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

Tobi Akomolede

dblp:297/4885 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2022
—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
Empirical software engineering · 67% Software maintenance and evolution · 33%

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

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Software maintenance and evolution
code review
0.612022
Leveraging test plan quality to improve code review efficacy · ESEC/SIGSOFT FSE 2022
Empirical software engineering › developer studies
developer sentiment analysis
0.612022
Leveraging test plan quality to improve code review efficacy · ESEC/SIGSOFT FSE 2022
Empirical software engineering
mining software repositories
0.612022
Leveraging test plan quality to improve code review efficacy · ESEC/SIGSOFT FSE 2022

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

transformer · 0.6natural language processing · 0.6
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2022 Leveraging test plan quality to improve code review efficacy
abstract
In modern code reviews, many artifacts play roles in knowledge- sharing and documentation: summaries, test plans, and comments, etc. Improving developer tools and facilitating better code reviews require an understanding of the quality of pull requests and their artifacts. This is difficult to measure, however, because they are often free-form natural language and unstructured text data. In this paper, we focus on measuring the quality of test plans at Meta. Test plans are used as a communication mechanism between the author of a pull request and its reviewers, serving as walkthroughs to help confirm that the changed code is behaving as expected. We collected developer opinions on over 650 test plans from more than 500 Meta developers, then introduced a transformer-based model to leverage the success of natural language processing (NLP) tech- niques in the code review domain. In our study, we show that the learned model is able to capture the sentiment of developers and reflect a correlation of test plan quality with review engagement and reversions: compared to a decision tree model, our proposed transformer-based model achieves a 7% higher F1-score. Finally, we present a case study of how such a metric may be useful in experiments to inform improvements in developer tools and experiences.
Lawrence Chen 0002, Rui Abreu 0001, Tobi Akomolede, Peter C. Rigby, Satish Chandra 0001, Nachiappan Nagappan
ESEC/SIGSOFT FSE3