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

Sophie Xie

dblp:311/8813 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
4ranked-venue papers
1as first author
4since 2021 · last 2026
0009-0000-5484-5234ORCID · corroborated

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

Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 4 · 1 first-author · 4 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
4 papers
Software testing · 73% Debugging and program repair · 19% Software maintenance and evolution · 8%
Databases, data mining, and information retrieval
2 papers
Machine learning and data management · 54% Database system architecture and tuning · 46%

Topics — the 7 heaviest of 8, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Software testing
machine learning testing
1.822026
Keeper: Automated Testing and Fixing of Machine Learning Software - RCR Report · ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. 2026
Keeper: Automated Testing and Fixing of Machine Learning Software · ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. 2024
Software testing › test generation
automated test generation
1.322024
Keeper: Automated Testing and Fixing of Machine Learning Software · ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. 2024
Automated Testing of Software that Uses Machine Learning APIs · ICSE 2022
Debugging and program repair
automated program repair
1.222026
Keeper: Automated Testing and Fixing of Machine Learning Software - RCR Report · ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. 2026
Keeper: Automated Testing and Fixing of Machine Learning Software · ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. 2024
Software testing
automated testing
1.012026
Keeper: Automated Testing and Fixing of Machine Learning Software - RCR Report · ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. 2026
Software testing › test oracle
test oracle problem
0.612022
Automated Testing of Software that Uses Machine Learning APIs · ICSE 2022
Software maintenance and evolution
refactoring
0.512021
Automated Code Refactoring upon Database-Schema Changes in Web Applications · ASE 2021
Machine learning and data management › machine learning systems
machine learning APIs
0.212022
Automated Testing of Software that Uses Machine Learning APIs · ICSE 2022

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

static code analysis · 1.0code transformation · 1.0automated testing · 1.0automated fixing · 1.0symbolic execution · 0.8pseudo-inverse functions · 0.8
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2026 Keeper: Automated Testing and Fixing of Machine Learning Software - RCR Report
abstract
This artifact aims to provide source code, benchmark suite, results, and materials used in our study “Keeper: Automated Testing and Fixing of Machine Learning Software” [ 3 ]. We developed an automated testing and fixing tool Keeper and its IDE plugin for ML software. It automatically detects software defects and attempts to change how ML APIs are used to alleviate software misbehavior. This artifact provides guidelines to set up and execute Keeper and also guidelines to interpret our evaluation results. We hope this artifact can motivate and help future research to further tackle ML API misuses. All related data are available online.
Chengcheng Wan 0001, Shicheng Liu, Sophie Xie, Yuhan Liu 0004, Michael Maire, Henry Hoffmann, Shan Lu 0001
ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol.3
2024 Keeper: Automated Testing and Fixing of Machine Learning Software
abstract
The increasing number of software applications incorporating machine learning (ML) solutions has led to the need for testing techniques. However, testing ML software requires tremendous human effort to design realistic and relevant test inputs and to judge software output correctness according to human common sense. Even when misbehavior is exposed, it is often unclear whether the defect is inside ML API or the surrounding code and how to fix the implementation. This article tackles these challenges by proposing Keeper, an automated testing and fixing tool for ML software. The core idea of Keeper is designing pseudo-inverse functions that semantically reverse the corresponding ML task in an empirical way and proxy common human judgment of real-world data. It incorporates these functions into a symbolic execution engine to generate tests. Keeper also detects code smells that degrade software performance. Once misbehavior is exposed, Keeper attempts to change how ML APIs are used to alleviate the misbehavior. Our evaluation on a variety of applications shows that Keeper greatly improves branch coverage, while identifying 74 previously unknown failures and 19 code smells from 56 out of 104 applications. Our user studies show that 78% of end-users and 95% of developers agree with Keeper’s detection and fixing results.
Chengcheng Wan 0001, Shicheng Liu, Sophie Xie, Yuhan Liu 0004, Henry Hoffmann, Michael Maire, Shan Lu 0001
ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol.3
2022 Automated Testing of Software that Uses Machine Learning APIs
abstract
An increasing number of software applications incorporate machine learning (ML) solutions for cognitive tasks that statistically mimic human behaviors. To test such software, tremendous human effort is needed to design image/text/audio inputs that are relevant to the software, and to judge whether the software is processing these inputs as most human beings do. Even when misbehavior is exposed, it is often unclear whether the culprit is inside the cognitive ML API or the code using the API.
Chengcheng Wan 0001, Shicheng Liu, Sophie Xie, Henry Hoffmann, Michael Maire, Shan Lu 0001
ICSE3
2021 Automated Code Refactoring upon Database-Schema Changes in Web Applications
abstract
Modern web applications manipulate a large amount of user data and undergo frequent data-schema changes. These changes bring up a unique refactoring task: updating application code to be consistent with data schema. Previous study and our own investigation show that this type of refactoring is error-prone and time-consuming for developers. This paper presents EvolutionSaver, a static code analysis and transformation tool that automates schema-related code refactoring and consistency checking. EvolutionSaver is implemented as an IDE plugin that works for both Rails and Django applications. The source code of EvolutionSaver is available on Github [1] and the plugin can be downloaded from Visual Studio Marketplace [2], with its tutorial available at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qBiMkLFIjbE and DOI 10.5281/zenodo.5276127.
Sophie Xie, Shan Lu 0001
ASE1