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

Simone Masiero

dblp:311/5409 · 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
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

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Software maintenance and evolution › code review
automated code review
0.612022
Using Pre-Trained Models to Boost Code Review Automation · ICSE 2022
Software maintenance and evolution
code review
0.612022
Using Pre-Trained Models to Boost Code Review Automation · ICSE 2022
Compilers and program optimization
program transformation
0.612022
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
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2022 Using Pre-Trained Models to Boost Code Review Automation
abstract
Code 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
ICSE2