Integrating Observability, Defect Prediction, and Decision Intelligence for Reliable AI-Driven Software Systems

Authors

  • Dr. Rhea Subramanian Department of Artificial Intelligence, Peninsula University of Digital Intelligence, Assistant Professor, Chennai, India. Author
  • Dr. Nitin Yadav Department of Computer Science, Frontier Institute of Computing Systems, Assistant Professor, Jaipur, India. Author
  • Dr. Sushmita Karmakar Department of Information Technology, Eastern School of Technology and Informatics, Assistant Professor, Guwahati, India. Author
  • Dr. Abhishek Tiwari Department of Artificial Intelligence, Center for Applied AI and Analytics, Assistant Professor, Lucknow, India. Author
  • Dr. Neha Sreedhar Department of Computer Science, Royal Institute of Computing and Data Science, Assistant Professor, Vijayawada, India. Author

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.63282/3117-5481/AIJCST-V6I6P108

Keywords:

Observability, Software Defect Prediction, Decision Intelligence, AIOps, MLOps, Software Reliability, AI-Driven Systems, Software Quality Assurance

Abstract

AI-driven software systems have expanded the operational surface area of modern platforms by coupling conventional application logic with data pipelines, machine learning components, and continuously changing runtime environments. This expansion makes reliability a moving target. Traditional quality assurance and post-deployment monitoring remain necessary, but they are no longer sufficient when failures emerge from interactions among code defects, model drift, infrastructure volatility, feature-store inconsistencies, and delayed operational response. This paper develops an integrated conceptual framework that unifies observability, software defect prediction, and decision intelligence into a single reliability architecture for AI-driven software systems. The proposed perspective argues that these capabilities should not be treated as isolated disciplines. Observability provides high-fidelity runtime evidence, defect prediction offers anticipatory risk estimation before failures become customer-visible, and decision intelligence converts technical signals into prioritized actions, governance routines, and architecture-level trade-off decisions. Drawing on literature from AIOps, MLOps, software quality engineering, testing, trustworthy AI, and architecture-centric governance, the paper synthesizes current knowledge, identifies fragmentation across the lifecycle, and proposes a layered operating model spanning development, deployment, operations, and continuous improvement. The manuscript also outlines adoption patterns, organizational prerequisites, and research challenges relevant to enterprise-scale implementation. The resulting framework is intended to support more reliable, auditable, and adaptive AI-enabled software delivery in complex socio-technical environments.

References

[1] S. Akimova, A. Sillitti, G. Succi, A. Bellucci, and P. Aversa, “The role of observability in software systems: A systematic literature review,” Mathematics, vol. 9, no. 11, p. 1180, 2021. https://doi.org/10.3390/math9111180

[2] Gunda SK, Yettapu SDR, Bodakunti S, Bikki SB. Decision Intelligence Methodology for AI-Driven Agile Software Lifecycle Governance and Architecture-Centered Project Management, 2023 Mar. 30;4(1):102-8. https://doi.org/10.63282/3050-9262.IJAIDSML-V4I1P112

[3] D. Kreuzberger, N. Kühl, and S. Hirschl, “Machine Learning Operations (MLOps): Overview, definition, and architecture,” IEEE Access, vol. 11, pp. 31866-31879, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2023.3262138

[4] Gudi, S. R. (2024). AI-Driven Fax-to-Digital Prescription Automation: A Cloud-Native Framework Using OCR, Machine Learning, and Microservices for Pharmacy Operations. International Journal of Emerging Research in Engineering and Technology, 5(1), 111-116. https://doi.org/10.63282/3050-922X.IJERET-V5I1P113

[5] I. Ozkaya, “The next frontier in software development: AI-augmented software development processes,” IEEE Software, vol. 40, no. 4, pp. 4-9, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1109/MS.2023.3263776

[6] Gudi, S. R. (2024). Design and Evaluation of Secure Microservices Architecture for HIPAA-Compliant Prescription Processing on AWS and OpenShift. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence, Data Science, and Machine Learning, 5(2), 144-149. https://doi.org/10.63282/3050-9262.IJAIDSML-V5I2P116

[7] M. Notaro, A. Pezzè, H. Bruneliere, J. Cabot, and C. Andrikopoulos, “A survey of AIOps methods for failure management,” ACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology, vol. 12, no. 6, pp. 81:1-81:45, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1145/3483424

[8] S. K. Gunda, “Comparative Analysis of Machine Learning Models for Software Defect Prediction,” 2024 International Conference on Power, Energy, Control and Transmission Systems (ICPECTS), Chennai, India, 2024, pp. 1-6. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICPECTS62210.2024.10780167

[9] M. Pratt, C. Bisson, and T. Warin, “Bringing advanced technology to strategic decision-making: The Decision Intelligence/Data Science (DI/DS) integration framework,” Futures, vol. 152, p. 103217, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2023.103217

[10] Gudi, S. R. (2024). Leveraging Predictive Analytics and Redis-Backed Caching to Optimize Specialty Medication Fulfillment and Pharmacy Inventory Management. International Journal of AI, BigData, Computational and Management Studies, 5(3), 155-160. https://doi.org/10.63282/3050-9416.IJAIBDCMS-V5I3P116

[11] S. K. Gunda, “Fault Prediction Unveiled: Analyzing the Effectiveness of Random Forest, Logistic Regression, and KNeighbors,” 2024 2nd International Conference on Self Sustainable Artificial Intelligence Systems (ICSSAS), Erode, India, 2024, pp. 107-113. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSSAS64001.2024.10760620

[12] J. C. Díaz-de-Arcaya, J. I. Torre-Bastida, I. Laña, and M. N. Moreno, “A joint study of the challenges, opportunities, and roadmap of MLOps and AIOps: A systematic survey,” ACM Computing Surveys, vol. 56, no. 6, article 150, 2023.

[13] Sivva SD, Thalakanti RR, Bandari SSG, Yettapu SDR. AI-Driven Decision Intelligence for Agile Software Lifecycle Governance: An Architecture-Centered Framework Integrating Machine Learning Defect Prediction and Automated Testing. 2023 Dec;4(4):167-72. Available from: https://www.ijetcsit.org/index.php/ijetcsit/article/view/554

[14] Gudi, S. R. (2023). Enhancing Reliability in Java Enterprise Systems through Comparative Analysis of Automated Testing Frameworks. International Journal of Emerging Trends in Computer Science and Information Technology, 4(2), 151-160. https://doi.org/10.63282/3050-9246.IJETCSIT-V4I2P115

[15] Gunda, S. K. G. (2023). The Future of Software Development and the Expanding Role of ML Models. International Journal of Emerging Research in Engineering and Technology, 4(2), 126-129. https://doi.org/10.63282/3050-922X.IJERET-V4I2P113

[16] Balerao, M. (2023). A converged artificial intelligence architecture for innovation, software lifecycle optimization, and cybersecurity risk mitigation. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Futuristic Development, 4(1), 117-120. https://doi.org/10.54660/IJMFD.2023.4.1.117-120

[17] R. Akbar, N. T. Jaffri, S. Ramadan, A. Hassan, J. M. Aljaam, and S. J. Malebary, “Trustworthy artificial intelligence: A decision-making taxonomy of potential challenges,” Software: Practice and Experience, vol. 54, no. 9, pp. 1621-1650, 2024. https://doi.org/10.1002/spe.3216

[18] Mutyam, N. (2024). Graph-based modeling of service dependencies for predicting failure propagation in distributed systems. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Evolutionary Research, 5(1), 113-116. https://doi.org/10.54660/IJMER.2024.5.1.113-116

[19] Sivva, S. D. (2023). An end-to-end AI-based systems engineering paradigm for lifecycle governance, predictive quality assurance, automation economics, and cybersecurity intelligence. Journal of Frontiers in Multidisciplinary Research, 4(1), 600-604. https://doi.org/10.54660/.JFMR.2023.4.1.600-604

[20] P. Kokol, “Artificial intelligence in software engineering: A systematic literature review,” Information, vol. 15, no. 6, p. 354, 2024. https://doi.org/10.3390/info15060354

[21] Gunda, Sai Kumar. “A Risk-Aware AI Framework for Automated Testing and Quality Assurance in Core Banking Systems.” International Journal of Multidisciplinary Evolutionary Research, vol. 5, no. 1, 2024, pp. 117-120. https://doi.org/10.54660/IJMER.2024.5.1.117-120

[22] Yettapu, S. D. R. (2023). A unified artificial intelligence governance and reliability engineering framework for secure and autonomous software-intensive and cyber-physical systems. Journal of Frontiers in Multidisciplinary Research, 4(1), 605-608. https://doi.org/10.54660/.JFMR.2023.4.1.605-608

[23] Y. A. Albattah and N. A. Alzahrani, “Software defect prediction based on machine learning and deep learning techniques: An empirical approach,” AI, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 1743-1758, 2024. https://doi.org/10.3390/ai5040086

[24] N. A. M. Zain, N. N. Sakri, and M. A. Ismail, “Application of deep learning in software defect prediction: Systematic literature review and meta-analysis,” Information and Software Technology, vol. 158, p. 107175, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2023.107175

[25] Mittamidi, V. K. R. (2024). An automated AI-driven monitoring and observability framework for cloud-based data pipelines by software defect prediction research. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Evolutionary Research, 5(1), 109-112. https://doi.org/10.54660/IJMER.2024.5.1.109-112

[26] H. Kaneko, “Naturally decision intelligence: Perfect algorithm generated by the hypothetical and synchronizing model for life system,” Intelligent Decision Technologies, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 195-210, 2023. https://doi.org/10.3233/IDT-220231

[27] H. Nassif, C. Bezemer, and B. Adams, “Software defect prediction using learning to rank approach,” Scientific Reports, vol. 13, article 18885, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-45915-5

[28] Z. Yu, H. He, Q. Hu, and L. Minku, “Improving effort-aware defect prediction by directly learning to rank software modules,” Information and Software Technology, vol. 165, p. 107250, 2024. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2023.107250

[29] X. Guo, M. Shepperd, and Z. Li, “Improving classifier-based effort-aware software defect prediction by reducing ranking errors,” in Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering (EASE), 2024, pp. 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1145/3661167.3661195

[30] T. Hall, S. Beecham, D. Bowes, D. Gray, and S. Counsell, “A systematic literature review on fault prediction performance in software engineering,” IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. 38, no. 6, pp. 1276-1304, 2012. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSE.2011.103

[31] S. Lessmann, B. Baesens, C. Mues, and S. Pietsch, “Benchmarking classification models for software defect prediction: A proposed framework and novel findings,” IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. 34, no. 4, pp. 485-496, 2008. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSE.2008.35

[32] T. Menzies, J. Greenwald, and A. Frank, “Data mining static code attributes to learn defect predictors,” IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 2-13, 2007. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSE.2007.256941

[33] T. Zimmermann, N. Nagappan, H. Gall, E. Giger, and B. Murphy, “Cross-project defect prediction: A large scale experiment on data vs. domain vs. process,” in Proceedings of the 7th joint meeting of the European Software Engineering Conference and the ACM SIGSOFT Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering (ESEC/FSE), 2009, pp. 91-100. https://doi.org/10.1145/1595696.1595713

[34] Z. Pan, S. Khurshid, and J. Campos, “Test case selection and prioritization using machine learning: A systematic literature review,” Empirical Software Engineering, vol. 27, article 29, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10664-021-10066-6

[35] H. Pan and M. Pradel, “Continuous test suite failure prediction,” in Proceedings of the 30th ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis (ISSTA), 2021, pp. 147-159. https://doi.org/10.1145/3460319.3464840

[36] M. Mahdieh, S. Mirarab, and M. Ebrahimi, “Incorporating fault-proneness estimations into coverage-based test case prioritization methods,” Information and Software Technology, vol. 121, p. 106269, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2020.106269

[37] A. Saidani, A. Ouni, M. W. Mkaouer, and M. D. Penta, “Predicting continuous integration build failures using machine learning,” Information and Software Technology, vol. 128, p. 106392, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2020.106392

[38] B. H. Sigelman, L. A. Barroso, M. Burrows, P. Stephenson, M. Plakal, D. Beaver, S. Jaspan, and C. Shanbhag, “Dapper, a large-scale distributed systems tracing infrastructure,” Google Research, 2010.

[39] R. Gu, S. S. Kanhere, S. Jha, and J. Zhao, “TrinityRCL: Multi-granular and code-level root cause localization using multiple types of telemetry data in microservice systems,” IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. 49, no. 5, pp. 3071-3088, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSE.2022.3223559

[40] I. Rouf, A. K. Saxena, N. Shah, and A. J. Oliner, “InstantOps: A joint approach to system failure prediction and root cause identification in microservices cloud-native applications,” in Proceedings of the ACM/SPEC International Conference on Performance Engineering (ICPE), 2024. https://doi.org/10.1145/3629526.3651800

Downloads

Published

2024-11-21

Issue

Section

Articles

How to Cite

[1]
R. Subramanian, N. Yadav, S. Karmakar, A. Tiwari, and N. Sreedhar, “Integrating Observability, Defect Prediction, and Decision Intelligence for Reliable AI-Driven Software Systems”, AIJCST, vol. 6, no. 6, pp. 78–86, Nov. 2024, doi: 10.63282/3117-5481/AIJCST-V6I6P108.

Similar Articles

31-40 of 159

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.