Collaborative bug triaging using textual similarities and change set analysis

Katja Kevic, Sebastian C. Müller, Thomas Fritz, H. Gall
{"title":"Collaborative bug triaging using textual similarities and change set analysis","authors":"Katja Kevic, Sebastian C. Müller, Thomas Fritz, H. Gall","doi":"10.1109/CHASE.2013.6614727","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Bug triaging assigns a bug report, which is also known as a work item, an issue, a task or simply a bug, to the most appropriate software developer for fixing or implementing it. However, this task is tedious, time-consuming and error-prone if not supported by effective means. Current techniques either use information retrieval and machine learning to find the most similar bugs already fixed and recommend expert developers, or they analyze change information stemming from source code to propose expert bug solvers. Neither technique combines textual similarity with change set analysis and thereby exploits the potential of the interlinking between bug reports and change sets. In this paper, we present our approach to identify potential experts by identifying similar bug reports and analyzing the associated change sets. Studies have shown that effective bug triaging is done collaboratively in a meeting, as it requires the coordination of multiple individuals, the understanding of the project context and the understanding of the specific work practices. Therefore, we implemented our approach on a multi-touch table to allow multiple stakeholders to interact simultaneously in the bug triaging and to foster their collaboration. In the current stage of our experiments we have experienced that the expert recommendations are more specific and useful when the rationale behind the expert selection is also presented to the users.","PeriodicalId":118499,"journal":{"name":"2013 6th International Workshop on Cooperative and Human Aspects of Software Engineering (CHASE)","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-05-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"27","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2013 6th International Workshop on Cooperative and Human Aspects of Software Engineering (CHASE)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/CHASE.2013.6614727","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 27

Abstract

Bug triaging assigns a bug report, which is also known as a work item, an issue, a task or simply a bug, to the most appropriate software developer for fixing or implementing it. However, this task is tedious, time-consuming and error-prone if not supported by effective means. Current techniques either use information retrieval and machine learning to find the most similar bugs already fixed and recommend expert developers, or they analyze change information stemming from source code to propose expert bug solvers. Neither technique combines textual similarity with change set analysis and thereby exploits the potential of the interlinking between bug reports and change sets. In this paper, we present our approach to identify potential experts by identifying similar bug reports and analyzing the associated change sets. Studies have shown that effective bug triaging is done collaboratively in a meeting, as it requires the coordination of multiple individuals, the understanding of the project context and the understanding of the specific work practices. Therefore, we implemented our approach on a multi-touch table to allow multiple stakeholders to interact simultaneously in the bug triaging and to foster their collaboration. In the current stage of our experiments we have experienced that the expert recommendations are more specific and useful when the rationale behind the expert selection is also presented to the users.
使用文本相似度和更改集分析的协作错误分类
错误分类将错误报告(也称为工作项、问题、任务或简单的错误)分配给最合适的软件开发人员来修复或实现它。然而,如果没有有效的手段支持,这项任务是乏味、耗时且容易出错的。当前的技术要么使用信息检索和机器学习来查找已经修复的最相似的错误并推荐专家开发人员,要么分析源自源代码的更改信息以推荐专家错误解决者。这两种技术都没有将文本相似性与变更集分析结合起来,从而利用bug报告和变更集之间的内在联系的潜力。在本文中,我们通过识别相似的bug报告和分析相关的变更集来展示我们识别潜在专家的方法。研究表明,有效的bug分类是在会议中协同完成的,因为它需要多个个体的协调、对项目背景的理解以及对具体工作实践的理解。因此,我们在多点触控表上实现了我们的方法,以允许多个利益相关者同时在bug分类中进行交互,并促进他们的协作。在我们目前的实验阶段,我们已经体验到,当专家选择背后的基本原理也呈现给用户时,专家建议更具体和有用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信