A Comparative Study of Short Text Classification Methods for Bug Report Type Identification

J. Polpinij, M. Kaenampornpan, B. Luaphol
{"title":"A Comparative Study of Short Text Classification Methods for Bug Report Type Identification","authors":"J. Polpinij, M. Kaenampornpan, B. Luaphol","doi":"10.1109/RI2C56397.2022.9910299","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This document is a model and instructions for LATEX. Previous related studies often used the ‘summary’ of bug reports because this part contains less noise. However, bug report summaries are often short, leading to short text classification issues which may have been overlooked. This study compares short text classification methods by categorizing bug reports into two classes as real-bug and non-bug based on three major factors namely bug report features, term weighting schemes and machine learning algorithms. Four bug report features (i.e. unigram, unigram + bigram, unigram + CamelCase, and all features), three term weighting schemes (i.e. tf, tf-idf and tf-igm) and three machine learning algorithms (i.e. random forest, support vector machine, and k-means clustering) are compared using bug reports relating to the Mozilla Firefox open source. Finally, unigram + CamelCase features along with tf-igm and support vector machine provide the most optimal bug report classification performance.","PeriodicalId":403083,"journal":{"name":"2022 Research, Invention, and Innovation Congress: Innovative Electricals and Electronics (RI2C)","volume":"347 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2022 Research, Invention, and Innovation Congress: Innovative Electricals and Electronics (RI2C)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/RI2C56397.2022.9910299","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This document is a model and instructions for LATEX. Previous related studies often used the ‘summary’ of bug reports because this part contains less noise. However, bug report summaries are often short, leading to short text classification issues which may have been overlooked. This study compares short text classification methods by categorizing bug reports into two classes as real-bug and non-bug based on three major factors namely bug report features, term weighting schemes and machine learning algorithms. Four bug report features (i.e. unigram, unigram + bigram, unigram + CamelCase, and all features), three term weighting schemes (i.e. tf, tf-idf and tf-igm) and three machine learning algorithms (i.e. random forest, support vector machine, and k-means clustering) are compared using bug reports relating to the Mozilla Firefox open source. Finally, unigram + CamelCase features along with tf-igm and support vector machine provide the most optimal bug report classification performance.
Bug报告类型识别的短文本分类方法比较研究
本文档是LATEX的模型和说明。之前的相关研究通常使用bug报告的“摘要”,因为这部分包含较少的噪音。然而,bug报告摘要通常很短,导致可能被忽视的短文本分类问题。本研究基于bug报告特征、术语加权方案和机器学习算法三个主要因素,将bug报告分为真实bug和非bug两类,对比短文本分类方法。使用Mozilla Firefox开源的bug报告,比较了四个bug报告特性(即unigram、unigram + bigram、unigram + CamelCase以及所有的特性)、三个术语加权方案(即tf、tf-idf和tf-igm)和三个机器学习算法(即随机森林、支持向量机和k-means聚类)。最后,unigram + CamelCase特性以及tf-igm和支持向量机提供了最优的bug报告分类性能。
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