{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,2,4]],"date-time":"2026-02-04T20:51:46Z","timestamp":1770238306935,"version":"3.49.0"},"reference-count":68,"publisher":"Association for Computing Machinery (ACM)","issue":"FSE","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2024,7,12]],"date-time":"2024-07-12T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1720742400000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0\/"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["Proc. ACM Softw. Eng."],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2024,7,12]]},"abstract":"<jats:p>Defect reduction planning plays a vital role in enhancing software quality and minimizing software maintenance costs. By training a black box machine learning model and \u201cexplaining\u201d its predictions, explainable AI for software engineering aims to identify the code characteristics that impact maintenance risks. However, post-hoc explanations do not always faithfully reflect what the original model computes. In this paper, we introduce CounterACT, a Counterfactual ACTion rule mining approach that can generate defect reduction plans without black-box models. By leveraging action rules, CounterACT provides a course of action that can be considered as a counterfactual explanation for the class (e.g., buggy or not buggy) assigned to a piece of code. We compare the effectiveness of CounterACT with the original action rule mining algorithm and six established defect reduction approaches on 9 software projects. Our evaluation is based on (a) overlap scores between proposed code changes and actual developer modifications; (b) improvement scores in future releases; and (c) the precision, recall, and F1-score of the plans. Our results show that, compared to competing approaches, CounterACT\u2019s explainable plans achieve higher overlap scores at the release level (median 95%) and commit level (median 85.97%), and they offer better trade-off between precision and recall (median F1-score 88.12%). Finally, we venture beyond planning and explore leveraging Large Language models (LLM) for generating code edits from our generated plans. Our results show that suggested LLM code edits supported by our plans are actionable and are more likely to pass relevant test cases than vanilla LLM code recommendations.<\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.1145\/3660809","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2024,7,12]],"date-time":"2024-07-12T10:22:09Z","timestamp":1720779729000},"page":"2309-2331","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":2,"title":["Mining Action Rules for Defect Reduction Planning"],"prefix":"10.1145","volume":"1","author":[{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0009-0002-9641-885X","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Khouloud","family":"Oueslati","sequence":"first","affiliation":[{"name":"Polytechnique Montr\u00e9al, Montreal, Canada"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0009-0002-2019-2292","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Gabriel","family":"Laberge","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Polytechnique Montr\u00e9al, Montreal, Canada"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0003-3705-6238","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Maxime","family":"Lamothe","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Polytechnique Montr\u00e9al, Montreal, Canada"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0002-5704-4173","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Foutse","family":"Khomh","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Polytechnique Montr\u00e9al, Montreal, Canada"}]}],"member":"320","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2024,7,12]]},"reference":[{"key":"e_1_3_1_2_2","unstructured":"Amritanshu Agrawal and Tim Menzies. 2017. \"Better Data\" is Better than \"Better Data Miners\" (Benefits of Tuning SMOTE for Defect Prediction). CoRR abs\/1705.03697 (2017). arXiv:1705.03697 http:\/\/arxiv.org\/abs\/1705.03697"},{"key":"e_1_3_1_3_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1109\/ICSM.2010.5609747"},{"key":"e_1_3_1_4_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/stvr.1486"},{"key":"e_1_3_1_5_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Barry Boehm and Victor Basili. 2001. Software Defect Reduction Top 10 List. IEEE Computer 34 (01 2001) 135-137. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/3-540-27662-9_26 10.1007\/3-540-27662-9_26","DOI":"10.1007\/3-540-27662-9_26"},{"key":"e_1_3_1_6_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Nitesh Chawla Kevin Bowyer Lawrence Hall and W. Kegelmeyer. 2002. SMOTE: Synthetic Minority Over-sampling Technique. J. Artif. Intell. Res. (JAIR) 16 (06 2002) 321-357. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1613\/jair.953 10.1613\/jair.953","DOI":"10.1613\/jair.953"},{"key":"e_1_3_1_7_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1109\/32.295895"},{"key":"e_1_3_1_8_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Cesar Couto Pedro Pires Marco Tulio Valente Roberto S. Bigonha and Nicolas Anquetil. 2014. Predicting software defects with causality tests. Journal of Systems and Software 93 (2014) 24-41. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.jss.2014.01.033 10.1016\/j.jss.2014.01.033","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jss.2014.01.033"},{"key":"e_1_3_1_9_2","unstructured":"Hoa Khanh Dam Truyen Tran and Aditya Ghose. 2018. Explainable Software Analytics. CoRR abs\/1802.00603 (2018). arXiv:1802.00603 http:\/\/arxiv.org\/abs\/1802.00603"},{"key":"e_1_3_1_10_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Marco D\u2019Ambros Michele Lanza and Romain Robbes. 2010. An extensive comparison of bug prediction approaches. Proceedings - International Conference on Software Engineering 31-41. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1109\/MSR.2010.5463279 10.1109\/MSR.2010.5463279","DOI":"10.1109\/MSR.2010.5463279"},{"key":"e_1_3_1_11_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.5555\/2431385"},{"key":"e_1_3_1_12_2","unstructured":"Usama M. Fayyad and Keki B. Irani. 1993. Multi-Interval Discretization of Continuous-Valued Attributes for Classification Learning. In International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence. https:\/\/api.semanticscholar.org\/CorpusID:18718011"},{"key":"e_1_3_1_13_2","volume-title":"The Mythical Man-Month: Essays on Software Engineering","author":"Brooks Frederick P","year":"1995","unstructured":"Brooks Jr. Frederick P. 1995. The Mythical Man-Month: Essays on Software Engineering. Pearson Education."},{"key":"e_1_3_1_14_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Bahar Gezici and Ay\u00e7a Kolukisa Tarhan. 2022. Explainable AI for Software Defect Prediction with Gradient Boosting Classifier. In 2022 7th International Conference on Computer Science and Engineering (UBMK). 1-6. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1109\/UBMK55850.2022.9919490 10.1109\/UBMK55850.2022.9919490","DOI":"10.1109\/UBMK55850.2022.9919490"},{"key":"e_1_3_1_15_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1109\/TSE.2011.103"},{"key":"e_1_3_1_16_2","unstructured":"Steffen Herbold Alexander Trautsch and Fabian Trautsch. 2020. On the Feasibility of Automated Issue Type Prediction. CoRR abs\/2003.05357 (2020). arXiv:2003.05357 https:\/\/arxiv.org\/abs\/2003.05357"},{"key":"e_1_3_1_17_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Jaitus Hihn and Tim Menzies. 2015. Data Mining Methods and Cost Estimation Models: Why is it So Hard to Infuse New Ideas?. In 2015 30th IEEE\/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering Workshop (ASEW). 5-9. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1109\/ASEW.2015.27 10.1109\/ASEW.2015.27","DOI":"10.1109\/ASEW.2015.27"},{"key":"e_1_3_1_18_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Jirayus Jiarpakdee Chakkrit Tantithamthavorn Hoa Dam and John Grundy. 2020. An Empirical Study of ModelAgnostic Techniques for Defect Prediction Models. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering PP (03 2020) 1-1. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1109\/TSE.2020.2982385 10.1109\/TSE.2020.2982385","DOI":"10.1109\/TSE.2020.2982385"},{"key":"e_1_3_1_19_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Jirayus Jiarpakdee Chakkrit Tantithamthavorn and Christoph Treude. 2018. AutoSpearman: Automatically Mitigating Correlated Metrics for Interpreting Defect Models. (06 2018).","DOI":"10.1109\/ICSME.2018.00018"},{"key":"e_1_3_1_20_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"44","DOI":"10.1007\/3-540-45329-6_8","volume-title":"Progress in Artificial Intelligence,","author":"Jovanoski Viktor","year":"2001","unstructured":"Viktor Jovanoski and Nada Lavrac. 2001. Classification Rule Learning with APRIORI-C. In Progress in Artificial Intelligence, Pavel Brazdil and Alipio Jorge (Eds.). Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 44-51."},{"key":"e_1_3_1_21_2","unstructured":"Marian Jureczko. 2011. Significance of Different Software Metrics in Defect Prediction. Software Engineering: An International Journal 1 (01 2011) 86-95."},{"key":"e_1_3_1_22_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1145\/1868328.1868342"},{"key":"e_1_3_1_23_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Yasutaka Kamei Emad Shihab Bram Adams Ahmed E. Hassan Audris Mockus Anand Sinha and Naoyasu Ubayashi. 2013. A Large-Scale Empirical Study of Just-in-Time Quality Assurance. Software Engineering IEEE Transactions on 39 (06 2013) 757-773. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1109\/TSE.2012.70 10.1109\/TSE.2012.70","DOI":"10.1109\/TSE.2012.70"},{"key":"e_1_3_1_24_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1109\/TSE.2012.70"},{"key":"e_1_3_1_25_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Vigdis Kampenes Tore Dyb\u00e5 Jo Hannay and Dag Sj\u00f8berg. 2007. A systematic review of effect size in software engineering experiments. Information and Software Technology 49 (11 2007) 1073-1086. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.infsof.2007.02.015 10.1016\/j.infsof.2007.02.015","DOI":"10.1016\/j.infsof.2007.02.015"},{"key":"e_1_3_1_26_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1109\/ICSE.2007.66"},{"key":"e_1_3_1_27_2","unstructured":"Rahul Krishna and Tim Menzies. 2017. From Prediction to Planning: Improving Software Quality with BELLTREE. arXiv: Software Engineering (2017)."},{"key":"e_1_3_1_28_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Rahul Krishna and Tim Menzies. 2020. From prediction to planning: Improving software quality with BELLTREE. Empir. Softw. Eng. 25 (2020) 3468-3500.","DOI":"10.1007\/s10664-020-09843-6"},{"key":"e_1_3_1_29_2","unstructured":"Akshay Kumar and Rishabh Kumar. 2018. Uplift Modeling : Predicting incremental gains. https:\/\/api.semanticscholar.org\/CorpusID:113397046"},{"key":"e_1_3_1_30_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Gichan Lee and Scott Uk-Jin Lee. 2023. An Empirical Comparison of Model-Agnostic Techniques for Defect Prediction Models. In 2023 IEEE International Conference on Software Analysis Evolution and Reengineering (SANER). 179-189. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1109\/SANER56733.2023.00026 10.1109\/SANER56733.2023.00026","DOI":"10.1109\/SANER56733.2023.00026"},{"key":"e_1_3_1_31_2","unstructured":"Guillaume Lema\u00eetre Fernando Nogueira and Christos K. Aridas. 2016. Imbalanced-learn: A Python Toolbox to Tackle the Curse of Imbalanced Datasets in Machine Learning. ArXiv abs\/1609.06570 (2016) http:\/\/arxiv.org\/abs\/1609.06570. https:\/\/api.semanticscholar.org\/CorpusID:1426815"},{"key":"e_1_3_1_32_2","unstructured":"Scott M. Lundberg and Su-In Lee. 2017. A unified approach to interpreting model predictions. CoRR abs\/1705.07874 (2017). arXiv:1705.07874 http:\/\/arxiv.org\/abs\/1705.07874"},{"key":"e_1_3_1_33_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"T.J. McCabe. 1976. A Complexity Measure. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering SE-2 4 (1976) 308-320. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1109\/TSE.1976.233837 10.1109\/TSE.1976.233837","DOI":"10.1109\/TSE.1976.233837"},{"key":"e_1_3_1_34_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Thilo Mende and Rainer Koschke. 2010. Effort-Aware Defect Prediction Models. European Conference on Software Maintenance and Reengineering 107-116. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1109\/CSMR.2010.18 10.1109\/CSMR.2010.18","DOI":"10.1109\/CSMR.2010.18"},{"key":"e_1_3_1_35_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Tim Menzies Jeremy Greenwald and Art Frank. 2007. Data Mining Static Code Attributes to Learn Defect Predictors. IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 33 (01 2007) 2-13. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1109\/TSE.2007.10 10.1109\/TSE.2007.10","DOI":"10.1109\/TSE.2007.10"},{"key":"e_1_3_1_36_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1109\/TSE.2007.256941"},{"key":"e_1_3_1_37_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Mina Mobini and Sepideh Banihashemi. 2016. Analysis of Defect Prediction by using Object Oriented Metrics. (04 2016). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.13140\/RG.2.1.4075.8166 10.13140\/RG.2.1.4075.8166","DOI":"10.13140\/RG.2.1.4075.8166"},{"key":"e_1_3_1_38_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Ramaravind K Mothilal Amit Sharma and Chenhao Tan. 2020. Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In Proceedings of the 2020 conference on fairness accountability and transparency. 607-617.","DOI":"10.1145\/3351095.3372850"},{"key":"e_1_3_1_39_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Nachiappan Nagappan and Thomas Ball. 2007. Using Software Dependencies and Churn Metrics to Predict Field Failures: An Empirical Case Study. Proceedings - 1st International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement ESEM 2007 364-373. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1109\/ESEM.2007.13 10.1109\/ESEM.2007.13","DOI":"10.1109\/ESEM.2007.13"},{"key":"e_1_3_1_40_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Nachiappan Nagappan Andreas Zeller Thomas Zimmermann Kim Herzig and Brendan Murphy. 2010. Change Bursts as Defect Predictors. Proceedings - International Symposium on Software Reliability Engineering ISSRE. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1109\/ISSRE.2010.25 10.1109\/ISSRE.2010.25","DOI":"10.1109\/ISSRE.2010.25"},{"key":"e_1_3_1_41_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Edmilson Campos Neto Daniel Alencar da Costa and Uira Kulesza. 2018. The impact of refactoring changes on the SZZ algorithm: An empirical study. In 2018 IEEE 25th International Conference on Software Analysis Evolution and Reengineering (SANER). 380-390. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1109\/SANER.2018.8330225 10.1109\/SANER.2018.8330225","DOI":"10.1109\/SANER.2018.8330225"},{"key":"e_1_3_1_42_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"254","DOI":"10.1109\/CSMR-WCRE.2014.6747177","volume-title":"2014 Software Evolution Week-IEEE Conference on Software Maintenance, Reengineering, and Reverse Engineering (CSMR-WCRE)","author":"Oliveira Paloma","year":"2014","unstructured":"Paloma Oliveira, Marco Tulio Valente, and Fernando Paim Lima. 2014. Extracting relative thresholds for source code metrics. In 2014 Software Evolution Week-IEEE Conference on Software Maintenance, Reengineering, and Reverse Engineering (CSMR-WCRE). IEEE, 254-263."},{"key":"e_1_3_1_43_2","first-page":"8422","volume-title":"International Conference on Machine Learning","author":"Parmentier Axel","year":"2021","unstructured":"Axel Parmentier and Thibaut Vidal. 2021. Optimal counterfactual explanations in tree ensembles. In International Conference on Machine Learning. PMLR, 8422-8431."},{"key":"e_1_3_1_44_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Luca Pascarella Fabio Palomba and Alberto Bacchelli. 2019. Fine-grained just-in-time defect prediction. Journal of Systems and Software 150 (2019) 22-36. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.jss.2018.12.001 10.1016\/j.jss.2018.12.001","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jss.2018.12.001"},{"key":"e_1_3_1_45_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1007\/s00265-020-02916-y"},{"issue":"7","key":"e_1_3_1_46_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"2510","DOI":"10.1109\/TSE.2021.3062968","article-title":"Defect reduction planning (using timelime)","volume":"48","author":"Peng Kewen","year":"2021","unstructured":"Kewen Peng and Tim Menzies. 2021. Defect reduction planning (using timelime). IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 48, 7 (2021), 2510-2525.","journal-title":"IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering"},{"key":"e_1_3_1_47_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Chanathip Pornprasit and Chakkrit Tantithamthavorn. 2021. JITLine: A Simpler Better Faster Finer-grained Just-InTime Defect Prediction. CoRR abs\/2103.07068 (2021). arXiv:2103.07068 https:\/\/arxiv.org\/abs\/2103.07068","DOI":"10.1109\/MSR52588.2021.00049"},{"key":"e_1_3_1_48_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Chanathip Pornprasit Chakkrit Tantithamthavorn Jirayus Jiarpakdee Michael Fu and Patanamon Thongtanunam. 2021. PyExplainer: Explaining the Predictions of Just-In-Time Defect Models. In 2021 36th IEEE\/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE). 407-418. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1109\/ASE51524.2021.9678763 10.1109\/ASE51524.2021.9678763","DOI":"10.1109\/ASE51524.2021.9678763"},{"key":"e_1_3_1_49_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Dilini Rajapaksha Chakkrit Tantithamthavorn Jirayus Jiarpakdee Christoph Bergmeir John Grundy and Wray Buntine. 2021. SQAPlanner: Generating Data-Informed Software Quality Improvement Plans. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering PP (04 2021) 1-1. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1109\/TSE.2021.3070559 10.1109\/TSE.2021.3070559","DOI":"10.1109\/TSE.2021.3070559"},{"key":"e_1_3_1_50_2","unstructured":"Facebook Research. 2023. llama-recipes. https:\/\/github.com\/facebookresearch\/llama-recipes\/tree\/main Accessed: 2023-06-28."},{"key":"e_1_3_1_51_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Marco Tulio Ribeiro Sameer Singh and Carlos Guestrin. 2016. \" Why should i trust you?\" Explaining the predictions of any classifier. In Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD international conference on knowledge discovery and data mining. 1135-1144.","DOI":"10.1145\/2939672.2939778"},{"key":"e_1_3_1_52_2","unstructured":"Baptiste Roziere Jonas Gehring Fabian Gloeckle Sten Sootla Itai Gat Xiaoqing Ellen Tan Yossi Adi Jingyu Liu Tal Remez J\u00e9r\u00e9my Rapin Artyom Kozhevnikov Ivan Evtimov Joanna Bitton Manish Bhatt Cristian Canton Ferrer Aaron Grattafiori Wenhan Xiong Alexandre D\u00e9fossez Jade Copet Faisal Azhar Hugo Touvron Louis Martin Nicolas Usunier Thomas Scialom and Gabriel Synnaeve. 2023. Code Llama: Open Foundation Models for Code. arXiv:2308.12950 http:\/\/arxiv.org\/abs\/2308.12950 [cs.CL]"},{"key":"e_1_3_1_53_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Cynthia Rudin. 2019. Stop Explaining Black Box Machine Learning Models for High Stakes Decisions and Use Interpretable Models Instead. arXiv:1811.10154 http:\/\/arxiv.org\/abs\/1811.10154 [stat.ML]","DOI":"10.1038\/s42256-019-0048-x"},{"key":"e_1_3_1_54_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Chris Russell. 2019. Efficient search for diverse coherent explanations. In Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness Accountability and Transparency. 20-28.","DOI":"10.1145\/3287560.3287569"},{"key":"e_1_3_1_55_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/9781118491683"},{"key":"e_1_3_1_56_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1109\/TSE.2010.9"},{"key":"e_1_3_1_57_2","unstructured":"Jiho Shin Reem Aleithan Jaechang Nam Junjie Wang and Song Wang. 2021. Explainable Software Defect Prediction: Are We There Yet? arXiv:2111.10901 2111.10901 [cs.SE]"},{"key":"e_1_3_1_58_2","unstructured":"Jiho Shin Reem Aleithan Jaechang Nam Junjie Wang and Song Wang. 2021. Explainable Software Defect Prediction: Are We There Yet? CoRR abs\/2111.10901 (2021). arXiv:2111.10901 https:\/\/arxiv.org\/abs\/2111.10901"},{"key":"e_1_3_1_59_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1145\/1082983.1083147"},{"key":"e_1_3_1_60_2","unstructured":"Lukas Sykora and Tom\u00e1s Kliegr. 2020. Action Rules: Counterfactual Explanations in Python. In RuleML+RR."},{"key":"e_1_3_1_61_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1109\/TSE.2018.2876537"},{"key":"e_1_3_1_62_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1109\/MS.2021.3072088"},{"key":"e_1_3_1_63_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1109\/TSE.2018.2794977"},{"key":"e_1_3_1_64_2","unstructured":"Alexander Trautsch Johannes Erbel Steffen Herbold and Jens Grabowski. 2021. On the differences between quality increasing and other changes in open source Java projects. CoRR abs\/2109.03544 (2021). arXiv:2109.03544 https:\/\/arxiv.org\/abs\/2109.03544"},{"key":"e_1_3_1_65_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Alexander Trautsch and Steffen Herbold. 2021. PROMISE 2021 Defect Prediction Challenge Data. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.5281\/zenodo.8370181 10.5281\/zenodo.8370181","DOI":"10.5281\/zenodo.8370181"},{"key":"e_1_3_1_66_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Sandra Wachter Brent Mittelstadt and Chris Russell. 2017. Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv. JL & Tech. 31 (2017) 841.","DOI":"10.2139\/ssrn.3063289"},{"key":"e_1_3_1_67_2","unstructured":"Romi Wahono. 2015. A Systematic Literature Review of Software Defect Prediction: Research Trends Datasets Methods and Frameworks. Journal of Software Engineering 1 (05 2015)."},{"key":"e_1_3_1_68_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Robert F Woolson. 2007. Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Wiley encyclopedia of clinical trials (2007) 1-3.","DOI":"10.1002\/9780471462422.eoct979"},{"key":"e_1_3_1_69_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1145\/2950290.2950353"}],"container-title":["Proceedings of the ACM on Software Engineering"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/dl.acm.org\/doi\/10.1145\/3660809","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/dl.acm.org\/doi\/pdf\/10.1145\/3660809","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2026,2,4]],"date-time":"2026-02-04T07:59:39Z","timestamp":1770191979000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/dl.acm.org\/doi\/10.1145\/3660809"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2024,7,12]]},"references-count":68,"journal-issue":{"issue":"FSE","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2024,7,12]]}},"alternative-id":["10.1145\/3660809"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1145\/3660809","relation":{},"ISSN":["2994-970X"],"issn-type":[{"value":"2994-970X","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2024,7,12]]}}}