Zeinab

Abolfazl Asudeh, Zeinab, Asoodeh et al.

Discretizing raw features into bucketized attribute representations is a popular step before sharing a dataset. It is, however, evident that this step can cause significant bias in data and amplify unfairness in downstream tasks. In this paper, we address this issue by introducing the unbiased binning problem that, given an attribute to bucketize, finds its closest discretization to equal-size binning that satisfies group parity across different buckets. Defining a small set of boundary candidates, we prove that unbiased binning must select its boundaries from this set. We then develop an efficient dynamic programming algorithm on top of the boundary candidates to solve the unbiased binning problem. Finding an unbiased binning may sometimes result in a high price of fairness, or it may not even exist, especially when group values follow different distributions. Considering that a small bias in the group ratios may be tolerable in such settings, we introduce the epsilon-biased binning problem that bounds the group disparities across buckets to a small value epsilon. We first develop a dynamic programming solution, DP, that finds the optimal binning in quadratic time. The DP algorithm, while polynomial, does not scale to very large settings. Therefore, we propose a practically scalable algorithm, based on local search (LS), for epsilon-biased binning. The key component of the LS algorithm is a divide-and-conquer (D&C) algorithm that finds a near-optimal solution for the problem in near-linear time. We prove that D&C finds a valid solution for the problem unless none exists. The LS algorithm then initiates a local search, using the D&C solution as the upper bound, to find the optimal solution.

Zeinab, Kermansaravi, Md Saidur Rahman et al.

During software evolution, inexperienced developers may introduce design anti-patterns when they modify their software systems to fix bugs or to add new functionalities based on changes in requirements. Developers may also use design patterns to promote software quality or as a possible cure for some design anti-patterns. Thus, design patterns and design anti-patterns are introduced, removed, and mutated from one another by developers. Many studies investigated the evolution of design patterns and design anti-patterns and their impact on software development. However, they investigated design patterns or design anti-patterns in isolation and did not consider their mutations and the impact of these mutations on software quality. Therefore, we report our study of bidirectional mutations between design patterns and design anti-patterns and the impacts of these mutations on software change- and fault-proneness. We analyzed snapshots of seven Java software systems with diverse sizes, evolution histories, and application domains. We built Markov models to capture the probability of occurrences of the different design patterns and design anti-patterns mutations. Results from our study show that (1) design patterns and design anti-patterns mutate into other design patterns and/or design anti-patterns. They also show that (2) some change types primarily trigger mutations of design patterns and design anti-patterns (renaming and changes to comments, declarations, and operators), and (3) some mutations of design anti-patterns and design patterns are more faulty in specific contexts. These results provide important insights into the evolution of design patterns and design anti-patterns and its impact on the change- and fault-proneness of software systems.