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

Yoonki Song

dblp:54/2079 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
4ranked-venue papers
2as 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 · 3 · 1 first-authorDatabases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 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
2 papers
Program analysis · 46% Empirical software engineering · 28% Software maintenance and evolution · 26%

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

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Empirical software engineering
developer studies
0.212013
Why don't software developers use static analysis tools to find bugs? · ICSE 2013
Program analysis
static analysis
0.212013
Why don't software developers use static analysis tools to find bugs? · ICSE 2013
Program analysis › static analysis
static analysis tool adoption
0.212013
Why don't software developers use static analysis tools to find bugs? · ICSE 2013
Software maintenance and evolution › bug triage
bug report management
0.112010
JDF: detecting duplicate bug reports in Jazz · ICSE (2) 2010
Software maintenance and evolution › bug triage
duplicate bug report detection
0.112010
JDF: detecting duplicate bug reports in Jazz · ICSE (2) 2010
Program analysis › static analysis
bug detection
0.012013
Why don't software developers use static analysis tools to find bugs? · ICSE 2013
Empirical software engineering › mining software repositories
bug repositories
0.012010
JDF: detecting duplicate bug reports in Jazz · ICSE (2) 2010
Empirical software engineering
mining software repositories
0.012010
JDF: detecting duplicate bug reports in Jazz · ICSE (2) 2010

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

interviews · 0.2natural language processing · 0.1execution information analysis · 0.1
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2016 From Quick Fixes to Slow Fixes: Reimagining Static Analysis Resolutions to Enable Design Space Exploration
abstract
Quick Fixes as implemented by IDEs today prioritize the speed of applying the fix as a primary criteria for success. In this paper, we argue that when tools over-optimize this criteria, such tools neglect other dimensions that are important to successfully applying a fix, such as being able to explore the design space of multiple fixes. This is especially true in cases where a fix only partially implements the intention of the developer. In this paper, we implement an extension to the FindBugs defect finding tool, called FixBugs, an interactive resolution approach within the Eclipse development environment that prioritizes other design criteria to the successful application of suggested fixes. Our empirical evaluation method of 12 developers suggests that FixBugs enables developers to explore alternative designs and balances the benefits of manual fixing with automated fixing, without having to compromise in either effectiveness or efficiency. Our analytic evaluation method with six usability experts identified trade-offs between FixBugs and Quick Fix, and suggests ways in which FixBugs and Quick Fix can offer complementary capabilities to better support developers.
Titus Barik, Yoonki Song, Brittany Johnson, Emerson R. Murphy-Hill
ICSME2
2013 Why don't software developers use static analysis tools to find bugs?
abstract
Using static analysis tools for automating code inspections can be beneficial for software engineers. Such tools can make finding bugs, or software defects, faster and cheaper than manual inspections. Despite the benefits of using static analysis tools to find bugs, research suggests that these tools are underused. In this paper, we investigate why developers are not widely using static analysis tools and how current tools could potentially be improved. We conducted interviews with 20 developers and found that although all of our participants felt that use is beneficial, false positives and the way in which the warnings are presented, among other things, are barriers to use. We discuss several implications of these results, such as the need for an interactive mechanism to help developers fix defects.
Brittany Johnson, Yoonki Song, Emerson R. Murphy-Hill, Robert W. Bowdidge
ICSE2
2010 JDF: detecting duplicate bug reports in Jazz
abstract
Both developers and users submit bug reports to a bug repository. These reports can help reveal defects and improve software quality. As the number of bug reports in a bug repository increases, the number of the potential duplicate bug reports increases. Detecting duplicate bug reports helps reduce development efforts in fixing defects. However, it is challenging to manually detect all potential duplicates because of the large number of existing bug reports. This paper presents JDF (representing Jazz Duplicate Finder), a tool that helps users to find potential duplicates of bug reports on Jazz, which is a team collaboration platform for software development and process management. JDF finds potential duplicates for a given bug report using natural language and execution information.
Yoonki Song, Xiaoyin Wang, Tao Xie 0001, Lu Zhang 0023, Hong Mei 0001
ICSE (2)1
2003 Exception Specification and Handling in Workflow Systems
Yoonki Song, Dongsoo Han 0001
APWeb1