Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Andrey Zaytsev

dblp:153/5235 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
2ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2025
—ORCID · unresolved

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 since 2021Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 1Databases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 1 · 1 since 2021

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Databases, data mining, and information retrieval
1 paper
Data integration and cleaning · 50% Data mining · 50%
Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
1 paper
Software testing · 100%

Topics — the 5 heaviest of 5, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Data mining › text mining › information extraction
attribute extraction
0.912025
Cross-Domain Web Information Extraction at Pinterest · KDD (2) 2025
Data integration and cleaning › data extraction
web data extraction
0.912025
Cross-Domain Web Information Extraction at Pinterest · KDD (2) 2025
Software testing
regression testing
0.212014
Balancing trade-offs in test-suite reduction · SIGSOFT FSE 2014
Software testing › regression testing
test suite reduction
0.212014
Balancing trade-offs in test-suite reduction · SIGSOFT FSE 2014
Software testing
mutation testing
0.112014
Balancing trade-offs in test-suite reduction · SIGSOFT FSE 2014

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

large language model · 0.9XGBoost · 0.9empirical evaluation · 0.2
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2025 Cross-Domain Web Information Extraction at Pinterest
abstract
The internet offers a massive repository of unstructured information, but it's a significant challenge to convert this into a structured format. At Pinterest, the ability to accurately extract structured product data from e-commerce websites is essential to enhance user experiences and improve content distribution. In this paper, we present Pinterest's system for attribute extraction, which achieves remarkable accuracy and scalability at a manageable cost. Our approach leverages a novel webpage representation that combines structural, visual, and text modalities into a compact form, optimizing it for small model learning. This representation captures each visible HTML node with its text, style and layout information. We show how this allows simple models such as eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost) to extract attributes more accurately than much more complex Large Language Models (LLMs) such as Generative Pre-trained Transformer (GPT). Our results demonstrate a system that is highly scalable, processing over 1,000 URLs per second, while being 1000 times more cost-effective than the cheapest GPT alternatives.
Michael Farag, Patrick Halina, Andrey Zaytsev, Alekhya Munagala, Imtihan Ahmed
KDD (2)3
2014 Balancing trade-offs in test-suite reduction
abstract
Regression testing is an important activity but can get expensive for large test suites. Test-suite reduction speeds up regression testing by identifying and removing redundant tests based on a given set of requirements. Traditional research on test-suite reduction is rather diverse but most commonly shares three properties: (1) requirements are defined by a coverage criterion such as statement coverage; (2) the reduced test suite has to satisfy all the requirements as the original test suite; and (3) the quality of the reduced test suites is measured on the software version on which the reduction is performed. These properties make it hard for test engineers to decide how to use reduced test suites. We address all three properties of traditional test-suite reduction: (1) we evaluate test-suite reduction with requirements defined by killed mutants; (2) we evaluate inadequate reduction that does not require reduced test suites to satisfy all the requirements; and (3) we propose evolution-aware metrics that evaluate the quality of the reduced test suites across multiple software versions. Our evaluations allow a more thorough exploration of trade-offs in test-suite reduction, and our evolution-aware metrics show how the quality of reduced test suites can change after the version where the reduction is performed. We compare the trade-offs among various reductions on 18 projects with a total of 261,235 tests over 3,590 commits and a cumulative history spanning 35 years of development. Our results help test engineers make a more informed decision about balancing size, coverage, and fault-detection loss of reduced test suites.
August Shi, Alex Gyori, Milos Gligoric 0001, Andrey Zaytsev, Darko Marinov
SIGSOFT FSE4