CodeDoctor: multi-category code review comment generation

IF 2 2区 计算机科学 Q3 COMPUTER SCIENCE, SOFTWARE ENGINEERING
Yingling Li, Yuhan Wu, Zi’ao Wang, Lei Huang, Junjie Wang, Jianping Li, Minying Huang
{"title":"CodeDoctor: multi-category code review comment generation","authors":"Yingling Li,&nbsp;Yuhan Wu,&nbsp;Zi’ao Wang,&nbsp;Lei Huang,&nbsp;Junjie Wang,&nbsp;Jianping Li,&nbsp;Minying Huang","doi":"10.1007/s10515-025-00491-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Code review is an effective software quality assurance activity. However, this process is labor-intensive and time-consuming, requiring reviewers to carefully review under various categories (e.g., function, refactoring, documentation, etc) to generate review comments. Several approaches have been proposed for automatic review comment generation, although they can generate review comments, they hardly cover all manual review comments. Because most of these approaches simply utilize the information of submitted code and review comments, not fully modeling the features of code review (i.e., ignoring review category, the association of issue snippets and review comments). In this paper, we propose CodeDoctor, an automatic review comment generator with data augmentation and category-aware encoder-decoder to generate multi-category review comments. It consists of three main phases: (1) Data augmentation phase, which classifies review comments and builds review exemplars (i.e., the pairs of issue snippet and its comment) to augment review data by using a large language model (LLM) with prompt engineering and feedback loops; (2) Encoder phase, which encodes the inputs (i.e., review category, diff code and review exemplar) into semantic and token representations; (3) Decoder phase, which designs a category-focused decoder to capture the most relevant information of given category for multi-category review comment generation. Evaluations with five commonly-used and state-of-the-art baselines on two datasets show that CodeDoctor outperforms all baselines, with 1770% higher average BLEU-4, 111% higher average ROUGE-L and 49% higher average F1 than the best baseline. Furthermore, a human evaluation also confirms the significant potential of applying CodeDoctor in practical usage. Our approach can relieve the burden of reviewers by automatically generating multi-category review comments, and helps developers better detect code issues as early as possible, thereby facilitating software development.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":55414,"journal":{"name":"Automated Software Engineering","volume":"32 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Automated Software Engineering","FirstCategoryId":"94","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10515-025-00491-y","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"计算机科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, SOFTWARE ENGINEERING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Code review is an effective software quality assurance activity. However, this process is labor-intensive and time-consuming, requiring reviewers to carefully review under various categories (e.g., function, refactoring, documentation, etc) to generate review comments. Several approaches have been proposed for automatic review comment generation, although they can generate review comments, they hardly cover all manual review comments. Because most of these approaches simply utilize the information of submitted code and review comments, not fully modeling the features of code review (i.e., ignoring review category, the association of issue snippets and review comments). In this paper, we propose CodeDoctor, an automatic review comment generator with data augmentation and category-aware encoder-decoder to generate multi-category review comments. It consists of three main phases: (1) Data augmentation phase, which classifies review comments and builds review exemplars (i.e., the pairs of issue snippet and its comment) to augment review data by using a large language model (LLM) with prompt engineering and feedback loops; (2) Encoder phase, which encodes the inputs (i.e., review category, diff code and review exemplar) into semantic and token representations; (3) Decoder phase, which designs a category-focused decoder to capture the most relevant information of given category for multi-category review comment generation. Evaluations with five commonly-used and state-of-the-art baselines on two datasets show that CodeDoctor outperforms all baselines, with 1770% higher average BLEU-4, 111% higher average ROUGE-L and 49% higher average F1 than the best baseline. Furthermore, a human evaluation also confirms the significant potential of applying CodeDoctor in practical usage. Our approach can relieve the burden of reviewers by automatically generating multi-category review comments, and helps developers better detect code issues as early as possible, thereby facilitating software development.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Automated Software Engineering
Automated Software Engineering 工程技术-计算机:软件工程
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
11.80%
发文量
51
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: This journal details research, tutorial papers, survey and accounts of significant industrial experience in the foundations, techniques, tools and applications of automated software engineering technology. This includes the study of techniques for constructing, understanding, adapting, and modeling software artifacts and processes. Coverage in Automated Software Engineering examines both automatic systems and collaborative systems as well as computational models of human software engineering activities. In addition, it presents knowledge representations and artificial intelligence techniques applicable to automated software engineering, and formal techniques that support or provide theoretical foundations. The journal also includes reviews of books, software, conferences and workshops.
×
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