Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Simone Masiero
dblp:311/5409
· DBLP profile ↗
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 |
Software maintenance and evolution · 67% Compilers and program optimization · 33% |
Topics — the 3 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Software maintenance and evolution › code review
automated code review |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Using Pre-Trained Models to Boost Code Review Automation · ICSE 2022 |
Software maintenance and evolution
code review |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Using Pre-Trained Models to Boost Code Review Automation · ICSE 2022 |
Compilers and program optimization
program transformation |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Using Pre-Trained Models to Boost Code Review Automation · ICSE 2022 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
t5 · 0.6pre-trained transformer · 0.6deep learning · 0.6
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | Using Pre-Trained Models to Boost Code Review AutomationabstractCode review is a practice widely adopted in open source and industrial projects. Given the non-negligible cost of such a process, researchers started investigating the possibility of automating specific code review tasks. We recently proposed Deep Learning (DL) models targeting the automation of two tasks: the first model takes as input a code submitted for review and implements in it changes likely to be recommended by a reviewer; the second takes as input the submitted code and a reviewer comment posted in natural language and automatically implements the change required by the reviewer. While the preliminary results we achieved are encouraging, both models had been tested in rather simple code review scenarios, substantially simplifying the targeted problem. This was also due to the choices we made when designing both the technique and the experiments. In this paper, we build on top of that work by demonstrating that a pre-trained Text-To-Text Transfer Transformer (T5) model can outperform previous DL models for automating code review tasks. Also, we conducted our experiments on a larger and more realistic (and challenging) dataset of code review activities. Rosalia Tufano, Simone Masiero, Antonio Mastropaolo, Luca Pascarella, Denys Poshyvanyk, Gabriele Bavota |
ICSE | 2 |