VLDB 2026 Research / reviewers in the wild / expert
Adriano Franci
dblp:281/7119
· DBLP profile ↗
3ranked-venue papers
1as first author
3since 2021 · last 2022
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 3 · 1 first-author · 3 since 2021Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 first-author · 1 since 2021
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | Influence-driven data poisoning in graph-based semi-supervised classifiersabstractGraph-based Semi-Supervised Learning (GSSL) is a practical solution to learn from a limited amount of labelled data together with a vast amount of unlabelled data. However, due to their reliance on the known labels to infer the unknown labels, these algorithms are sensitive to data quality. It is therefore essential to study the potential threats related to the labelled data, more specifically, label poisoning. In this paper, we propose a novel data poisoning method which efficiently approximates the result of label inference to identify the inputs which, if poisoned, would produce the highest number of incorrectly inferred labels. We extensively evaluate our approach on three classification problems under 24 different experimental settings each. Compared to the state of the art, our influence-driven attack produces an average increase of error rate 50% higher, while being faster by multiple orders of magnitude. Moreover, our method can inform engineers of inputs that deserve investigation (relabelling them) before training the learning model. We show that relabelling one-third of the poisoned inputs (selected based on their influence) reduces the poisoning effect by 50%. Adriano Franci, Maxime Cordy, Martin Gubri, Mike Papadakis, Yves Le Traon |
CAIN | 1 |
| 2022 | FlakiMe: Laboratory-Controlled Test Flakiness Impact AssessmentabstractMuch research on software testing makes an implicit assumption that test failures are deterministic such that they always witness the presence of the same defects. However, this assumption is not always true because some test failures are due to so-called flaky tests, i.e., tests with non-deterministic outcomes. To help testing researchers better investigate flakiness, we introduce a test flakiness assessment and experimentation platform, called FlakiMe. FlakiMe supports the seeding of a (controllable) degree of flakiness into the behaviour of a given test suite. Thereby, FlakiMe equips researchers with ways to investigate the impact of test flakiness on their techniques under laboratory-controlled conditions. To demonstrate the application of FlakiMe, we use it to assess the impact of flakiness on mutation testing and program repair (the PRAPR and ARJA methods). These results indicate that a 10% flakiness is sufficient to affect the mutation score, but the effect size is modest (2% - 5% ), while it reduces the number of patches produced for repair by 20% up to 100% of repair problems; a devastating impact on this application of testing. Our experiments with FlakiMe demonstrate that flakiness affects different testing applications in very different ways, thereby motivating the need for a laboratory-controllable flakiness impact assessment platform and approach such as FlakiMe. Maxime Cordy, Renaud Rwemalika, Adriano Franci, Mike Papadakis, Mark Harman |
ICSE | 3 |
| 2022 | What Made This Test Flake? Pinpointing Classes Responsible for Test FlakinessabstractFlaky tests are defined as tests that manifest non-deterministic behaviour by passing and failing intermittently for the same version of the code. These tests cripple continuous integration with false alerts that waste developers’ time and break their trust in regression testing. To mitigate the effects of flakiness, both researchers and industrial experts proposed strategies and tools to detect and isolate flaky tests. However, flaky tests are rarely fixed as developers struggle to localise and understand their causes. Additionally, developers working with large codebases often need to know the sources of non-determinism to preserve code quality, i.e., avoid introducing technical debt linked with non-deterministic behaviour, and to avoid introducing new flaky tests. To aid with these tasks, we propose re-targeting Fault Localisation techniques to the flaky component localisation problem, i.e., pinpointing program classes that cause the non-deterministic behaviour of flaky tests. In particular, we employ Spectrum-Based Fault Localisation (SBFL), a coverage-based fault localisation technique commonly adopted for its simplicity and effectiveness. We also utilise other data sources, such as change history and static code metrics, to further improve the localisation. Our results show that augmenting SBFL with change and code metrics ranks flaky classes in the top-1 and top-5 suggestions, in 26% and 47% of the cases. Overall, we successfully reduced the average number of classes inspected to locate the first flaky class to 19% of the total number of classes covered by flaky tests. Our results also show that localisation methods are effective in major flakiness categories, such as concurrency and asynchronous waits, indicating their general ability to identify flaky components. Sarra Habchi, Guillaume Haben, Jeongju Sohn, Adriano Franci, Mike Papadakis, Maxime Cordy, Yves Le Traon |
ICSME | 4 |