惯性聚合 高效追踪和阅读你感兴趣的博客、新闻、科技资讯
阅读原文 在惯性聚合中打开

推荐订阅源

J
Java Code Geeks
freeCodeCamp Programming Tutorials: Python, JavaScript, Git & More
S
SegmentFault 最新的问题
博客园 - 三生石上(FineUI控件)
Hugging Face - Blog
Hugging Face - Blog
博客园 - Franky
云风的 BLOG
云风的 BLOG
I
InfoQ
小众软件
小众软件
Last Week in AI
Last Week in AI
钛媒体:引领未来商业与生活新知
钛媒体:引领未来商业与生活新知
大猫的无限游戏
大猫的无限游戏
A
About on SuperTechFans
Stack Overflow Blog
Stack Overflow Blog
The Cloudflare Blog
雷峰网
雷峰网
P
Proofpoint News Feed
腾讯CDC
H
Help Net Security
V
Visual Studio Blog
美团技术团队
F
Fortinet All Blogs
MongoDB | Blog
MongoDB | Blog
阮一峰的网络日志
阮一峰的网络日志

cs.SE updates on arXiv.org

VLA Foundry: A Unified Framework for Training Vision-Language-Action Models Evaluating LLM-Generated Obfuscated XSS Payloads for Machine Learning-Based Detection Do Agents Dream of Root Shells? Partial-Credit Evaluation of LLM Agents in Capture the Flag Challenges Refute-or-Promote: An Adversarial Stage-Gated Multi-Agent Review Methodology for High-Precision LLM-Assisted Defect Discovery From Particles to Perils: SVGD-Based Hazardous Scenario Generation for Autonomous Driving Systems Testing Choose Your Own Adventure: Non-Linear AI-Assisted Programming with EvoGraph Human-Machine Co-Boosted Bug Report Identification with Mutualistic Neural Active Learning LLMSniffer: Detecting LLM-Generated Code via GraphCodeBERT and Supervised Contrastive Learning Neurosymbolic Repo-level Code Localization CodeMMR: Bridging Natural Language, Code, and Image for Unified Retrieval Symbolic Guardrails for Domain-Specific Agents: Stronger Safety and Security Guarantees Without Sacrificing Utility Verification Modulo Tested Library Contracts The Semi-Executable Stack: Agentic Software Engineering and the Expanding Scope of SE Scaling Test-Time Compute for Agentic Coding AI-Assisted Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Evaluation Relative to Expert Judgment From Procedural Skills to Strategy Genes: Towards Experience-Driven Test-Time Evolution Atropos: Improving Cost-Benefit Trade-off of LLM-based Agents under Self-Consistency with Early Termination and Model Hotswap Vibe-Coding: Feedback-Based Automated Verification with no Human Code Inspection, a Feasibility Study Benchmarks for Trajectory Safety Evaluation and Diagnosis in OpenClaw and Codex: ATBench-Claw and ATBench-Codex Bounded Autonomy for Enterprise AI: Typed Action Contracts and Consumer-Side Execution AIPC: Agent-Based Automation for AI Model Deployment with Qualcomm AI Runtime Analyzing Chain of Thought (CoT) Approaches in Control Flow Code Deobfuscation Tasks Asking What Matters: Reward-Driven Clarification for Software Engineering Tasks Prompt-Driven Code Summarization: A Systematic Literature Review LinuxArena: A Control Setting for AI Agents in Live Production Software Environments LLMs taking shortcuts in test generation: A study with SAP HANA and LevelDB Large Language Models to Enhance Business Process Modeling: Past, Present, and Future Trends CollabCoder: Plan-Code Co-Evolution via Collaborative Decision-Making for Efficient Code Generation Sentiment analysis for software engineering: How far can zero-shot learning (ZSL) go? Learning from Change: Predictive Models for Incident Prevention in a Regulated IT Environment
Testing the Stationarity Assumption in Software Effort Es...
Michael Franklin Bosu, Stephen G. MacDonell, Peter Whigham · 2020-12-16 · via cs.SE updates on arXiv.org

Software effort estimation (SEE) models are typically developed based on an underlying assumption that all data points are equally relevant to the prediction of effort for future projects. The dynamic nature of several aspects of the software engineering process could mean that this assumption does not hold in at least some cases. This study employs three kernel estimator functions to test the stationarity assumption in three software engineering datasets that have been used in the construction of software effort estimation models. The kernel estimators are used in the generation of non-uniform weights which are subsequently employed in weighted linear regression modeling. Prediction errors are compared to those obtained from uniform models. Our results indicate that, for datasets that exhibit underlying non-stationary processes, uniform models are more accurate than non-uniform models. In contrast, the accuracy of uniform and non-uniform models for datasets that exhibited stationary processes was essentially equivalent. The results of our study also confirm prior findings that the accuracy of effort estimation models is independent of the type of kernel estimator function used in model development.