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

Mathias Ellmann

dblp:166/9738 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
2ranked-venue papers
1as first author
0since 2021 · last 2017
—ORCID · none

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

Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 2 · 1 first-author

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.

Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
1 paper
Software maintenance and evolution · 100%
Databases, data mining, and information retrieval
1 paper
Information retrieval · 100%

Topics — the 2 heaviest of 2, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Software maintenance and evolution
software documentation
0.312017
On the similarity of software development documentation · ESEC/SIGSOFT FSE 2017
Information retrieval › similarity measure
document similarity
0.112017
On the similarity of software development documentation · ESEC/SIGSOFT FSE 2017
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2017 On the similarity of software development documentation
abstract
Software developers spent 20% of their time on information seeking on Stack Overflow, YouTube or an API reference documentation. Software developers can search within Stack Overflow for duplicates or similar posts. They can also take a look on software development documentations that have similar and additional information included as a Stack Overflow post or a development screencast in order to get new inspirations on how to solve their current development problem. The linkage of same and different types of software development documentation might safe time to evolve new software solutions and might increase the productivity of the developer’s work day. In this paper we will discuss our approach to get a broader understanding of different similarity types (exact, similar and maybe) within and between software documentation as well as an understanding of how different software documentations can be extended.
Mathias Ellmann
ESEC/SIGSOFT FSE1
2017 Using contexts similarity to predict relationships between tasks
abstract
Developers’ tasks are often interrelated. A task might succeed, precede, block, or depend on another task. Or, two tasks might simply have a similar aim or require similar expertise. When working on tasks, developers interact with artifacts and tools, which constitute the contexts of the tasks. This work investigates the extent to which the similarity of the contexts predicts whether and how the respective tasks are related. The underlying assumption is simple: if during two tasks the same artifacts are touched or similar interactions are observed, the tasks might be interrelated. We define a task context as the set of all developer’s interactions with the artifacts during the task. We then apply Jaccard index, a popular similarity measure to compare two contexts. Instead of only counting the artifacts in the intersection and union of the contexts as Jaccard does, we scale the artifacts with their relevance to the task. For this, we suggest a simple heuristic based on the Frequency, Duration, and Age of the interactions with the artifacts (FDA). Alternatively, artifact relevance can be estimated by the Degree-of-Interest (DOI) used in task-focused programming. To compare the accuracy of the context similarity models for predicting task relationships, we conducted a field study with professionals, analyzed data from the open source task repository Bugzilla, and ran an experiment with students. We studied two types of relationships useful for work coordination (dependsOn and blocks) and two types useful for personal work management (isNextTo and isSimilarTo). We found that context similarity models clearly outperform a random prediction for all studied task relationships. We also found evidence that, the more interrelated the tasks are, the more accurate the context similarity predictions are. Our results show that context similarity is roughly as accurate to predict task relationships as comparing the textual content of the task descriptions. Context and content similarity models might thus be complementary in practice, depending on the availability of text descriptions or context data. We discuss several use cases for this research, e.g. to assist developers choose the next task or to recommend other tasks they should be aware of.
Walid Maalej, Mathias Ellmann, Romain Robbes
J. Syst. Softw.2