Practitioners' Perceptions of the Goals and Visual Explanations of Defect Prediction Models
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Software defect prediction models are classifiers that are constructed from historical software data. Such software defect prediction models have been proposed to help developers optimize the limited Software Quality Assurance (SQA) resources and help managers develop SQA plans. Prior studies have different goals for their defect prediction models and use different techniques for generating visual explanations of their models. Yet, it is unclear what are the practitioners' perceptions of (1) these defect prediction model goals, and (2) the model-agnostic techniques used to visualize these models. We conducted a qualitative survey to investigate practitioners' perceptions of the goals of defect prediction models and the model-agnostic techniques used to generate visual explanations of defect prediction models. We found that (1) 82%-84% of the respondents perceived that the three goals of defect prediction models are useful; (2) LIME is the most preferred technique for understanding the most important characteristics that contributed to a prediction of a file, while ANOVA/VarImp is the second most preferred technique for understanding the characteristics that are associated with software defects in the past. Our findings highlight the significance of investigating how to improve the understanding of defect prediction models and their predictions. Hence, model-agnostic techniques from explainable AI domain may help practitioners to understand defect prediction models and their predictions.
Key facts. Cited by 9 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 24 Feb 2021.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2022: 1; 2023: 3; 2024: 4; 2025: 1.
9 papers.
- 2023Pitfalls in Language Models for Code Intelligence: A Taxonomy and Surveycited by 9
- 2024Are Latent Vulnerabilities Hidden Gems for Software Vulnerability Prediction? An Empirical Studycited by 9
- 2023Ethics in the Age of AI: An Analysis of AI Practitioners' Awareness and Challengescited by 6
- 2024Looking into Black Box Code Language Modelscited by 5
- 2025Neuron-Guided Interpretation of Code LLMs: Where, Why, and How?cited by 5
- 2022Studying the explanations for the automated prediction of bug and non-bug issues using LIME and SHAPcited by 4
- 2023Predicting Line-Level Defects by Capturing Code Contexts with Hierarchical Transformerscited by 0
- 2024Practitioners' Challenges and Perceptions of CI Build Failure Predictions at Atlassiancited by 0
- 2024Towards Explainable Test Case Prioritisation with Learning-to-Rank Modelscited by 0
- 2025Neuron-Guided Interpretation of Code LLMs: Where, Why, and How?23 Dec 2025
- 2024Looking into Black Box Code Language Models5 Jul 2024
- 2024Towards Explainable Test Case Prioritisation with Learning-to-Rank Models22 May 2024
- 2024Practitioners' Challenges and Perceptions of CI Build Failure Predictions at Atlassian15 Feb 2024
- 2024Are Latent Vulnerabilities Hidden Gems for Software Vulnerability Prediction? An Empirical Study20 Jan 2024
- 2023Predicting Line-Level Defects by Capturing Code Contexts with Hierarchical Transformers19 Dec 2023
- 2023Pitfalls in Language Models for Code Intelligence: A Taxonomy and Survey27 Oct 2023
- 2023Ethics in the Age of AI: An Analysis of AI Practitioners' Awareness and Challenges14 Jul 2023
- 2022Studying the explanations for the automated prediction of bug and non-bug issues using LIME and SHAP15 Sep 2022