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

Suzzana Rafi

dblp:272/9090 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2025
—ORCID · none

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

Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 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.

Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
1 paper
Software testing · 100%

Topics — the 3 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Software testing
flaky test
0.912025
Ranking Relevant Tests for Order-Dependent Flaky Tests · ICSE 2025
Software testing › flaky test
order-dependent flaky test
0.912025
Ranking Relevant Tests for Order-Dependent Flaky Tests · ICSE 2025
Software testing
regression testing
0.912025
Ranking Relevant Tests for Order-Dependent Flaky Tests · ICSE 2025

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

test-order execution analysis · 0.9large language model · 0.9
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2025 Ranking Relevant Tests for Order-Dependent Flaky Tests
abstract
One major challenge of regression testing are flaky tests, i.e., tests that may pass in one run but fail in another run for the same version of code. One prominent category of flaky tests is order-dependent (OD) flaky tests, which can pass or fail depending on the order in which the tests are run. To help developers debug and fix OD tests, prior work attempts to automatically find OD-relevant tests, which are tests that determine whether an OD test passes or fails, depending on whether the OD-relevant tests run before or after the OD test. Prior work found OD-relevant tests by running different tests before the OD test, without considering each test's likelihood of being OD-relevant tests. We propose RankF to rank tests in order of likelihood of being OD-relevant tests, finding the first OD-relevant test for a given OD test more quickly. We propose two ranking approaches, each requiring different information. Our first approach,$\boldsymbol{RankF}_L$, relies on training a large-language model to analyze test code. Our second approach,$\boldsymbol{RankF}_O$, relies on analyzing prior test-order execution information. We evaluate our approaches on 155 OD tests across 24 open-source projects. We compare RankF against baselines from prior work, where we find that RankF finds the first OD-relevant test for an OD test faster than the best baseline; depending on the type of OD-relevant test, RankF takes 9.4 to 14.1 seconds on median, compared to the baseline's 34.2 to 118.5 seconds on median.
Shanto Rahman, Bala Naren Chanumolu, Suzzana Rafi, August Shi, Wing Lam
ICSE3