Papers › Bayesian Statistics in Software Engineering: Practical Guide and Case Studies

Bayesian Statistics in Software Engineering: Practical Guide and Case Studies

24 Aug 2016arXiv:1608.06865links table onlyarchive 2025-07-28

Carlo A. Furia

The archive published only this paper's code-link row. Authors, date and abstract are from arXiv's metadata (CC0), read from the Kaggle arXiv metadata snapshot of 2026-09-12 where its title matched the archive's; the title is the archive's.

Statistics comes in two main flavors: frequentist and Bayesian. For historical and technical reasons, frequentist statistics has dominated data analysis in the past; but Bayesian statistics is making a comeback at the forefront of science. In this paper, we give a practical overview of Bayesian statistics and illustrate its main advantages over frequentist statistics for the kinds of analyses that are common in empirical software engineering, where frequentist statistics still is standard. We also apply Bayesian statistics to empirical data from previous research investigating agile vs. structured development processes, the performance of programming languages, and random testing of object-oriented programs. In addition to being case studies demonstrating how Bayesian analysis can be applied in practice, they provide insights beyond the results in the original publications (which used frequentist statistics), thus showing the practical value brought by Bayesian statistics.

PaperPDFCode

Code

bitbucket.org/caf/bayesstats-se officialmentioned in papermentioned on GitHub report

Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections