Detecting missing information in bug descriptions

Oscar Chaparro, Jing Lu, Fiorella Zampetti, Laura Moreno, M. D. Penta, Andrian Marcus, G. Bavota, Vincent Ng
{"title":"Detecting missing information in bug descriptions","authors":"Oscar Chaparro, Jing Lu, Fiorella Zampetti, Laura Moreno, M. D. Penta, Andrian Marcus, G. Bavota, Vincent Ng","doi":"10.1145/3106237.3106285","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Bug reports document unexpected software behaviors experienced by users. To be effective, they should allow bug triagers to easily understand and reproduce the potential reported bugs, by clearly describing the Observed Behavior (OB), the Steps to Reproduce (S2R), and the Expected Behavior (EB). Unfortunately, while considered extremely useful, reporters often miss such pieces of information in bug reports and, to date, there is no effective way to automatically check and enforce their presence. We manually analyzed nearly 3k bug reports to understand to what extent OB, EB, and S2R are reported in bug reports and what discourse patterns reporters use to describe such information. We found that (i) while most reports contain OB (i.e., 93.5%), only 35.2% and 51.4% explicitly describe EB and S2R, respectively; and (ii) reporters recurrently use 154 discourse patterns to describe such content. Based on these findings, we designed and evaluated an automated approach to detect the absence (or presence) of EB and S2R in bug descriptions. With its best setting, our approach is able to detect missing EB (S2R) with 85.9% (69.2%) average precision and 93.2% (83%) average recall. Our approach intends to improve bug descriptions quality by alerting reporters about missing EB and S2R at reporting time.","PeriodicalId":313494,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 2017 11th Joint Meeting on Foundations of Software Engineering","volume":"11 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"119","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the 2017 11th Joint Meeting on Foundations of Software Engineering","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3106237.3106285","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 119

Abstract

Bug reports document unexpected software behaviors experienced by users. To be effective, they should allow bug triagers to easily understand and reproduce the potential reported bugs, by clearly describing the Observed Behavior (OB), the Steps to Reproduce (S2R), and the Expected Behavior (EB). Unfortunately, while considered extremely useful, reporters often miss such pieces of information in bug reports and, to date, there is no effective way to automatically check and enforce their presence. We manually analyzed nearly 3k bug reports to understand to what extent OB, EB, and S2R are reported in bug reports and what discourse patterns reporters use to describe such information. We found that (i) while most reports contain OB (i.e., 93.5%), only 35.2% and 51.4% explicitly describe EB and S2R, respectively; and (ii) reporters recurrently use 154 discourse patterns to describe such content. Based on these findings, we designed and evaluated an automated approach to detect the absence (or presence) of EB and S2R in bug descriptions. With its best setting, our approach is able to detect missing EB (S2R) with 85.9% (69.2%) average precision and 93.2% (83%) average recall. Our approach intends to improve bug descriptions quality by alerting reporters about missing EB and S2R at reporting time.
检测bug描述中缺失的信息
Bug报告记录了用户遇到的意外软件行为。为了有效,它们应该允许bug触发器通过清晰地描述观察到的行为(OB)、重现的步骤(S2R)和预期的行为(EB),轻松地理解和重现潜在的报告错误。不幸的是,虽然被认为非常有用,但报告者经常在错误报告中遗漏这些信息,而且到目前为止,还没有有效的方法来自动检查和强制执行它们的存在。我们手动分析了近3k个bug报告,以了解bug报告中报告了OB、EB和S2R的程度,以及记者使用什么话语模式来描述这些信息。我们发现(i)虽然大多数报告包含OB(即93.5%),但分别只有35.2%和51.4%明确描述EB和S2R;(ii)记者经常使用154种话语模式来描述这些内容。基于这些发现,我们设计并评估了一种自动方法来检测bug描述中EB和S2R的缺失(或存在)。在最佳设置下,我们的方法能够检测缺失的EB (S2R),平均精度为85.9%(69.2%),平均召回率为93.2%(83%)。我们的方法是通过在报告时提醒记者缺少EB和S2R来提高bug描述的质量。
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