AutoSpearman: Automatically Mitigating Correlated Metrics for Interpreting Defect Models
The interpretation of defect models heavily relies on software metrics that are used to construct them. However, such software metrics are often correlated to defect models. Prior work often uses feature selection techniques to remove correlated metrics in order to improve the performance of defect models. Yet, the interpretation of defect models may be misleading if feature selection techniques produce subsets of inconsistent and correlated metrics. In this paper, we investigate the consistency and correlation of the subsets of metrics that are produced by nine commonly-used feature selection techniques. Through a case study of 13 publicly-available defect datasets, we find that feature selection techniques produce inconsistent subsets of metrics and do not mitigate correlated metrics, suggesting that feature selection techniques should not be used and correlation analyses must be applied when the goal is model interpretation. Since correlation analyses often involve manual selection of metrics by a domain expert, we introduce AutoSpearman, an automated metric selection approach based on correlation analyses. Our evaluation indicates that AutoSpearman yields the highest consistency of subsets of metrics among training samples and mitigates correlated metrics, while impacting model performance by 1-2%pts. Thus, to automatically mitigate correlated metrics when interpreting defect models, we recommend future studies use AutoSpearman in lieu of commonly-used feature selection techniques.
Code (0)
등록된 구현이 없습니다.
Tasks
feature selectionSimilar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
Mitigating Unfairness via Evolutionary Multi-objective Ensemble Learning
In the literature of mitigating unfairness in machine learning, many fairness measures are designed to evaluate predictions of learning models and also utilised to guide the training of fair models. It has been theoretic…
Ensemble LearningFairnessMT Metrics Correlate with Human Ratings of Simultaneous Speech Translation
There have been several meta-evaluation studies on the correlation between human ratings and offline machine translation (MT) evaluation metrics such as BLEU, chrF2, BertScore and COMET. These metrics have been used to e…
Machine TranslationTranslationWhat do the metrics mean? A critical analysis of the use of Automated Evaluation Metrics in Interpreting
With the growth of interpreting technologies, from remote interpreting and Computer-Aided Interpreting to automated speech translation and interpreting avatars, there is now a high demand for ways to quickly and efficien…
Why Don't Prompt-Based Fairness Metrics Correlate?
The widespread use of large language models has brought up essential questions about the potential biases these models might learn. This led to the development of several metrics aimed at evaluating and mitigating these …
FairnessMetric Design != Metric Behavior: Improving Metric Selection for the Unbiased Evaluation of Dimensionality Reduction
Evaluating the accuracy of dimensionality reduction (DR) projections in preserving the structure of high-dimensional data is crucial for reliable visual analytics. Diverse evaluation metrics targeting different structura…
Dimensionality Reduction