Skip to content
Review Open access

Software Failure Prediction and Efficiency Optimization Using AI/ML Techniques

Prasad Mathapati S. G. Gollagi Zebashireen Fahim Shaikh
2026 · International journal of research and scientific innovation · 0 citations

TL;DR

The analysis indicates that no single model is universally optimal; robust software failure prediction requires dataset-aware preprocessing, leakage-safe validation, imbalance-aware evaluation, and an explicit trade-off among predictive performance, computational efficiency, and interpretability.

Abstract

Software reliability remains a major concern in modern software engineering due to the increasing complexity of software systems and the rapid pace of development. Software Failure Prediction (SFP) aims to identify fault-prone modules before deployment, enabling organizations to reduce maintenance costs and improve system quality. Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning (ML) techniques provide data-driven approaches for analyzing software metrics, defect repositories, and execution logs to predict failures. This review examines AI/ML-based approaches for software failure prediction and efficiency optimization, with explicit attention to benchmark datasets, dataset quality, preprocessing, class imbalance, feature selection, model families, validation strategies, and evaluation measures. Representative NASA and PROMISE/Jureczko datasets are characterized in terms of software-unit type, metric families, binary defect labels, and imbalance. The review emphasizes Precision, Recall, F1-score, ROC-AUC, and MCC in addition to accuracy and compares traditional ML, ensemble, and deep-learning approaches. It further discusses missing data, concept drift, and cross-project prediction as key factors affecting real-world generalization. The analysis indicates that no single model is universally optimal; robust software failure prediction requires dataset-aware preprocessing, leakage-safe validation, imbalance-aware evaluation, and an explicit trade-off among predictive performance, computational efficiency, and interpretability.

Read PDF

Similar papers

Aug 2026

Precision Software Defect Prediction Using Novel Machine Learning Approaches

This study aims to improve software defect prediction five publicly available NASA datasets by using Random Forest and Classification Network to achieve higher defect prediction accuracy compared to methods without feature selection (WOFS) and to get matrix problem the authors use Classification Network.

S. G., Santosh Santosh · 0 citations
Review Aug 2026

Automated software debugging and bug prediction through the use of machine learning and deep learning

The results indicate that traditional ML models, especially random forest and extra trees, are still very effective for metric-based defect prediction, while DL and multi-modal approaches need to be fed with richer software artifacts to reach their full potential.

Amro Mohammad Abed Alfattah Abdin, Mohanad Alayedi, Ahmad M. Jaradat · 0 citations
Open access Aug 2026

An Intelligent Framework for AI-Based Automated Software Testing and Defect Prediction

The analysis indicates that combining predictive defect-risk scores with automated test selection can potentially reduce redundant testing, concentrate computational resources on high-risk software components, and improve feedback speed, but model reliability depends on historical defect data, feature quality, distribu...

Haruto Tanaka, Yuki Nakamura · 0 citations
Open access 2021

Predicting Software Maintainability Using AI Models

Experiments demonstrate the effectiveness of AI-based predictions in improving software quality assessment, providing actionable insights, and supporting proactive maintenance strategies in improving software quality assessment and reducing maintenance effort.

Fatima Noor · 0 citations
Review Open access Aug 2026

Machine Learning-Driven Test Automation for Continuous Software Quality Engineering

The analysis indicates that machine learning can shift test automation from static execution toward adaptive quality intelligence, however, model drift, insufficient representative test data, explainability, false positives, computational overhead, and continuous maintenance remain significant constraints.

Chinedu Okafor · 0 citations

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.