1 2 8 24 32 44 48 49 50
SEC journal Vol.11 No.2 Sep. 2015 1
2 SEC journal Vol.11 No.2 Sep. 2015
SEC journal Vol.11 No.2 Sep. 2015 3
4 SEC journal Vol.11 No.2 Sep. 2015
SEC journal Vol.11 No.2 Sep. 2015 5
6 SEC journal Vol.11 No.2 Sep. 2015
SEC journal Vol.11 No.2 Sep. 2015 7
An Approach for Prioritizing Fault-Prone Modules by Combining a Discriminative Model and Code Review with Checklist 1 2 3 8 SEC journal Vol.11 No.2 Sep. 2015
m Fm Fm m i m j i jij Fm i Fm j m i m j m 1 m 2 m n m Im l q i il q i q i m s im s im m Im s im l q i Fm FmFmIm SEC journal Vol.11 No.2 Sep. 2015 9
Fm m' 1 m' 2 m' n Fm' 1 Fm' 2 Fm' n m' t tn q 1 q 2 q 3 q 4 q 5 q 6 q 7 q 8 q 9 q 10 q 11 q 12 q 13 q 14 q 15 q 16 q 17 q 18 q 19 q 20 q 21 q 22 q 23 q 24 q 25 q 26 q 27 q 28 q 29 10 SEC journal Vol.11 No.2 Sep. 2015
XM 1 M 3 M 2l+1 M 125 Y M 2 M 4 M 2l M 124 X SVM X RND Y SVM Y RND X SVM m SVM1 m SVM2 m SVM63 Fm Fm Fm SEC journal Vol.11 No.2 Sep. 2015 11
Fm n k n Fm Im Fm Fm Fm Fm Fm Fm m 1 m 2 m 3 m 4 m 5 m 6 m 7 m 8 m 9 m 10 m 1, m 2, m 3, m m, m -1, m -2, m /2, m /2-1, m /2+1, m 1, m, m 2, m -1 m' 1 m' 2 m' 10 m' 1 m' 10 m' 1 m' m' 10 1 m' 10 12 SEC journal Vol.11 No.2 Sep. 2015
m i i Fm i SEC journal Vol.11 No.2 Sep. 2015 13
q 6 q 16 14 SEC journal Vol.11 No.2 Sep. 2015
SEC journal Vol.11 No.2 Sep. 2015 15
Predicting Faults After Unit Testing Using Design Phase Metrics in Embedded Software Development Masateru Tsunoda 1, 2 Akito Monden 1, 3 Kenichi Matsumoto 1 This research tried to predict the number of faults after unit testing using design phase (i.e., integration testing and system testing) metrics in embedded software development. As explanatory variables of the model, we used review effort in basic and detail design phase, metrics related to quality assurance such as number of BRE (balanced relative error) of the models were almost 35%, and we can say that prediction accuracy of them were relatively high. Also, the results show that when the number of faults is predicted after basic design phase, the prediction accuracy is relative high. 16 SEC journal Vol.11 No.2 Sep. 2015
v 1 v 2 v 3 v 4 v 5 v 6 v 7 v 8 v 9 v 10 v 11 SEC journal Vol.11 No.2 Sep. 2015 17
y 0 1 x 1 2 x 2 k x k y x 1 x 2 k k 0 1 2 k 18 SEC journal Vol.11 No.2 Sep. 2015
v 1 v 2 v 3 v 4 v 5 v 6 v 7 v 8 v 9 v 10 v 1 v 2 v 3 v 4 v 5 v 6 v 7 v 8 v 9 v 10 F F p in p in F F F p out F p out p in p out p in p out SEC journal Vol.11 No.2 Sep. 2015 19
AE AE BRE BRE AE AE BRE BRE AEMRE BRE x x MRE BRE MRE MRE MRE MRE BRE BRE v 1 v 10 v 1 v 10 20 SEC journal Vol.11 No.2 Sep. 2015
v 5 v 4 v 6 v 10 v 9 v 10 v 4 AE BRE BRE BRE AE BRE SEC journal Vol.11 No.2 Sep. 2015 21
AEBRE AE AE BRE BRE v 1 v 1 v 9 v 1 v 1 v 9 22 SEC journal Vol.11 No.2 Sep. 2015
BRE SEC journal Vol.11 No.2 Sep. 2015 23
24 SEC journal Vol.11 No.2 Sep. 2015
SEC journal Vol.11 No.2 Sep. 2015 25
26 SEC journal Vol.11 No.2 Sep. 2015
SEC journal Vol.11 No.2 Sep. 2015 27
28 SEC journal Vol.11 No.2 Sep. 2015
SEC journal Vol.11 No.2 Sep. 2015 29
30 SEC journal Vol.11 No.2 Sep. 2015
SEC journal Vol.11 No.2 Sep. 2015 31
32 SEC journal Vol.11 No.2 Sep. 2015
SEC journal Vol.11 No.2 Sep. 2015 33
34 SEC journal Vol.11 No.2 Sep. 2015
SEC journal Vol.11 No.2 Sep. 2015 35
36 SEC journal Vol.11 No.2 Sep. 2015
SEC journal Vol.11 No.2 Sep. 2015 37
38 SEC journal Vol.11 No.2 Sep. 2015
39 SEC journal Vol.11 No.2 Sep. 2015
40 SEC journal Vol.11 No.2 Sep. 2015
SEC journal Vol.11 No.2 Sep. 2015 41
42 SEC journal Vol.11 No.2 Sep. 2015
SEC journal Vol.11 No.2 Sep. 2015 43
44 SEC journal Vol.11 No.2 Sep. 2015
SEC journal Vol.11 No.2 Sep. 2015 45
46 SEC journal Vol.11 No.2 Sep. 2015
SEC journal Vol.11 No.2 Sep. 2015 47
48 SEC journal Vol.11 No.2 Sep. 2015
SEC journal Vol.11 No.2 Sep. 2015 49
50 SEC journal Vol.11 No.2 Sep. 2015
SEC journal