDITED BY RICARDO COLOMO-PALACIOS,
3.5 “SOFTWARE VISUALIZATION AND DEEP TRANSFER 9
LEARNING FOR EFFECTIVE SOFTWARE DEFECT
PREDICTION.” 42TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON
SOFTWARE ENGINEERING

4. SYSTEM ANALYSIS 11
4.1 OBJECTIVE 11
4.2 EXISTING SYSTEM 14
4.3 PROPOSED SYSTEM 17
5. SYSTEM REQUIREMENT 20
5.1 SYSTEM REQUIREMENT 20
5.2 HARDWARE REQUIREMENT 20
5.3 DELEVOLOPMENT ENVIRONMENT 21
 iv

5.4 FILE FORMAT SUPPORTED 21

5.5 USER INTERFACE REQUIREMENT 22
5.6 MACHINE LEARNING AND MODEL REQUIREMENT 22
5.7 ERROR HANDLING AND NOTIFICATION 23
6. SYSTEM DESIGN 24
6.1 ARCHITECTURE DIAGRAM 24
6.2 USE CASE DIAGRAM 24
6.3 ACTIVITY DIAGRAM 25
6.4 SYSTEM DIAGRAM 25
CONCLUSION & FUTURE WORK 26
REFERENCES 27
 v

ABSTRACT
In the rapidly evolving field of software engineering, the ability to predict software
defects has become increasingly vital. Software defects can lead to significant
financial losses, compromised user satisfaction, and diminished reliability of software
systems. This project focuses on developing a comprehensive framework for software
defect prediction, utilizing various machine learning algorithms to analyze historical
data and identify potential defects before they manifest in production. As software
systems grow in complexity, traditional methods of testing and quality assurance often
prove insufficient in ensuring defect-free releases. Predictive modeling offers a
promising solution by enabling developers to concentrate their testing efforts on the
most problematic areas of the codebase. The goal of this project is to create an
intuitive software tool that not only predicts software defects but also aids developers
in improving software quality.

The proposed framework is implemented as a user-friendly graphical user interface

(GUI) application, allowing users to upload datasets in popular formats such as Excel
and CSV. Upon loading the datasets, the application processes the data to extract
relevant features for defect prediction. Feature selection is crucial, as it directly
impacts the model's performance. The GUI facilitates input for these features, enabling
users to generate random values for testing and validation purposes. The project
leverages several well-known machine learning algorithms, including logistic
regression, which serves as a fundamental statistical method for binary classification,
and random forest, an ensemble method that builds multiple decision trees and merges
their outputs for improved accuracy. Additionally, support vector machines (SVM) are
employed as a powerful classifier that works well in high-dimensional spaces. Naive
Bayes, a probabilistic classifier based on applying Bayes' theorem, is suitable for large
datasets, while decision trees provide a model that uses a tree-like structure to make
decisions based on feature values.
 vi

To ensure robust predictions, the datasets undergo preprocessing, including handling

missing values and normalizing features using the StandardScaler. An 80-20 train-test
split is applied to evaluate the models' performance accurately. The project
incorporates a model evaluation component, where key performance metrics such as
accuracy, precision, recall, F1 score, and ROC-AUC are calculated. These metrics
provide insights into each model's predictive capabilities, guiding users in selecting the
most effective model for their specific datasets. The framework not only provides
predictive insights but also visualizes the performance of each model through
informative plots. This includes graphs showcasing model accuracy across various
metrics, allowing users to understand the strengths and weaknesses of each
classification algorithm. Furthermore, the system offers a decision tree visualization,
elucidating the decision-making process of the model and providing transparency and
interpretability in predictions.

By enabling efficient defect prediction, this software tool aims to assist developers in
making informed decisions throughout the software development lifecycle. The
framework is designed to facilitate proactive measures, ultimately leading to improved
software reliability and maintainability. In conclusion, the implementation of this
defect prediction framework represents a significant step towards enhancing software
quality assurance practices. As the landscape of software development continues to
evolve, the integration of machine learning techniques into the defect prediction
process will play a crucial role in mitigating risks and improving overall project
outcomes. Future work will focus on expanding the range of machine learning
algorithms integrated into the framework, enhancing feature selection methods, and
incorporating advanced visualization techniques. Through continuous refinement and
adaptation to emerging trends in software engineering, this project aspires to
contribute significantly to the field of software defect prediction and quality assurance.
 vii

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure No. Figure Name Page No.
Fig 6.1 Architecture Design 25

Fig 6.2 Use Case Design 25

Fig 6.3 Activity Diagram 26

Fig 6.4 System Design 26

Fig 6.5 User Interface 27

 1

1. INTRODUCTION
In today's software-driven world, the reliability and quality of software systems are
paramount. As organizations increasingly rely on complex software applications to
support their operations and deliver services, the presence of defects can have far-
reaching consequences, including financial losses, damaged reputations, and
compromised user experiences. Software defects, which can range from minor bugs to
critical failures, necessitate robust testing and quality assurance processes to ensure
that applications function correctly and meet user expectations. However, traditional
methods of software testing are often reactive, focusing on identifying defects only
after they occur, which can lead to delays in development cycles and increased costs.
In light of these challenges, the need for proactive approaches to defect management
has never been more critical.

Software defect prediction has emerged as a promising solution to address these

challenges. By utilizing historical data and machine learning algorithms, organizations
can predict potential defects before they affect the end user, thereby enabling
developers to prioritize their efforts and allocate resources more effectively. This
proactive approach not only reduces the overall number of defects but also enhances
the efficiency of the software development lifecycle. The process of defect prediction
involves analyzing various factors, such as code complexity, developer experience,
and historical defect data, to identify patterns and correlations that may indicate a
higher likelihood of defects in certain areas of the codebase. This predictive capability
empowers development teams to implement targeted quality assurance measures,
ultimately leading to more reliable software products.

The current landscape of software engineering presents a unique set of challenges and
opportunities for defect prediction. With the rapid advancement of technologies,
software systems are becoming increasingly complex, integrating various components
and functionalities that can introduce potential vulnerabilities. Additionally, the rise of
agile and DevOps methodologies emphasizes the need for continuous integration and
 2

continuous delivery (CI/CD), where software is released frequently and often. In this
fast-paced environment, traditional defect detection methods may not be sufficient to
keep pace with the speed of development. As such, the implementation of automated
defect prediction tools becomes essential for maintaining software quality while
meeting tight deadlines.

This project aims to develop an innovative software defect prediction framework that
leverages advanced machine learning techniques to provide developers with actionable
insights into potential defects. By integrating various algorithms into a user-friendly
application, the framework seeks to streamline the defect prediction process, making it
accessible to software development teams of all sizes. The project begins with the
collection of historical data, which serves as the foundation for training machine
learning models. These models will be designed to learn from past defect occurrences,
identifying key features and patterns that contribute to defect generation.

A critical aspect of this project is the selection of appropriate machine learning

algorithms for defect prediction. The framework will explore various models,
including logistic regression, random forest, support vector machines (SVM), naive
Bayes, and decision trees. Each of these algorithms offers unique strengths and
weaknesses, making them suitable for different types of data and defect prediction
scenarios. By evaluating the performance of each algorithm, the project aims to
identify the most effective approach for predicting defects based on the characteristics
of the input data. Furthermore, the framework will incorporate essential preprocessing
steps, such as data cleaning, normalization, and feature selection, to enhance model
accuracy and reliability.

In addition to predictive modeling, the project emphasizes the importance of

visualization in understanding defect prediction results. By providing clear and
informative visual representations of model performance and decision-making
processes, the framework will enable developers to gain insights into the underlying
patterns and factors influencing defect generation. This transparency is crucial for
 3

fostering trust in the predictions and facilitating informed decision-making in the

software development process.

The ultimate goal of this project is to contribute to the ongoing evolution of software
quality assurance practices. By implementing a robust software defect prediction
framework, organizations can significantly reduce the time and effort spent on
debugging and fixing defects, leading to faster development cycles and higher-quality
software releases. As the software industry continues to grow and innovate, the
integration of predictive analytics into the development process will play a pivotal role
in ensuring the reliability and success of software applications.
 4

2. TERMINOLOGY AND PROCESS

2.1 TERMINOLOGY
 Dataset: A set of data examples that contain features important to solving
the problem.
 Features: Important pieces of data that help us understand a problem.
These are fed in to a Machine Learning algorithm to help it learn.
 Model: The representation (internal model) of a phenomenon that a
Machine Learning algorithm has learnt. It learns this from the data it is
shown during training. The model is the output you get after training an
algorithm. For example, a decision tree algorithm would be trained and
produce a decision tree model.

2.2 PROCESS:
 Data Collection: Collect the data that the algorithm will learn from.

 Data Preparation: Format and engineer the data into the optimal format,
extracting important features and performing dimensionaility reduction.
 Training: Also known as the fitting stage, this is where the Machine
Learning algorithm actually learns by showing it the data that has been
collected and prepared.
 Evaluation: Test the model to see how well it performs.

 Tuning: Fine tune the model to maximise it’s performance.

 5

3. LITERATURE SURVEY

3.1 FASEEHA MATLOOB , TAHER M. GHAZAL, (Member, IEEE), NASSER

TALEB, SHABIB AFTAB , MUNIR AHMAD , (Member, IEEE), MUHAMMAD
ADNAN KHAN ,SAGHEER ABBAS , AND TARIQ RAHIM SOOMRO , (Senior
Member, IEEE), Software Defect Prediction Using Ensemble Learning: A
Systematic Literature Review, IEEE Access 2021.
Recent advances in the domain of software defect prediction (SDP) include the
integration of multiple classification techniques to create an ensemble or hybrid
approach. This technique was introduced to improve the prediction performance by
overcoming the limitations of any single classification technique. This research
provides a systematic literature review on the use of the ensemble learning approach
for software defect prediction. The review is conducted after critically analyzing
research papers published since 2012 in four well-known online libraries: ACM, IEEE,
Springer Link, and Science Direct. In this study, five research questions covering the
different aspects of research progress on the use of ensemble learning for software
defect prediction are addressed. To extract the answers to identified questions, 46 most
relevant papers are shortlisted after a thorough systematic research process. This study
will provide compact information regarding the latest trends and advances in ensemble
learning for software defect prediction and provide a baseline for future innovations
and further reviews. Through our study, we discovered that frequently employed
ensemble methods by researchers are the random forest, boosting, and bagging. Less
frequently employed methods include stacking, voting and Extra Trees. Researchers
proposed many promising frameworks, such as EMKCA, SMOTE-Ensemble, MKEL,
SDAEsTSE, TLEL, and LRCR, using ensemble learning methods. The AUC,
accuracy, F-measure, Recall, Precision, and MCC were mostly utilized to measure the
prediction performance of models. WEKA was widely adopted as a platform for
machine learning. Many researchers showed through empirical analysis that features
selection, and data sampling was necessary pre-processing steps that improve the
performance of ensemble classifiers.
 6

3.2 Thota, Mahesh Kumar, et al. “Survey on software defect prediction

techniques.” International Journal of Applied Science and Engineering, 2020, p.
331. https://doi.org/10.6703/IJASE.202012_17(4).331.

Recent advancements in technology have emerged the requirements of hardware and

software applications. Along with this technical growth, software industries also have
faced drastic growth in the demand of software for several applications. For any
software industry, developing good quality software and maintaining its eminence for
user end is considered as most important task for software industrial growth. In order
to achieve this, software engineering plays an important role for software industries.
Software applications are developed with the help of computer programming where
codes are written for desired task. Generally, these codes contain some faulty instances
which may lead to the buggy software development cause due to software defects. In
the field of software engineering, software defect prediction is considered as most
important task which can be used for maintaining the quality of software. Defect
prediction results provide the list of defect-prone source code artefacts so that quality
assurance team scan effectively allocate limited resources for validating software
products by putting more effort on the defect-prone source code. As the size of
software projects becomes larger, defect prediction techniques will play an important
role to support developers as well as to speed up time to market with more reliable
software products. One of the most exhaustive and pricey part of embedded software
development is consider as the process of finding and fixing the defects. Due to
complex infrastructure, magnitude, cost and time limitations, monitoring and fulfilling
the quality is a big challenge, especially in automotive embedded systems. However,
meeting the superior product quality and reliability is mandatory. Hence, higher
importance is given to V&V (Verification & Validation). Software testing is an
integral part of software V&V, which is focused on promising accurate functionality
and long-term reliability of software systems. Simultaneously, software testing
requires much effort, cost, infrastructure and expertise as the development. The costs
and efforts elevate in safety critical software systems. Therefore, it is essential to have
 7

a good testing strategy for any industry with high software development costs. In this
work, we are planning to develop an efficient approach for software defect prediction
by using soft computing based machine learning techniques which helps to predict
optimize the features and efficiently learn the features.

3.3 Li, Ning, et al. “A Systematic Review of Unsupervised Learning Techniques

for Software Defect Prediction.” Preprint Submitted to Information & Software
Technology, Feb. 2020.

Background: Unsupervised machine learners have been increasingly applied to

software defect prediction. It is an
approach that may be valuable for software practitioners because it reduces the need
for labeled training data.
Objective: Investigate the use and performance of unsupervised learning techniques in
software defect prediction.
Method: We conducted a systematic literature review that identified 49 studies
containing 2456 individual experimental results, which satisfied our inclusion criteria
published between January 2000 and March 2018. In order to compare
prediction performance across these studies in a consistent way, we (re-)computed the
confusion matrices and employed
the Matthews Correlation Coefficient (MCC) as our main performance measure.
Results: Our meta-analysis shows that unsupervised models are comparable with
supervised models for both withinproject and cross-project prediction. Among the 14
families of unsupervised model, Fuzzy CMeans (FCM) and Fuzzy
SOMs (FSOMs) perform best. In addition, where we were able to check, we found that
almost 11% (262/2456) of published results (contained in 16 papers) were internally
inconsistent and a further 33% (823/2456) provided insufficient
details for us to check.
Conclusion: Although many factors impact the performance of a classifier, e.g.,
dataset characteristics, broadly speaking, unsupervised classifiers do not seem to
 8

perform worse than the supervised classifiers in our review. However, we

note a worrying prevalence of (i) demonstrably erroneous experimental results, (ii)
undemanding benchmarks and (iii)
incomplete reporting. We therefore encourage researchers to be comprehensive in their
reporting.

3.4 Pan, Cong, et al. “An Empirical Study on Software Defect Prediction Using
CodeBERT Model.” Applied Sciences, edited by Ricardo Colomo-Palacios, vol.
11, 2021, p. 4793. https://doi.org/10.3390/app11114793.

Deep learning-based software defect prediction has been popular these days. Recently,
the publishing of the CodeBERT model has made it possible to perform many
software engineering tasks. We propose various CodeBERT models targeting software
defect prediction, including CodeBERT-NT, CodeBERT-PS, CodeBERT-PK, and
CodeBERT-PT. We perform empirical studies using such models in cross-version and
cross-project software defect prediction to investigate if using a neural language model
like CodeBERT could improve prediction performance. We also investigate the effects
of different prediction patterns in software defect prediction using CodeBERT models.
The empirical results are further discussed.

3.5 “Software Visualization and Deep Transfer Learning for Effective Software

Defect Prediction.” 42th International Conference on Software Engineering,

2018, p. 12. doi.org/10.1145/1122445.1122456.

Software defect prediction aims to automatically locate defective code modules to

better focus testing resources and human effort. Typically, software defect prediction

pipelines are comprised of two parts: the first extracts program features, like abstract

syntax trees, by using external tools, and the second applies machine learning-based
 9

classification models to those features in order to predict defective modules. Since

such approaches depend on specific feature extraction tools, machine learning

classifiers have to be custom-tailored to effectively build most accurate models.To

bridge the gap between deep learning and defect prediction, we propose an end-to-end

framework which can directly get prediction results for programs without utilizing

feature-extraction tools. To that end, we first visualize programs as images, apply the

self-attention mechanism to extract image features, use transfer learning to reduce the

difference in sample distributions between projects, and finally feed the image files

into a pre-trained, deep learning model for defect prediction. Experiments with 10

open source projects from the PROMISE dataset show that our method can improve

cross-project and within-project defect prediction. Our code and data pointers are

available at https://zenodo.org/record/3373409#.XV0Oy5Mza35.
 10

4. SYSTEM ANALYSIS
4.1 OBJECTIVE:

The primary objective of this software defect prediction project is to develop a

comprehensive framework that leverages advanced machine learning techniques to
predict potential software defects before they impact the final product. This proactive
approach aims to enhance software quality, reduce development costs, and improve the
overall efficiency of the software development lifecycle. The objectives can be broken
down into several key areas, each addressing a specific aspect of defect prediction and
its application within software engineering practices.

Firstly, a fundamental objective is to collect and preprocess historical defect

data from various software projects. This data serves as the foundation for
training machine learning models. It will include attributes such as code metrics,
developer activity, and previous defect reports. By ensuring that the dataset is
comprehensive and representative, the project aims to capture the diverse factors that
contribute to software defects. Preprocessing steps, such as data cleaning and
normalization, will be essential to enhance the quality of the input data and ensure its
suitability for analysis. This process will involve identifying and removing any
anomalies or inconsistencies in the data that could skew the predictions.

Secondly, the project aims to implement a range of machine learning algorithms to

identify the most effective models for defect prediction. These algorithms may include
logistic regression, random forests, support vector machines, and neural networks.
Each of these techniques offers unique capabilities in handling different types of data
and complexity levels. By evaluating their performance using metrics such as
accuracy, precision, recall, and F1 score, the project seeks to determine which models
provide the best predictive power in the context of software defects. This objective is
crucial, as the selection of the right algorithm can significantly influence the success of
 11

the defect prediction efforts.

In addition to model selection, another objective is to develop a user-friendly interface

that allows software developers to easily access and utilize the defect prediction
framework. This interface will serve as a crucial component of the project, facilitating
interaction between the developers and the underlying machine learning models. By
providing clear visualizations of predicted defects and actionable insights, the interface
will empower developers to make informed decisions regarding code reviews and
testing efforts. User experience will be a primary focus, ensuring that the interface is
intuitive and provides relevant information in a concise manner.

Another significant objective is to conduct rigorous validation and testing of the

developed framework. This involves implementing a robust evaluation strategy to
assess the model's performance across different datasets and software projects. By
employing techniques such as cross-validation and train-test splits, the project will
ensure that the models generalize well to unseen data and are not overfitting to the
training set. Additionally, the framework will be tested in real-world scenarios to
evaluate its effectiveness in predicting defects during the software development
lifecycle. Feedback from developers using the framework will also be collected to
identify areas for improvement and optimization.

Furthermore, the project seeks to explore the role of feature selection and engineering
in improving defect prediction accuracy. Identifying the most relevant features that
contribute to defect occurrences is critical for enhancing model performance. The
objective is to experiment with various feature selection techniques, such as
correlation analysis and recursive feature elimination, to determine which factors
provide the most significant predictive power. This exploration will contribute to a
deeper understanding of the underlying causes of software defects, allowing for
targeted improvements in coding practices and quality assurance processes.
 12

Lastly, an overarching objective of this project is to contribute to the body of

knowledge in software engineering by providing insights and recommendations based
on the findings from the defect prediction framework. This includes documenting the
methodology, results, and best practices for implementing defect prediction in various
software development environments. By sharing these insights, the project aims to
promote the adoption of proactive defect management strategies across the industry,
ultimately fostering a culture of quality and continuous improvement in software
development practices.

In summary, the objectives of this software defect prediction project encompass a wide
range of activities aimed at developing an effective and user-friendly framework for
predicting software defects. From data collection and preprocessing to model
implementation and validation, each objective contributes to the overarching goal of
enhancing software quality and reducing the costs associated with defects. Through the
successful execution of these objectives, the project aspires to make a meaningful
impact on software engineering practices, equipping developers with the tools they
need to proactively manage and mitigate defects in their applications.

4.2 EXISITNG SYSTEM:

In recent years, software defect prediction (SDP) has evolved into a critical area within
software engineering, aiming to identify and minimize defects in software systems
efficiently. The need for high-quality software has driven advancements in prediction
techniques, integrating machine learning and deep learning to support defect detection
and improve software reliability. Various systems and methodologies have been
proposed to enhance SDP, employing both supervised and unsupervised learning
approaches, ensemble methods, and deep neural networks.

Ensemble Learning Techniques: One prominent direction in SDP involves ensemble

learning, where multiple classifiers are combined to enhance prediction accuracy.
Faseeha Matloob et al. (2021) conducted a systematic literature review on ensemble
 13

learning for SDP, revealing the efficacy of methods such as Random Forest, Boosting,
and Bagging. These techniques compensate for the weaknesses of individual models
and provide robust defect prediction. Less common ensemble techniques like Stacking,
Voting, and Extra Trees were also explored, yielding promising results in specific
contexts. The study found that feature selection and data sampling are crucial
preprocessing steps that can significantly impact performance. Ensemble frameworks
such as EMKCA, SMOTE-Ensemble, and SDAEsTSE leverage various combinations
of classifiers to address complex defect prediction scenarios, establishing a baseline
for future research in this domain.

Unsupervised Learning Approaches: In contrast to supervised models that rely on

labeled data, unsupervised learning has gained traction in SDP due to its capacity to
operate with unlabeled data, a frequent challenge in real-world projects. Li et al.
(2020) reviewed unsupervised learning techniques applied to SDP, emphasizing
methods such as Fuzzy C-Means and Fuzzy Self-Organizing Maps (SOMs), which
demonstrate competitive performance against supervised methods. Their research also
highlighted issues with inconsistent results and incomplete reporting in some studies,
underscoring the need for standardized evaluation metrics like the Matthews
Correlation Coefficient (MCC) to ensure comparability across studies. The
unsupervised models showed promise, particularly in settings where labeled datasets
are scarce, supporting defect detection without the overhead of extensive data labeling.

Deep Learning and Transfer Learning: Recent trends have introduced deep learning
models like CodeBERT and transfer learning to address the complexities of software
defect prediction. Pan et al. (2021) applied CodeBERT, a neural language model, to
predict software defects across different project versions, exploring variations such as
CodeBERT-NT and CodeBERT-PS. CodeBERT leverages deep neural network
architectures pre-trained on extensive code datasets, which enable it to capture code
semantics effectively. This approach has shown promising results in cross-version and
cross-project defect prediction, where traditional models may struggle. Moreover, the
 14

ability to fine-tune CodeBERT on specific projects demonstrates the potential of

neural language models to improve SDP performance.

Software Visualization and End-to-End Frameworks: To address the limitations of

traditional feature extraction methods, visualization and end-to-end frameworks have
been developed. A study presented at the 42nd International Conference on Software
Engineering (2018) introduced a novel method that visualizes software programs as
images, applying self-attention mechanisms and transfer learning to enhance defect
prediction. This method eliminates the need for external feature-extraction tools,
allowing deep learning models to directly process program images for defect detection.
By leveraging the PROMISE dataset, the study demonstrated improvements in cross-
project and within-project defect prediction, showing that the visualization-based
approach could make SDP more accessible and effective across different software
environments.

Traditional Machine Learning Techniques: Traditional machine learning

algorithms, including decision trees, Naive Bayes, and Support Vector Machines,
remain foundational to SDP. Thota et al. (2020) highlighted the significance of these
techniques in SDP, as they provide interpretable models that are suitable for defect
prediction in larger, complex systems. The authors also emphasized the importance of
validation and verification (V&V) in software quality assurance, with defect prediction
enabling focused testing and resource allocation. Traditional methods still play a vital
role in SDP, especially in projects with stringent requirements for explainability and
reliability.

In summary, existing systems in SDP reflect a spectrum of methodologies, from

ensemble and unsupervised learning to deep learning-based approaches. Each system
has its strengths and limitations, with ensemble methods improving robustness,
unsupervised models offering scalability with unlabeled data, and deep learning
models capturing complex code patterns through neural representations. Together,
 15

these approaches represent a well-rounded toolkit for addressing the challenges of

software defect prediction in various industrial and research contexts, establishing a
foundation for developing more accurate and reliable software systems.

4.3 PROPOSED SYSTEM

The proposed system aims to develop a software application that facilitates defect
prediction in software projects by utilizing machine learning models. This system will
analyze historical data on software defects and apply various machine learning
algorithms to predict potential defects based on specific input features. This predictive
analysis will help development teams identify high-risk areas in their code, allowing
them to take proactive measures to reduce software faults, improve quality, and
optimize resource allocation.

The proposed system is designed to be user-friendly and accessible, featuring an

intuitive graphical user interface (GUI) built using Tkinter, Python’s standard GUI
toolkit. The interface allows users to easily load their datasets in Excel or CSV
formats, select the input fields relevant to their prediction needs, and visualize results
without needing extensive technical knowledge. The GUI also includes input fields for
user-defined values, validation to ensure data integrity, and informative notifications
that guide users throughout the prediction process. By making data loading, input
selection, and model interpretation straightforward, the system empowers users to
perform accurate defect predictions with minimal effort.

At the core of this system are several machine learning models, implemented using the
scikit-learn library. These models include Logistic Regression, Random Forest
Classifier, Support Vector Machine (SVM), Naive Bayes, and Decision Tree
Classifier, each chosen for its suitability in handling classification tasks. During the
data processing phase, the system uses data preprocessing techniques, such as train-test
splitting and feature scaling, to prepare the data for model training and testing. Each
model is trained on historical defect data, learning to recognize patterns that indicate
 16

potential software faults. After training, the models are evaluated on performance
metrics like accuracy, precision, recall, F1 score, and ROC-AUC to identify the most
effective algorithm for defect prediction.

In addition to predictive analysis, the system also includes data visualization

components. The Decision Tree model, for instance, is visualized using matplotlib’s
plot_tree function, allowing users to see the decision-making process of the model.
Furthermore, other model metrics, such as accuracy and precision, are plotted for a
comparative analysis of the models. These visual aids help users understand the
strengths and limitations of each model, enabling them to make informed decisions on
the best approach for their specific use case.

The system is designed with flexibility and scalability in mind, allowing it to be

compatible across different operating systems, including Windows, macOS, and
Linux. This cross-platform capability ensures that users can run the software on their
preferred operating system without facing compatibility issues. The software’s system
requirements are modest, requiring a minimum of 4 GB of RAM (with 8 GB
recommended for larger datasets) and a modern multi-core processor. This makes the
application accessible to a wide range of users, from small development teams with
limited resources to larger organizations handling extensive datasets.

Error handling is another key feature of the proposed system. Through Tkinter’s
messagebox functionality, the software provides clear and informative notifications to
users in case of errors, such as missing datasets or empty input fields. These messages
guide users in rectifying issues, enhancing the robustness of the system and reducing
the likelihood of workflow interruptions. Additionally, the system incorporates input
validation checks to ensure that all user inputs are valid and within expected ranges,
preventing unexpected behavior and improving the reliability of predictions.

Overall, this proposed system combines user-friendly design, robust machine learning
 17

models, and intuitive visualizations to create a powerful tool for software defect
prediction. By automating the defect prediction process and presenting the results in a
clear, accessible manner, this system offers significant value to software development
teams seeking to improve software quality and optimize their defect management
processes. The integration of multiple machine learning algorithms and detailed model
evaluation further enhances its utility, providing users with a comprehensive solution
for understanding and predicting software defects.
 18

5. SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS
5.1 HARDWARE REQUIREMENTS:

1. GPU: A high-performance Graphics Processing Unit (GPU) is essential for

accelerating the training and inference processes of deep neural networks. GPUs with

CUDA cores and sufficient memory capacity (e.g., NVIDIA GeForce GTX or RTX

series) are preferred for efficient computation.

2. Memory: An ample amount of Random Access Memory (RAM) is required to

handle large datasets and model parameters efficiently during training and inference. A

minimum of 16 GB of RAM is recommended for optimal performance.

3. Storage: Sufficient storage space is necessary to store datasets, pre-trained models,

and experiment logs. Solid-State Drives (SSDs) are preferred over Hard Disk Drives

(HDDs) for faster data access and model loading times.

5.2 SOFTWARE REQUIREMENTS:

1. Programming Language and Libraries

The software is developed using Python 3.x, a versatile language widely used for data

science and machine learning applications. Python’s extensive library ecosystem

makes it suitable for this project, which involves data processing, machine learning

model implementation, and a graphical user interface (GUI). Key libraries include

pandas for loading and manipulating data from Excel/CSV files, allowing easy

integration with various data sources. Numpy handles numerical operations and data
 19

transformations, ensuring efficient processing of datasets. Matplotlib provides

visualization tools to create graphs of model metrics and visual representations of

decision trees, which help users interpret model performance. Tkinter is used to build a

user-friendly GUI, enabling file selection, input fields, and buttons for interaction.

Scikit-learn serves as the machine learning backbone, offering models (e.g., Logistic

Regression, Random Forest, SVM) and utilities for data preprocessing, model training,

and evaluation.

5.3 SOFTWARE/DEVELOPMENT ENVIRONMENT

The development environment is based on a Python IDE such as PyCharm, VS Code,

or Spyder, which offers debugging tools and code organization features essential for

efficient development. Tkinter is integrated with most Python installations, but IDE-

specific configuration may be required to ensure GUI functionality works seamlessly.

The Package Manager (e.g., pip) is necessary for installing third-party libraries such as

pandas, numpy, matplotlib, and scikit-learn, ensuring that dependencies are managed

and updated effectively. This setup ensures that developers can write, test, and debug

the code efficiently, while also handling potential issues related to GUI rendering and

library compatibility.

5.4 FILE FORMATS SUPPORTED

The application supports Excel (.xlsx/.xls) and CSV (.csv) file formats, commonly

used for storing and exchanging tabular data. These formats allow the application to

load and analyze data from diverse sources, such as test results and defect reports,

ensuring compatibility with a wide range of data collection tools. The application’s

design includes data validation and error handling to ensure that loaded files meet the
 20

required format and structure, reducing the risk of data corruption or processing errors.

This versatility allows users to work with both structured and semi-structured datasets,

simplifying data integration and preparation for analysis.

5.5 SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS

The software is designed to be cross-platform, running on Windows, macOS, and

Linux as long as Python and the required packages are supported, ensuring

accessibility for a broad user base. A minimum of 4 GB RAM is recommended, with 8

GB or more suggested for handling larger datasets and complex model training tasks.

A modern multi-core processor is also recommended to facilitate efficient data

processing and faster training times. This ensures that the application performs

optimally across various hardware setups, allowing users to process and analyze data

without significant delays or performance issues.

5. 6 USER INTERFACE REQUIREMENTS

The application features a Graphical Interface built with Tkinter, providing an

intuitive, easy-to-navigate interface for loading datasets, inputting values, and viewing

predictions. The GUI includes input fields and buttons to enable users to interact with

the program easily. Input validation is integrated to manage missing or invalid data

entries, preventing errors from disrupting workflows and ensuring accurate results.

This interface is designed to guide users through each step, from loading data to

interpreting results, making the application accessible for both technical and non-

technical users.
 21

5.7 MACHINE LEARNING AND MODEL REQUIREMENTS

The software incorporates data preprocessing steps such as train-test splitting (using

train_test_split) and feature scaling (with StandardScaler) to normalize data, essential

for consistent model performance. The application includes various machine learning

models like Logistic Regression, Random Forest Classifier, SVM, Naive Bayes, and

Decision Tree Classifier to predict software defects. Evaluation metrics such as

Accuracy, Precision, Recall, F1 Score, and ROC-AUC assess model performance,

helping users compare model effectiveness. Visualization tools like plot_tree and

matplotlib help illustrate decision trees and performance metrics, making it easier for

users to understand and interpret model results.

5.8 ERROR HANDLING AND NOTIFICATIONS

Tkinter messagebox notifications are integrated to alert users about issues, such as

missing datasets, invalid input fields, or errors during processing. These notifications

provide clear prompts and feedback, guiding users on corrective actions to prevent or

resolve errors. The messagebox also displays success messages, indicating the

completion of tasks like data loading or prediction generation. This robust error

handling improves user experience by ensuring that users are informed about issues in

real-time, reducing frustration and enhancing the overall reliability of the software.
 22

6. SYSTEM DESIGN

6.1 ARCHITECTURE DIAGRAM:

Fig 1: Architecture Diagram of general ME project

6.2 USE CASE DIAGRAM

Fig 2: Use Case Diagram of the proposed model

 23

6.3 ACTIVITY DIAGRAM

Fig 3: Activity diagram for the proposed system

6.4 SYSTEM DIAGRAM

Fig 4:

System Diagram of the project

 24

7. CONCLUSION AND FUTURE ENHANCEMENTS

The software defect detection tool developed in this project effectively addresses the
challenge of identifying defects within software components using machine learning
models. By offering an interactive, user-friendly interface, the tool enables users to
load datasets, enter feature values, and analyze software reliability through predictive
modeling. This application leverages a variety of machine learning algorithms,
including Logistic Regression, SVM, Random Forest, Naive Bayes, and Decision
Tree, to identify software defects with notable accuracy. The tool's capability to
automate defect detection significantly enhances software quality assurance, allowing
developers and testers to make data-driven decisions regarding the reliability of
software components before deployment. By using key metrics like accuracy,
precision, recall, F1 score, and ROC-AUC, this project provides a detailed assessment
of each model's performance, aiding in the selection of the most suitable algorithm for
defect prediction tasks.

This project’s interactive feature input system, complete with random value generation
for specific data types, also enhances user accessibility. Additionally, the feature-
scaling and model training processes are streamlined through automated data
preprocessing and training-test splitting, ensuring that the tool remains efficient and
effective across various datasets. The decision tree visualization further adds
interpretability to the predictive models, allowing users to visually assess how specific
features contribute to defect predictions. This aspect is crucial for enhancing users’
trust in the model by providing transparency and insight into the decision-making
process.

While this tool achieves its primary goal of defect detection, it also lays a foundation
for future exploration into other software quality metrics. Its modular structure allows
for future expansion, where new features, additional algorithms, and advanced data
visualization techniques can be incorporated. This adaptability ensures that the tool
 25

remains relevant as new machine learning advancements emerge.

Future Enhancements

Expanding Algorithm Selection: Future versions of this project could include

advanced algorithms such as Gradient Boosting Machines (GBMs), XGBoost,
LightGBM, and neural networks to potentially improve detection accuracy. The
incorporation of these algorithms would allow the tool to handle a wider range of
software data characteristics and potentially yield better results, especially for complex
datasets with nuanced patterns.

Automated Feature Engineering: A critical area of improvement is the integration of

automated feature engineering. By applying techniques such as polynomial feature
generation, interaction terms, or dimensionality reduction methods (e.g., PCA), the
tool could uncover more predictive features within the dataset, potentially enhancing
model accuracy without extensive manual preprocessing.

Improved GUI and User Experience: Enhancing the graphical user interface (GUI)
to provide clearer, more visually appealing feedback to users can make the tool more
accessible. Adding progress bars, tooltips, and interactive graphs (e.g., ROC curve
visualization) can also enhance the user experience. Such features could help non-
technical users understand model results and metrics more intuitively.

Integration of Cross-Validation and Hyperparameter Tuning: While the current

tool assesses model performance based on a single train-test split, incorporating cross-
validation and hyperparameter tuning (using techniques such as GridSearchCV or
RandomizedSearchCV) would allow for more robust model performance evaluation
and optimization, ultimately leading to higher reliability.

Deployment and Scalability: Deploying this tool as a web application or a cloud-

 26

based service would make it accessible to a larger user base. By implementing scalable
cloud infrastructure, users across various locations and teams could access the tool,
facilitating collaborative software testing and defect detection in larger development
environments. Integrating the tool with popular project management software (e.g.,
JIRA) would also streamline defect tracking within the development workflow.

Automated Report Generation: To further support quality assurance processes,

adding an automated report generation feature would allow users to generate detailed
reports of model performance, defect predictions, and data insights. These reports
could be exported in formats such as PDF or Excel, providing teams with
documentation to support their software development lifecycle.

Incorporating Time-Series Analysis: For projects where data is collected over time,
incorporating time-series analysis could improve the prediction of defects based on
temporal trends. Time-based features like defect occurrence trends, release cycles, and
frequency patterns could reveal useful insights, especially for agile development
environments where defect patterns evolve rapidly.

Enhanced Model Interpretability: Leveraging techniques such as SHAP (SHapley

Additive exPlanations) values or LIME (Local Interpretable Model-agnostic
Explanations) would make it easier to interpret complex models. Adding these
techniques would allow users to understand the contribution of individual features to
the predictions, thereby building confidence in model decisions and fostering more
insightful defect analysis.

Support for Real-Time Prediction: For continuous integration (CI) environments,

real-time defect prediction could be implemented to automatically assess new builds or
commits for potential defects. By integrating this tool into the CI pipeline, it could
provide immediate feedback to developers on possible code issues, allowing rapid
iteration and improvement.
 27

In conclusion, while this software defect detection tool already demonstrates strong
potential for supporting defect identification, the suggested future enhancements
would further its capability and utility. With continuous improvement and the
integration of more advanced techniques, this project can evolve into a comprehensive
solution for defect detection and software quality assurance, ultimately leading to more
reliable, efficient, and maintainable software products.
 28

REFERENCES

1. Faseeha Matloob , Taher m. Ghazal, (member, ieee), Nasser Taleb, Shabib Aftab ,
Munir Ahmad , (member, IEEE), Muhammad Adnan Khan ,Sagheer Abbas , and Tariq
Rahim Soomro , (senior member, IEEE), Software Defect Prediction using ensemble
learning: A systematic literature review, ieee access 2021.

2. Thota, Mahesh Kumar, et al. “Survey on software defect prediction techniques.”

International Journal of Applied Science and Engineering, 2020, p. 331.

3. Li, Ning, et al. “A Systematic Review of Unsupervised Learning Techniques for

Software Defect Prediction.” Preprint Submitted to Information & Software
Technology, Feb. 2020.

2. Pan, Cong, et al. “An Empirical Study on Software Defect Prediction Using
CodeBERT Model.” Applied Sciences, edited by Ricardo Colomo-Palacios, vol. 11,
2021, p. 4793. https://doi.org/10.3390/app11114793.

5.“Software Visualization and Deep Transfer Learning for Effective Software Defect
Prediction.” 42th International Conference on Software Engineering, 2018, p. 12.
doi.org/10.1145/1122445.1122456.