Evaluating Software Defect Prediction Models via the Area Under the ROC Curve Can Be Misleading
Luigi Lavazza, Gabriele Rotoloni, Sandro Morasca

TL;DR
This paper critically examines the reliability of ROC curves and AUC in evaluating software defect prediction models, revealing potential misleading conclusions and proposing enhanced evaluation methods.
Contribution
It demonstrates that high AUC values can be misleading and introduces decorated ROC curves as a better way to evaluate SDP models across thresholds.
Findings
High AUC does not guarantee better TPR and FPR than random models at all thresholds.
Decorated ROC curves reveal evaluation nuances missed by AUC alone.
Alternative representations are necessary for accurate SDP model assessment.
Abstract
Background: Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curves are widely used to evaluate the performance of Software Defect Prediction (SDP) models that estimate module fault-proneness, i.e., the probability that a module is faulty. A ROC curve maps a model's performance in terms of True Positive Rate and False Positive Rate for any possible threshold set on fault-proneness. The Area Under the ROC Curve (AUC) summarizes the performance of a model across all possible thresholds. Traditionally, ROC curves completely above the bisector of the ROC space are considered better than random, and high AUC values are associated with good performance. Aim: We investigate whether these beliefs are correct, hence if SDP model evaluation based on ROC curves and AUC is reliable. Method: We decorate ROC curves by highlighting the points corresponding to threshold values. We also represent True Positive…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
