Statistical Analysis of the Three-Dimensional Data of Software Metrics RFC, CBO, and WMC that are not Normally Distributed

Prykhodko, Sergiy; Pukhalevych, Lidiia

doi:<a href=

Proceedings of International Conference on Applied Innovation in IT · 2025/04/26 · Vol. 13 · Issue 1 · pp. 127–132

Statistical Analysis of the Three-Dimensional Data of Software Metrics RFC, CBO, and WMC that are not Normally Distributed

Sergiy Prykhodko, Lidiia Makarova and Andrii Pukhalevych

📄 Download PDF DOI: <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.25673/119224">10.25673/119254</a>

Abstract

Empirical data of RFC (response for a class), CBO (coupling between object classes), and WMC (weighted methods per class) software metrics, that can be used for estimation of software quality, deviate from normality. These metrics unveil multivariate skewness and kurtosis that do not conform to a multivariate Gaussian distribution. At the same time, well-known statistical methods that assume data normality may not be appropriate for the analysis of non-Gaussian data. To detect the outliers in the three-dimensional data of RFC, CBO, and WMC metrics and to estimate the confidence and prediction intervals of nonlinear regressions for these metrics, we need to use three-variate normalizing transformations. For statistical analysis of RFC, CBO, and WMC metrics, their normalization using the three-variate Box-Cox transformation was applied. Mardia’s test for the transformed data after applying the multivariate Box-Cox transformation points that the transformed dataset is Gaussian. A technique for detecting outliers in multivariate non-Gaussian data based on the squared Mahalanobis distance for normalized data was applied to ensure the removal of outliers. Three nonlinear regression models for each of the RFC, CBO, and WMC metrics were constructed. The confidence and prediction intervals of nonlinear regressions for each of the RFC, CBO, and WMC metrics were built. Well-known statistical characteristics PRED(0.25) and MMRE for both the primary and the test datasets show that the model quality is satisfactory. The confidence and prediction intervals of nonlinear regressions for these metrics can be used for estimation of the quality of the object-oriented design of the software.

Keywords

Software Quality Software Development Statistical Analysis Prediction Interval Confidence Interval Nonlinear Regression OOD Metric RFC CBO WMC Multivariate Box-Cox Transformation Outlier Detection.

References

D. Mendez, P. Avgeriou, M. Kalinowski, and N. bin Ali, Handbook on teaching empirical software engineering. Cham: Springer, 2024, doi: 10.1007/978-3-031-71769-7.
J. Härtel and R. Lämmel, “Operationalizing validity of empirical software engineering studies,” Empir. Softw. Eng., vol. 28, Nov. 2023, Art. no. 153, doi: 10.1007/s10664-023-10370-3.
R. A. Johnson and D. W. Wichern, Applied Multivariate Statistical Analysis. New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall, 2007.
J. Osborne, Best Practices in Data Cleaning: A Complete Guide to Everything You Need to Do Before and After Collecting Your Data. SAGE Publications, Inc., 2013, doi: 10.4135/9781452269948.
S. R. Chidamber and C. F. Kemerer, “Towards a metrics suite for object oriented design,” ACM SIGPLAN Notices, vol. 26, no. 11, pp. 197–211, 1991, doi: 10.1145/118014.117970.
C. Haritha Madhav and K. S. Vipin Kumar, “A method for predicting software reliability using object oriented design metrics,” in Proc. Int. Conf. on Intelligent Computing and Control Systems (ICCS), 2019, pp. 679–682, doi: 10.1109/ICCS45141.2019.9065541.
E. A. Alomar, M. W. Mkaouer, A. Ouni, and M. Kessentini, “On the Impact of Refactoring on the Relationship between Quality Attributes and Design Metrics,” in Proc. Int. Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement (ESEM), Porto de Galinhas, Brazil, 2019, pp. 1-11, doi: 10.1109/ESEM.2019.8870177.
M. Rizwan, A. Nadeem, and M. A. Sindhu, “Empirical Evaluation of Coupling Metrics in Software Fault Prediction,” in Proc. 17th Int. Bhurban Conf. on Applied Sciences and Technology (IBCAST), 2020, pp. 434–440, doi: 10.1109/IBCAST47879.2020.9044489.
A. Vescan, C. Serban, and G. C. Crisan, “Software defects rules discovery,” in Proc. IEEE 14th Int. Conf. on Software Testing, Verification and Validation Workshops (ICSTW), 2021, pp. 101–109, doi: 10.1109/ICSTW52544.2021.00028.
M. Begum, M. H. Shuvo, I. Ashraf, A. A. Mamun, J. Uddin, and M. A. Samad, “Software Defects Identification: Results Using Machine Learning and Explainable Artificial Intelligence Techniques,” IEEE Access, vol. 11, pp. 132750–132765, 2023, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2023.3329051.
M. Ziobrowski, M. Ochodek, J. Nawrocki, and B. Walter, “Towards Reliable Rule Mining about Code Smells: The McPython Approach,” in Proc. 18th Conf. on Computer Science and Intelligence Systems (FedCSIS), 2023, pp. 65–66, doi: 10.15439/2023F2071.
P. Ofem, B. Isong, and F. Lugayizi, “Metrics for Evaluating and Improving Transparency in Software Engineering: An Empirical Study and Improvement Model,” SN Computer Science, vol. 5, Art. no. 8, 2024, doi: 10.1007/s42979-024-03471-3.
A. S. Prykhodko and E. V. Malakhov, “Determining object-oriented design complexity due to the identification of classes of open-source web applications created using PHP frameworks,” Radio Electronics, Computer Science, Control, 2024, no. 2 (69), pp 160–166, doi: 10.15588/1607-3274-2024-2-16.
M.-A. Levasseur and M. Badri, “Prioritizing unit tests using object-oriented metrics, centrality measures, and machine learning algorithms,” Innovations in Systems and Software Engineering, 2024, doi: 10.1007/s11334-024-00550-9.
D. A. Rebro, S. Chren, and B. Rossi, “Source Code Metrics for Software Defects Prediction,” in Proc. ACM Symposium on Applied Computing, 2023, pp. 1469–1472, doi: 10.1145/3555776.3577809.
A.-J. Molnar, A. Neamţu, and S. Motogna, “Evaluation of Software Product Quality Metrics,” in Proc. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol. 1172, 2020, pp. 163-187, doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-40223-5_8.
M. M. A. Dabdawb and B. Mahmood, “A Network of Object-Oriented Software Metrics Parameters,” in Proc. 10th IEEE Int. Conf. on Communication, Networks and Satellite (Comnetsat), 2021, pp. 172–178, doi: 10.1109/COMNETSAT53002.2021.
9530822.
I. C. Nwandu, J. N. Odii, E. C. Nwokorie, and S. A. Okolie, “Evaluation of Software Quality in Test-driven Development: A Perspective of Measurement and Metrics,” Int. Journal of Information Technology and Computer Science, vol. 14, no. 6, pp. 13–22, 2022, doi: 10.5815/ijitcs.2022.06.02.
I. M. A. Wikantyasa, A. P. Kurniawan, and S. Rochimah, “C K Metric and Architecture Smells Relations: Towards Software Quality Assurance,” in Proc. 14th Int. Conf. on Information and Communication Technology and System (ICTS), 2023, doi: 10.1109/ICTS58770.2023.10330874.
S. Jin, Z. Li, B. Chen, B. Zhu, and Y. Xia, “Software Code Quality Measurement: Implications from Metric Distributions,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. on Software Quality, Reliability and Security (QRS), 2023, pp. 488–496, doi: 10.1109/QRS60937.2023.
00054.
S. Prykhodko, “Evaluating Quality of Software Systems by the Confidence and Prediction Intervals of Regressions for RFC, CBO and WMC Metrics,” WSEAS Transactions on Systems, vol. 23, pp. 322–330, 2024, doi: 10.37394/23202.2024.23.36.
S. Prykhodko, N. Prykhodko, L. Makarova, and A. Pukhalevych, “Application of the squared Mahalanobis distance for detecting outliers in multivariate non-Gaussian data,” in Proc. 14th Int. Conf. on Advanced Trends in Radioelectronics, Telecommunications and Computer Engineering (TCSET), 2018, pp. 962–965, doi: 10.1109/TCSET.2018.8336353.