Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Anunay Amar
dblp:242/3893
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
1as first author
0since 2021 · last 2019
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 1 · 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 |
Empirical software engineering · 39% Debugging and program repair · 30% Software testing · 30% |
Topics — the 4 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Debugging and program repair
fault localization |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Mining historical test logs to predict bugs and localize faults in the test logs · ICSE 2019 |
Empirical software engineering
software defect prediction |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Mining historical test logs to predict bugs and localize faults in the test logs · ICSE 2019 |
Software testing › software testing evaluation › test result analysis
test log analysis |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Mining historical test logs to predict bugs and localize faults in the test logs · ICSE 2019 |
Empirical software engineering
mining software repositories |
0.1 | 1 | 2019 | Mining historical test logs to predict bugs and localize faults in the test logs · ICSE 2019 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
information retrieval · 0.4TF-IDF · 0.4KNN · 0.4
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | Mining historical test logs to predict bugs and localize faults in the test logsabstractSoftware testing is an integral part of modern software development. However, test runs can produce thousands of lines of logged output that make it difficult to find the cause of a fault in the logs. This problem is exacerbated by environmental failures that distract from product faults. In this paper we present techniques with the goal of capturing the maximum number of product faults, while flagging the minimum number of log lines for inspection. We observe that the location of a fault in a log should be contained in the lines of a failing test log. In contrast, a passing test log should not contain the lines related to a failure. Lines that occur in both a passing and failing log introduce noise when attempting to find the fault in a failing log. We introduce an approach where we remove the lines that occur in the passing log from the failing log. After removing these lines, we use information retrieval techniques to flag the most probable lines for investigation. We modify TF-IDF to identify the most relevant log lines related to past product failures. We then vectorize the logs and develop an exclusive version of KNN to identify which logs are likely to lead to product faults and which lines are the most probable indication of the failure. Our best approach, LogFaultFlagger finds 89% of the total faults and flags less than 1% of the total failed log lines for inspection. LogFaultFlagger drastically outperforms the previous work CAM. We implemented LogFaultFlagger as a tool at Ericsson where it presents fault prediction summaries to base station testers. Anunay Amar, Peter C. Rigby |
ICSE | 1 |