Bug Priority Change Prediction: An Exploratory Study on Apache Software

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2512.09216v1
• Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2025 00:59:51 GMT
• Title: Bug Priority Change Prediction: An Exploratory Study on Apache Software
• Authors: Guangzong Cai, Zengyang Li, Peng Liang, Ran Mo, Hui Liu, Yutao Ma,
• Abstract summary: We propose a novel two-phase bug report priority change prediction method based on bug fixing evolution features and class imbalance handling strategy.<n>To evaluate the performance of our method, we conducted experiments on a bug dataset constructed from 32 non-trivial Apache projects.
• Score: 7.264561489832595
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Bug fixing is a critical activity in the software development process. In issue tracking systems such as JIRA, each bug report is assigned a priority level to indicate the urgency and importance level of the bug. The priority may change during the bug fixing process, indicating that the urgency and importance level of the bug will change with the bug fixing. However, manually evaluating priority changes for bugs is a tedious process that heavily relies on the subjective judgment of developers and project managers, leading to incorrect priority changes and thus hindering timely bug fixes. Given the lack of research on bug priority change prediction, we propose a novel two-phase bug report priority change prediction method based on bug fixing evolution features and class imbalance handling strategy. Specifically, we divided the bug lifecycle into two phases: bug reporting and bug fixing, and constructed bug priority change prediction models for each phase. To evaluate the performance of our method, we conducted experiments on a bug dataset constructed from 32 non-trivial Apache projects. The experimental results show that our proposed bug fixing evolution features and the adopted class imbalance handling strategy can effectively improve the performance of prediction models. The F1-score of the prediction model constructed for the bug reporting phase reached 0.798, while the F1-weighted and F1-macro of the prediction model constructed for the bug fixing phase were 0.712 and 0.613, respectively. Furthermore, we explored the cross-project applicability of our prediction models and their performance at different priority levels. The findings indicate large variations in model performance across different projects, although the overall scores remain decent. Meanwhile, the predictive performance across various priority levels remained relatively consistently high.

Related papers

• BugPilot: Complex Bug Generation for Efficient Learning of SWE Skills [59.003563837981886]
  High quality bugs are key to training the next generation of language model based software engineering (SWE) agents.<n>We introduce a novel method for synthetic generation of difficult and diverse bugs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-22T17:58:56Z)
• Refactoring $\neq$ Bug-Inducing: Improving Defect Prediction with Code Change Tactics Analysis [54.361900378970134]
  Just-in-time defect prediction (JIT-DP) aims to predict the likelihood of code changes resulting in software defects at an early stage.<n>Prior research has largely ignored code during both the evaluation and methodology phases, despite its prevalence.<n>We propose Code chAnge Tactics (CAT) analysis to categorize code and its propagation, which improves labeling accuracy in the JIT-Defects4J dataset by 13.7%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-25T23:29:25Z)
• Bug Destiny Prediction in Large Open-Source Software Repositories through Sentiment Analysis and BERT Topic Modeling [3.481985817302898]
  We leverage features available before a bug is resolved to enhance predictive accuracy.<n>Our methodology incorporates sentiment analysis to derive both an emotionality score and a sentiment classification.<n>Results demonstrate that sentiment analysis serves as a valuable predictor of a bug's eventual outcome.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-22T15:18:14Z)
• Bug Priority Change: An Empirical Study on Apache Projects [5.902703395502138]
  A proportion of bugs in each project underwent priority changes after such bugs were reported. There is a lack of indepth investigation on the phenomenon of bug priority changes, which may negatively impact the bug fixing process. The results show that: (1) 8.3% of the bugs in the selected projects underwent priority changes; (2) the median priority change time interval is merely a few days for most (28 out of 32) projects, and half (50. 7%) of bug priority changes occurred before bugs were handled.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-08T05:10:57Z)
• Using Developer Discussions to Guide Fixing Bugs in Software [51.00904399653609]
  We propose using bug report discussions, which are available before the task is performed and are also naturally occurring, avoiding the need for additional information from developers. We demonstrate that various forms of natural language context derived from such discussions can aid bug-fixing, even leading to improved performance over using commit messages corresponding to the oracle bug-fixing commits.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-11T16:37:33Z)
• ADPTriage: Approximate Dynamic Programming for Bug Triage [0.0]
  We develop a Markov decision process (MDP) model for an online bug triage task. We provide an ADP-based bug triage solution, called ADPTriage, which reflects downstream uncertainty in the bug arrivals and developers' timetables. Our result shows a significant improvement over the myopic approach in terms of assignment accuracy and fixing time.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-02T04:42:21Z)
• An Empirical Study on Bug Severity Estimation using Source Code Metrics and Static Analysis [0.8621608193534838]
  We study 3,358 buggy methods with different severity labels from 19 Java open-source projects. Results show that code metrics are useful in predicting buggy code, but they cannot estimate the severity level of the bugs. Our categorization shows that Security bugs have high severity in most cases while Edge/Boundary faults have low severity.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-26T17:07:23Z)
• Understanding Factual Errors in Summarization: Errors, Summarizers, Datasets, Error Detectors [105.12462629663757]
  In this work, we aggregate factuality error annotations from nine existing datasets and stratify them according to the underlying summarization model. We compare performance of state-of-the-art factuality metrics, including recent ChatGPT-based metrics, on this stratified benchmark and show that their performance varies significantly across different types of summarization models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-25T15:26:48Z)
• DapStep: Deep Assignee Prediction for Stack Trace Error rePresentation [61.99379022383108]
  We propose new deep learning models to solve the bug triage problem. The models are based on a bidirectional recurrent neural network with attention and on a convolutional neural network. To improve the quality of ranking, we propose using additional information from version control system annotations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-01-14T00:16:57Z)
• Predicting the Number of Reported Bugs in a Software Repository [0.0]
  We examine eight different time series forecasting models, including Long Short Term Memory Neural Networks (LSTM), auto-regressive integrated moving average (ARIMA), and Random Forest Regressor. We analyze the quality of long-term prediction for each model based on different performance metrics. The assessment is conducted on Mozilla, which is a large open-source software application.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-04-24T19:06:35Z)
• Evaluating Prediction-Time Batch Normalization for Robustness under Covariate Shift [81.74795324629712]
  We call prediction-time batch normalization, which significantly improves model accuracy and calibration under covariate shift. We show that prediction-time batch normalization provides complementary benefits to existing state-of-the-art approaches for improving robustness. The method has mixed results when used alongside pre-training, and does not seem to perform as well under more natural types of dataset shift.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-19T05:08:43Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.