You are required to read and agree to the below before accessing a full-text version of an article in the IDE article repository.

The full-text document you are about to access is subject to national and international copyright laws. In most cases (but not necessarily all) the consequence is that personal use is allowed given that the copyright owner is duly acknowledged and respected. All other use (typically) require an explicit permission (often in writing) by the copyright owner.

For the reports in this repository we specifically note that

  • the use of articles under IEEE copyright is governed by the IEEE copyright policy (available at
  • the use of articles under ACM copyright is governed by the ACM copyright policy (available at
  • technical reports and other articles issued by M‰lardalen University is free for personal use. For other use, the explicit consent of the authors is required
  • in other cases, please contact the copyright owner for detailed information

By accepting I agree to acknowledge and respect the rights of the copyright owner of the document I am about to access.

If you are in doubt, feel free to contact

Resampling methods in software quality classification

Publication Type:

Journal article


International Journal of Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering




In the presence of a number of algorithms for classification and prediction in software engineering, there is a need to have a systematic way of assessing their performances. The performance assessment is typically done by some form of partitioning or resampling of the original data to alleviate biased estimation. For predictive and classification studies in software engineering, there is a lack of a definitive advice on the most appropriate resampling method to use. This is seen as one of the contributing factors for not being able to draw general conclusions on what modeling technique or set of predictor variables are the most appropriate. Furthermore, the use of a variety of resampling methods make it impossible to perform any formal meta analysis of the primary study results. Therefore, it is desirable to examine the influence of various resampling methods and to quantify possible differences. Objective and method: This study empirically compares five common resampling methods (hold-out validation, repeated random sub-sampling, 10-fold cross-validation, leave-one-out cross-validation and nonparametric bootstrapping) using 8 publicly available data sets with genetic programming (GP) and multiple linear regression (MLR) as software quality classification approaches. Location of (PF, PD) pairs in the ROC (receiver operating characteristics) space and area under an ROC curve (AUC) are used as accuracy indicators. Results: The results show that in terms of the location of (PF, PD) pairs in the ROC space, bootstrapping results are in the preferred region for 3 of the 8 data sets for GP and for 4 of the 8 data sets for MLR. Based on the AUC measure, there are no significant differences between the different resampling methods using GP and MLR. Conclusion: There can be certain data set properties responsible for insignificant differences between the resampling methods based on AUC. These include imbalanced data sets, insignificant predictor variables and high-dimensional data sets. With the current selection of data sets and classification techniques, bootstrapping is a preferred method based on the location of (PF, PD) pair data in the ROC space. Hold-out validation is not a good choice for comparatively smaller data sets, where leave-one-out cross-validation (LOOCV) performs better. For comparatively larger data sets, 10-fold cross-validation performs better than LOOCV.


author = {Wasif Afzal and Richard Torkar and Robert Feldt},
title = {Resampling methods in software quality classification},
volume = {22},
number = {2},
pages = {203--223},
month = {May},
year = {2012},
journal = {International Journal of Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering},
url = {}