Jone Bartel

Andreas Metzger, Jone Bartel, Jan Laufer

Deep Reinforcement Learning (Deep RL) is increasingly used to cope with the open-world assumption in service-oriented systems. Deep RL was successfully applied to problems such as dynamic service composition, job scheduling, and offloading, as well as service adaptation. While Deep RL offers many benefits, understanding the decision-making of Deep RL is challenging because its learned decision-making policy essentially appears as a black box. Yet, understanding the decision-making of Deep RL is key to help service developers perform debugging, support service providers to comply with relevant legal frameworks, and facilitate service users to build trust. We introduce Chat4XAI to facilitate the understanding of the decision-making of Deep RL by providing natural-language explanations. Compared with visual explanations, the reported benefits of natural-language explanations include better understandability for non-technical users, increased user acceptance and trust, as well as more efficient explanations. Chat4XAI leverages modern AI chatbot technology and dedicated prompt engineering. Compared to earlier work on natural-language explanations using classical software-based dialogue systems, using an AI chatbot eliminates the need for eliciting and defining potential questions and answers up-front. We prototypically realize Chat4XAI using OpenAI's ChatGPT API and evaluate the fidelity and stability of its explanations using an adaptive service exemplar.

Alexander Korn, Jone Bartel, Max Unterbusch et al.

Empirical research in Requirements Engineering is hampered by a lack of adequate datasets that pair source code with corresponding requirements. A tempting route to addressing this lack is the use of Large Language Models to synthesize requirements from existing code bases. We investigate this question by evaluating an LLM-based and RAG-supported agentic approach that generates requirements from source code, verifies their implementation status relying on a human-in-the-loop, and synthetically introduces requirements smells and non-implemented requirements. Our goal was to create datasets that mimic reality and foster empirical RE research. However, during the study, various problems arose, leading to this experience report. Contrary to our initial hypotheses, LLMs were unable to (i) generate non-implemented requirements reliably, (ii) generate high quality requirements, and (iii) reliably introduce synthetic requirements smells. Furthermore, neither an LLM nor a single human-in-the-loop suffices to detect requirements smells reliably. These findings suggest that the generation of code-to-requirements datasets using LLMs is not yet viable and requires human supervision, especially for quality assurance. We critically reflect on our lessons learned and draw relevant conclusions for both researchers and practitioners.

Xhulja Shahini, Jone Bartel, Klaus Pohl

Just in time defect prediction (JIT DP) leverages ML to identify defect-prone code commits, enabling quality assurance (QA) teams to allocate resources more efficiently by focusing on commits that are most likely to contain defects. Although JIT DP techniques have introduced improvements in terms of predictive accuracy, they are still susceptible to misclassification errors such as false positives and negatives. This can lead to wasted resources or undetected defects, a particularly critical concern when QA resources are limited. To mitigate these challenges and preserve the practical utility of JIT DP tools, it becomes essential to estimate the reliability of the predictions, i.e., computing confidence scores. Such scores can help practitioners determine the trustworthiness of predictions and thus prioritize them efficiently. A simple approach to computing confidence scores is to extract, alongside each prediction, the corresponding prediction probabilities and use them as indicators of confidence. However, for these probabilities to reliably serve as confidence scores, the predictive model must be well-calibrated. This means that the prediction probabilities must accurately represent the true likelihood of each prediction being correct. Miscalibration, common in modern ML models, distorts probability scores such that they do not align with the actual correctness probability. In this study, we evaluate the calibration of three JIT DP techniques to determine whether and to what extent they exhibit poor calibration. Furthermore, we assess whether post-calibration methods can improve the calibration of existing JIT defect prediction models. Our results reveal that all evaluated JIT DP models exhibit some level of miscalibration, with ECE ranging from 2-35%. Furthermore, post-calibration methods do not consistently improve the calibration.