Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Johannes Lampel
dblp:202/8414
· DBLP profile ↗
2ranked-venue papers
1as first author
1since 2021 · last 2021
0000-0001-7370-9342ORCID · corroborated
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 2 · 1 first-author · 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.
| Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
2 papers |
Software testing · 100% | |
| Computer architecture, parallel and distributed computing, and storage systems
2 papers |
Cloud and datacenter computing · 100% |
Topics — the 2 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Software testing › flaky test
flaky test detection |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | When life gives you oranges: detecting and diagnosing intermittent job failures at Mozilla · ESEC/SIGSOFT FSE 2021 |
Software testing
unit testing |
0.3 | 1 | 2017 | CUT: automatic unit testing in the cloud · ISSTA 2017 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
telemetry analysis · 1.0machine learning classification · 1.0test parallelization · 0.6cloud configuration · 0.6
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 | When life gives you oranges: detecting and diagnosing intermittent job failures at MozillaabstractContinuous delivery of cloud systems requires constant running of jobs (build processes, tests, etc.). One issue that plagues this continuous integration (CI) process are intermittent failures - non-deterministic, false alarms that do not result from a bug in the software or job specification, but rather from issues in the underlying infrastructure. At Mozilla, such intermittent failures are called oranges as a reference to the color of the build status indicator. As such intermittent failures disrupt CI and lead to failures, they erode the developers' trust in the jobs. We present a novel approach that automatically classifies failing jobs to determine whether job execution failures arise from an actual software bug or were caused by flakiness in the job (e.g., test) or the underlying infrastructure. For this purpose, we train classification models using job telemetry data to diagnose failure patterns involving features such as runtime, cpu load, operating system version, or specific platform with high precision. In an evaluation on a set of Mozilla CI jobs, our approach achieves precision scores of 73%, on average, across all data sets with some test suites achieving precision scores good enough for fully automated classification (i.e., precision scores of up to 100%), and recall scores of 82% on average (up to 94%). Johannes Lampel, Sascha Just, Sven Apel, Andreas Zeller |
ESEC/SIGSOFT FSE | 1 |
| 2017 | CUT: automatic unit testing in the cloudabstractUnit tests can be significantly sped up by running them in parallel over distributed execution environments, such as the cloud. However, manually setting up such environments and configuring the testing frameworks to effectively use them is cumbersome and requires specialized expertise that developers might lack. Alessio Gambi, Sebastian Kappler, Johannes Lampel, Andreas Zeller |
ISSTA | 3 |