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

Chaoxuan Shi

dblp:351/8070 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
2ranked-venue papers
1as first author
2since 2021 · last 2024
0009-0001-9037-6698ORCID · corroborated

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

Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 2 · 1 first-author · 2 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
Program synthesis and code generation · 50% Empirical software engineering · 50%

Topics — the 2 heaviest of 2, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Empirical software engineering
benchmarking
0.812024
Deep Is Better? An Empirical Comparison of Information Retrieval and Deep Learning Approaches to Code Summarization · ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. 2024
Program synthesis and code generation
code summarization
0.812024
Deep Is Better? An Empirical Comparison of Information Retrieval and Deep Learning Approaches to Code Summarization · ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. 2024

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

information retrieval · 0.8hybrid approaches · 0.8deep learning · 0.8
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2024 Deep Is Better? An Empirical Comparison of Information Retrieval and Deep Learning Approaches to Code Summarization
abstract
Code summarization aims to generate short functional descriptions for source code to facilitate code comprehension. While Information Retrieval (IR) approaches that leverage similar code snippets and corresponding summaries have led the early research, Deep Learning (DL) approaches that use neural models to capture statistical properties between code and summaries are now mainstream. Although some preliminary studies suggest that IR approaches are more effective in some cases, it is currently unclear how effective the existing approaches can be in general, where and why IR/DL approaches perform better, and whether the integration of IR and DL can achieve better performance. Consequently, there is an urgent need for a comprehensive study of the IR and DL code summarization approaches to provide guidance for future development in this area. This article presents the first large-scale empirical study of 18 IR, DL, and hybrid code summarization approaches on five benchmark datasets. We extensively compare different types of approaches using automatic metrics, we conduct quantitative and qualitative analyses of where and why IR and DL approaches perform better, respectively, and we also study hybrid approaches for assessing the effectiveness of integrating IR and DL. The study shows that the performance of IR approaches should not be underestimated, that while DL models perform better in predicting tokens from method signatures and capturing structural similarities in code, simple IR approaches tend to perform better in the presence of code with high similarity or long reference summaries, and that existing hybrid approaches do not perform as well as individual approaches in their respective areas of strength. Based on our findings, we discuss future research directions for better code summarization.
Tingwei Zhu, Minxue Pan, Chaoxuan Shi, Tian Zhang 0001, Yu Pei 0001, Xuandong Li
ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol.4
2023 Structural-semantics Guided Program Simplification for Understanding Neural Code Intelligence Models
abstract
Neural code intelligence models are cutting-edge automated code understanding technologies that have achieved remarkable performance in various software engineering tasks. However, the lack of deep learning models’ interpretability hinders the application of deep learning based code intelligence models in real-world scenarios, particularly in security-critical domains. Previous studies use program simplification to understand neural code intelligence models, but they have overlooked the fact that the most significant difference between source code and natural language is the code’s structural semantics.
Chaoxuan Shi, Tingwei Zhu, Tian Zhang 0001, Jun Pang 0001, Minxue Pan
Internetware1