Explore the vast range of titles available.

Empirical validation of software metrics suites to predict fault proneness in object-oriented (OO) components is essential to ensure their practical use in industrial settings. In this paper, we empirically validate three OO metrics suites for their ability to predict software quality in terms of fault-proneness: the Chidamber and Kemerer (CK) metrics, Abreu's Metrics for Object-Oriented Design (MOOD), and Bansiya and Davis' Quality Metrics for Object-Oriented Design (QMOOD). Some CK class metrics have previously been shown to be good predictors of initial OO software quality. However, the other two suites have not been heavily validated except by their original proposers. Here, we explore the ability of these three metrics suites to predict fault-prone classes using defect data for six versions of Rhino, an open-source implementation of JavaScript written in Java. We conclude that the CK and QMOOD suites contain similar components and produce statistical models that are effective in detecting error-prone classes. We also conclude that the class components in the MOOD metrics suite are not good class fault-proneness predictors. Analyzing multivariate binary logistic regression models across six Rhino versions indicates these models may be useful in assessing quality in OO classes produced using modern highly iterative or agile software development processes.

This paper describes GenProg, an automated method for repairing defects in off-the-shelf, legacy programs without formal specifications, program annotations, or special coding practices. GenProg uses an extended form of genetic programming to evolve a program variant that retains required functionality but is not susceptible to a given defect, using existing test suites to encode both the defect and required functionality. Structural differencing algorithms and delta debugging reduce the difference between this variant and the original program to a minimal repair. We describe the algorithm and report experimental results of its success on 16 programs totaling 1.25 M lines of C code and 120K lines of module code, spanning eight classes of defects, in 357 seconds, on average. We analyze the generated repairs qualitatively and quantitatively to demonstrate that the process efficiently produces evolved programs that repair the defect, are not fragile input memorizations, and do not lead to serious degradation in functionality.

The rapid growth of applying Machine Learning (ML) in different domains, especially in safety-critical areas, increases the need for reliable ML components, i.e., a software component operating based on ML. Since corrective maintenance, i.e. identifying and resolving systems bugs, is a key task in the software development process to deliver reliable software components, it is necessary to investigate the usage of ML components, from the software maintenance perspective. Understanding the bugs’ characteristics and maintenance challenges in ML-based systems can help developers of these systems to identify where to focus maintenance and testing efforts, by giving insights into the most error-prone components, most common bugs, etc. In this paper, we investigate the characteristics of bugs in ML-based software systems and the difference between ML and non-ML bugs from the maintenance viewpoint. We extracted 447,948 GitHub repositories that used one of the three most popular ML frameworks, i.e., TensorFlow, Keras, and PyTorch. After multiple filtering steps, we select the top 300 repositories with the highest number of closed issues. We manually investigate the extracted repositories to exclude non-ML-based systems. Our investigation involved a manual inspection of 386 sampled reported issues in the identified ML-based systems to indicate whether they affect ML components or not. Our analysis shows that nearly half of the real issues reported in ML-based systems are ML bugs, indicating that ML components are more error-prone than non-ML components. Next, we thoroughly examined 109 identified ML bugs to identify their root causes, and symptoms, and calculate their required fixing time. The results also revealed that ML bugs have significantly different characteristics compared to non-ML bugs, in terms of the complexity of bug-fixing (number of commits, changed files, and changed lines of code). Based on our results, fixing ML bugs is more costly and ML components are more error-prone, compared to non-ML bugs and non-ML components respectively. Hence, paying significant attention to the reliability of the ML components is crucial in ML-based systems. These results deepen the understanding of ML bugs and we hope that our findings help shed light on opportunities for designing effective tools for testing and debugging ML-based systems.

Software repositories such as GitHub host a large number of software entities. Developers collaboratively discuss, implement, use, and share these entities. Proper documentation plays an important role in successful software management and maintenance. Users exploit Issue Tracking Systems, a facility of software repositories, to keep track of issue reports, to manage the workload and processes, and finally, to document the highlight of their team’s effort. An issue report is a rich source of collaboratively-curated software knowledge, and can contain a reported problem, a request for new features, or merely a question about the software product. As the number of these issues increases, it becomes harder to manage them manually. GitHub provides labels for tagging issues, as a means of issue management. However, about half of the issues in GitHub’s top 1000 repositories do not have any labels. In this work, we aim at automating the process of managing issue reports for software teams. We propose a two-stage approach to predict both the objective behind opening an issue and its priority level using feature engineering methods and state-of-the-art text classifiers. To the best of our knowledge, we are the first to fine-tune a Transformer for issue classification. We train and evaluate our models in both project-based and cross-project settings. The latter approach provides a generic prediction model applicable for any unseen software project or projects with little historical data. Our proposed approach can successfully predict the objective and priority level of issue reports with 82% (fine-tuned RoBERTa) and 75% (Random Forest) accuracy, respectively. Moreover, we conducted human labeling and evaluation on unlabeled issues from six unseen GitHub projects to assess the performance of the cross-project model on new data. The model achieves 90% accuracy on the sample set. We measure inter-rater reliability and obtain an average Percent Agreement of 85.3% and Randolph’s free-marginal Kappa of 0.71 that translate to a substantial agreement among labelers.

We provide an extensive overview of existing research in the field of software refactoring. This research is compared and discussed based on a number of different criteria: the refactoring activities that are supported, the specific techniques and formalisms that are used for supporting these activities, the types of software artifacts that are being refactored, the important issues that need to be taken into account when building refactoring tool support, and the effect of refactoring on the software process. A running example is used to explain and illustrate the main concepts.

Despite the accuracy of machine learning (ML) techniques in predicting invalid bug reports, as shown in earlier research, and the importance of early identification of invalid bug reports in software maintenance, the adoption of ML techniques for this task in industrial practice is yet to be investigated. In this study, we used a technology transfer model to guide the adoption of an ML technique at a company for the early identification of invalid bug reports. In the process, we also identify necessary conditions for adopting such techniques in practice. We followed a case study research approach with various design and analysis iterations for technology transfer activities. We collected data from bug repositories, through focus groups, a questionnaire, and a presentation and feedback session with an expert. As expected, we found that an ML technique can identify invalid bug reports with acceptable accuracy at an early stage. However, the technique’s accuracy drops over time in its operational use due to changes in the product, the used technologies, or the development organization. Such changes may require retraining the ML model. During validation, practitioners highlighted the need to understand the ML technique’s predictions to trust the predictions. We found that a visual (using a state-of-the-art ML interpretation framework) and descriptive explanation of the prediction increases the trustability of the technique compared to just presenting the results of the validity predictions. We conclude that trustability, integration with the existing toolchain, and maintaining the techniques’ accuracy over time are critical for increasing the likelihood of adoption.

An essential part of software maintenance and evolution, refactoring is performed by developers, regardless of technology or domain, to improve the internal quality of the system, and reduce its technical debt. However, choosing the appropriate refactoring strategy is not always straightforward, resulting in developers seeking assistance. Although research in refactoring is well-established, with several studies altering between the detection of refactoring opportunities and the recommendation of appropriate code changes, little is known about their adoption in practice. Analyzing the perception of developers is critical to understand better what developers consider to be problematic in their code and how they handle it. Additionally, there is a need for bridging the gap between refactoring, as research, and its adoption in practice, by extracting common refactoring intents that are more suitable for what developers face in reality. In this study, we analyze refactoring discussions on Stack Overflow through a series of quantitative and qualitative experiments. Our results show that Stack Overflow is utilized by a diverse set of developers for refactoring assistance for a variety of technologies. Our observations show five areas that developers typically require help with refactoring– Code Optimization, Tools and IDEs, Architecture and Design Patterns, Unit Testing, and Database. We envision our findings better bridge the support between traditional (or academic) aspects of refactoring and their real-world applicability, including better tool support.

Software traceability is a required component of many software development processes. Advocates of requirements traceability cite advantages like easier program comprehension and support for software maintenance (i.e., software change). However, despite its growing popularity, there exists no published evaluation about the usefulness of requirements traceability. It is important, if not crucial, to investigate whether the use of requirements traceability can significantly support development tasks to eventually justify its costs. We thus conducted a controlled experiment with 71 subjects re-performing real maintenance tasks on two third-party development projects: half of the tasks with and the other half without traceability. Subjects sketched their task solutions on paper to focus on the their ability to solving the problems rather than their programming skills. Our findings show that subjects with traceability performed on average 24 % faster on a given task and created on average 50 % more correct solutions—suggesting that traceability not only saves effort but can profoundly improve software maintenance quality.

A key issue in software evolution analysis is the identification of particular changes that occur across several versions of a program. We present change distilling, a tree differencing algorithm for fine-grained source code change extraction. For that, we have improved the existing algorithm of Chawathe et al. for extracting changes in hierarchically structured data. Our algorithm detects changes by finding a match between nodes of the compared two abstract syntax trees and a minimum edit script. We can identify change types between program versions according to our taxonomy of source code changes. We evaluated our change distilling algorithm with a benchmark we developed that consists of 1,064 manually classified changes in 219 revisions from three different open source projects. We achieved significant improvements in extracting types of source code changes: our algorithm approximates the minimum edit script by 45% better than the original change extraction approach by Chawathe et al. We are able to find all occurring changes and almost reach the minimum conforming edit script, i.e., we reach a mean absolute percentage error of 34%, compared to 79% reached by the original algorithm. The paper describes both the change distilling and the results of our evaluation.

In this paper, we explore the concept of code readability and investigate its relation to software quality. With data collected from 120 human annotators, we derive associations between a simple set of local code features and human notions of readability. Using those features, we construct an automated readability measure and show that it can be 80 percent effective and better than a human, on average, at predicting readability judgments. Furthermore, we show that this metric correlates strongly with three measures of software quality: code changes, automated defect reports, and defect log messages. We measure these correlations on over 2.2 million lines of code, as well as longitudinally, over many releases of selected projects. Finally, we discuss the implications of this study on programming language design and engineering practice. For example, our data suggest that comments, in and of themselves, are less important than simple blank lines to local judgments of readability.