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

Lorenzo Villarroel

dblp:131/4228 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
1as first author
0since 2021 · last 2016
—ORCID · none

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

Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 1 · 1 first-author

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%
Databases, data mining, and information retrieval
1 paper
Data mining · 100%

Topics — the 4 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Empirical software engineering › mining software repositories › app store mining
app review analysis
0.212016
Release planning of mobile apps based on user reviews · ICSE 2016
Empirical software engineering
mining software repositories
0.212016
Release planning of mobile apps based on user reviews · ICSE 2016
Software maintenance and evolution
release planning
0.212016
Release planning of mobile apps based on user reviews · ICSE 2016
Data mining
text mining
0.112016
Release planning of mobile apps based on user reviews · ICSE 2016

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

text categorization · 0.5prioritization · 0.5clustering · 0.5
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2016 Release planning of mobile apps based on user reviews
abstract
Developers have to to constantly improve their apps by fixing critical bugs and implementing the most desired features in order to gain shares in the continuously increasing and competitive market of mobile apps. A precious source of information to plan such activities is represented by reviews left by users on the app store. However, in order to exploit such information developers need to manually analyze such reviews. This is something not doable if, as frequently happens, the app receives hundreds of reviews per day. In this paper we introduce CLAP (Crowd Listener for releAse Planning), a thorough solution to (i) categorize user reviews based on the information they carry out (e.g., bug reporting), (ii) cluster together related reviews (e.g., all reviews reporting the same bug), and (iii) automatically prioritize the clusters of reviews to be implemented when planning the subsequent app release. We evaluated all the steps behind CLAP, showing its high accuracy in categorizing and clustering reviews and the meaningfulness of the recommended prioritizations. Also, given the availability of CLAP as a working tool, we assessed its practical applicability in industrial environments.
Lorenzo Villarroel, Gabriele Bavota, Barbara Russo, Rocco Oliveto, Massimiliano Di Penta
ICSE1