George Mathew

George Mathew, Kathryn T. Stolee

As code search permeates most activities in software development,code-to-code search has emerged to support using code as a query and retrieving similar code in the search results. Applications include duplicate code detection for refactoring, patch identification for program repair, and language translation. Existing code-to-code search tools rely on static similarity approaches such as the comparison of tokens and abstract syntax trees (AST) to approximate dynamic behavior, leading to low precision. Most tools do not support cross-language code-to-code search, and those that do, rely on machine learning models that require labeled training data. We present Code-to-Code Search Across Languages (COSAL), a cross-language technique that uses both static and dynamic analyses to identify similar code and does not require a machine learning model. Code snippets are ranked using non-dominated sorting based on code token similarity, structural similarity, and behavioral similarity. We empirically evaluate COSAL on two datasets of 43,146Java and Python files and 55,499 Java files and find that 1) code search based on non-dominated ranking of static and dynamic similarity measures is more effective compared to single or weighted measures; and 2) COSAL has better precision and recall compared to state-of-the-art within-language and cross-language code-to-code search tools. We explore the potential for using COSAL on large open-source repositories and discuss scalability to more languages and similarity metrics, providing a gateway for practical,multi-language code-to-code search.

Tianpei Xia, Rahul Krishna, Jianfeng Chen et al.

Software analytics has been widely used in software engineering for many tasks such as generating effort estimates for software projects. One of the "black arts" of software analytics is tuning the parameters controlling a data mining algorithm. Such hyperparameter optimization has been widely studied in other software analytics domains (e.g. defect prediction and text mining) but, so far, has not been extensively explored for effort estimation. Accordingly, this paper seeks simple, automatic, effective and fast methods for finding good tunings for automatic software effort estimation. We introduce a hyperparameter optimization architecture called OIL (Optimized Inductive Learning). We test OIL on a wide range of hyperparameter optimizers using data from 945 software projects. After tuning, large improvements in effort estimation accuracy were observed (measured in terms of standardized accuracy). From those results, we recommend using regression trees (CART) tuned by different evolution combine with default analogy-based estimator. This particular combination of learner and optimizers often achieves in a few hours what other optimizers need days to weeks of CPU time to accomplish. An important part of this analysis is its reproducibility and refutability. All our scripts and data are on-line. It is hoped that this paper will prompt and enable much more research on better methods to tune software effort estimators.

Tianpei Xia, Jianfeng Chen, George Mathew et al.

Industrial practitioners now face a bewildering array of possible configurations for effort estimation. How to select the best one for a particular dataset? This paper introduces OIL (short for optimized learning), a novel configuration tool for effort estimation based on differential evolution. When tested on 945 software projects, OIL significantly improved effort estimations, after exploring just a few configurations (just a few dozen). Further OIL's results are far better than two methods in widespread use: estimation-via-analogy and a recent state-of-the-art baseline published at TOSEM'15 by Whigham et al. Given that the computational cost of this approach is so low, and the observed improvements are so large, we conclude that SBSE should be a standard component of software effort estimation.

George Mathew, Tim Menzies, Neil A. Ernst et al.

When Requirements Engineering(RE) models are unreasonably complex, they cannot support efficient decision making. SHORT is a tool to simplify that reasoning by exploiting the "key" decisions within RE models. These "keys" have the property that once values are assigned to them, it is very fast to reason over the remaining decisions. Using these "keys", reasoning about RE models can be greatly SHORTened by focusing stakeholder discussion on just these key decisions. This paper evaluates the SHORT tool on eight complex RE models. We find that the number of keys are typically only 12% of all decisions. Since they are so few in number, keys can be used to reason faster about models. For example, using keys, we can optimize over those models (to achieve the most goals at least cost) two to three orders of magnitude faster than standard methods. Better yet, finding those keys is not difficult: SHORT runs in low order polynomial time and terminates in a few minutes for the largest models.

Tim Menzies, Ye Yang, George Mathew et al.

Context:More than half the literature on software effort estimation (SEE) focuses on comparisons of new estimation methods. Surprisingly, there are no studies comparing state of the art latest methods with decades-old approaches. Objective:To check if new SEE methods generated better estimates than older methods. Method: Firstly, collect effort estimation methods ranging from "classical" COCOMO (parametric estimation over a pre-determined set of attributes) to "modern" (reasoning via analogy using spectral-based clustering plus instance and feature selection, and a recent "baseline method" proposed in ACM Transactions on Software Engineering).Secondly, catalog the list of objections that lead to the development of post-COCOMO estimation methods.Thirdly, characterize each of those objections as a comparison between newer and older estimation methods.Fourthly, using four COCOMO-style data sets (from 1991, 2000, 2005, 2010) and run those comparisons experiments.Fifthly, compare the performance of the different estimators using a Scott-Knott procedure using (i) the A12 effect size to rule out "small" differences and (ii) a 99% confident bootstrap procedure to check for statistically different groupings of treatments). Results: The major negative results of this paper are that for the COCOMO data sets, nothing we studied did any better than Boehm's original procedure. Conclusions: When COCOMO-style attributes are available, we strongly recommend (i) using that data and (ii) use COCOMO to generate predictions. We say this since the experiments of this paper show that, at least for effort estimation,how data is collected is more important than what learner is applied to that data.

George Mathew, Amritanshu Agrawal, Tim Menzies

This paper explores the structure of research papers in software engineering. Using text mining, we study 35,391 software engineering (SE) papers from 34 leading SE venues over the last 25 years. These venues were divided, nearly evenly, between conferences and journals. An important aspect of this analysis is that it is fully automated and repeatable. To achieve that automation, we used a stable topic modeling technique called LDADE that fully automates parameter tuning in LDA. Using LDADE, we mine 11 topics that represent much of the structure of contemporary SE. The 11 topics presented here should not be "set in stone" as the only topics worthy of study in SE. Rather our goal is to report that (a) text mining methods can detect large scale trends within our community; (b) those topic change with time; so (c) it is important to have automatic agents that can update our understanding of our community whenever new data arrives.