Publication:
Feature Comparison for Automatic Bug Report Classification

dc.contributor.authorBancha Luapholen_US
dc.contributor.authorBoonchoo Srikudkaoen_US
dc.contributor.authorTontrakant Kachaien_US
dc.contributor.authorNatthakit Srikanjanaperten_US
dc.contributor.authorJantima Polpinijen_US
dc.contributor.authorPoramin Bhegananen_US
dc.contributor.otherMahidol Universityen_US
dc.contributor.otherMahasarakham Universityen_US
dc.date.accessioned2020-01-27T03:32:14Z
dc.date.available2020-01-27T03:32:14Z
dc.date.issued2020-01-01en_US
dc.description.abstract© 2020, Springer Nature Switzerland AG. Nowadays, various bug tracking systems (BTS) such as Jira, Trace, and Bugzilla have been developed and proposed to gather the issues from users worldwide. This is because those issues, called bug reports, contain a significant information for software quality maintenance and improvement. However, many bug reports with poor quality might have been submitted to the BTS. In general, the reported bugs in the BTS are firstly analyzed and filtered out by bug triagers. However, with the increasing amount of bug reports in the BTS, manually classifying bug reports is a time-consuming task. To address this problem, automatically distinguishing of bugs and non-bugs is necessary. To the best of our knowledge, this task is never easy for bug reports classification because the problem of bug reports misclassification still occurs to date. The background of this problem may be arise from using inappropriate or confusing features. Therefore, this work aims to study and discover the most proper features for binary bug report classification. This study compares seven features such as unigram, bigram, camel case, unigram+bigram, unigram+camel case, bigram+ camel case, and all features together. The experimental results show that the unigram+camel case should be the most proper features for binary bug report classification, especially when using with the logistic regression algorithm. Consequently, the unigram+camel case should be the proper feature to distinguish bug reports from the non-bugs ones.en_US
dc.identifier.citationAdvances in Intelligent Systems and Computing. Vol.936, (2020), 69-78en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/978-3-030-19861-9_7en_US
dc.identifier.issn21945365en_US
dc.identifier.issn21945357en_US
dc.identifier.other2-s2.0-85065902706en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/20.500.14594/49588
dc.rightsMahidol Universityen_US
dc.rights.holderSCOPUSen_US
dc.source.urihttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85065902706&origin=inwarden_US
dc.subjectComputer Scienceen_US
dc.subjectEngineeringen_US
dc.titleFeature Comparison for Automatic Bug Report Classificationen_US
dc.typeConference Paperen_US
dspace.entity.typePublication
mu.datasource.scopushttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85065902706&origin=inwarden_US

Files

Collections