[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/ skip to main content
10.1145/2950290.2983938acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesfseConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

ARdoc: app reviews development oriented classifier

Published: 01 November 2016 Publication History

Abstract

Google Play, Apple App Store and Windows Phone Store are well known distribution platforms where users can download mobile apps, rate them and write review comments about the apps they are using. Previous research studies demonstrated that these reviews contain important information to help developers improve their apps. However, analyzing reviews is challenging due to the large amount of reviews posted every day, the unstructured nature of reviews and its varying quality.
In this demo we present ARdoc, a tool which combines three techniques: (1) Natural Language Parsing, (2) Text Analysis and (3) Sentiment Analysis to automatically classify useful feedback contained in app reviews important for performing software maintenance and evolution tasks. Our quantitative and qualitative analysis (involving mobile professional developers) demonstrates that ARdoc correctly classifies feedback useful for maintenance perspectives in user reviews with high precision (ranging between 84% and 89%), recall (ranging between 84% and 89%), and F-Measure (ranging between 84% and 89%). While evaluating our tool developers of our study confirmed the usefulness of ARdoc in extracting important maintenance tasks for their mobile applications.
Demo URL: https://youtu.be/Baf18V6sN8E
Demo Web Page: http://www.ifi.uzh.ch/seal/people/panichella/tools/ARdoc.html

References

[1]
N. Chen, J. Lin, S. C. H. Hoi, X. Xiao, and B. Zhang, “Ar-miner: Mining informative reviews for developers from mobile app marketplace,” in Proceedings of the 36th International Conference on Software Engineering, ICSE 2014, (New York, NY, USA), pp. 767–778, ACM, 2014.
[2]
L. V. Galvis Carre˜ no and K. Winbladh, “Analysis of user comments: An approach for software requirements evolution,” in Proceedings of the 2013 International Conference on Software Engineering, ICSE ’13, (Piscataway, NJ, USA), pp. 582–591, IEEE Press, 2013.
[3]
D. Pagano and W. Maalej, “User feedback in the appstore: An empirical study.,” in In Proceedings of the 21st IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE 2013), pp. 125–134, IEEE Computer Society, 2013.
[4]
S. Krusche and B. Bruegge, “User feedback in mobile development,” in Proceedings of the 2Nd International Workshop on Mobile Development Lifecycle, MobileDeLi ’14, (New York, NY, USA), pp. 25–26, ACM, 2014.
[5]
T. Vithani, “Modeling the mobile application development lifecycle,” in Proceedings of the International MultiConference of Engineers and Computer Scientists 2014, Vol. I, IMECS 2014, pp. 596–600, 2014.
[6]
W. Martin, F. Sarro, Y. Jia, Y. Zhang, and M. Harman, “A survey of app store analysis for software engineering,” tech. rep., University College London, 2016.
[7]
M. Goul, O. Marjanovic, S. Baxley, and K. Vizecky, “Managing the enterprise business intelligence app store: Sentiment analysis supported requirements engineering,” in Proceedings of the 2012 45th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, pp. 4168–4177, 2012.
[8]
W. Martin, M. Harman, Y. Jia, F. Sarro, and Y. Zhang, “The app sampling problem for app store mining,” in Proceedings of the 12th Working Conference on Mining Software Repositories, MSR ’15, (Piscataway, NJ, USA), pp. 123–133, IEEE Press, 2015.
[9]
H. Yang and P. Liang, “Identification and classification of requirements from app user reviews,” in Proceedings of the 27th International Conference on Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering (SEKE), pp. 7–12, Knowledge Systems Institute, 2015.
[10]
E. Guzman and W. Maalej, “How do users like this feature? a fine grained sentiment analysis of app reviews,” in Requirements Engineering Conference (RE), 2014 IEEE 22nd International, pp. 153–162, Aug 2014.
[11]
E. Guzman, M. El-Halaby, and B. Bruegge, “Ensemble Methods for App Review Classification: An Approach for Software Evolution.,” in Proc. of the Automated Software Enginering Conference (ASE), pp. 771–776, 2015.
[12]
E. Guzman, O. Aly, and B. Bruegge, “Retrieving Diverse Opinions from App Reviews.,” in Proc. of the Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement Conference (ESEM), pp. 1–10, 2015.
[13]
C. Iacob, R. Harrison, and S. Faily, “Online reviews as first class artifacts in mobile app development,” in Mobile Computing, Applications, and Services (G. Memmi and U. Blanke, eds.), vol. 130 of Lecture Notes of the Institute for Computer Sciences, Social Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering, pp. 47–53, Springer International Publishing, 2014.
[14]
W. Maalej and H. Nabil, “Bug report, feature request, or simply praise? On automatically classifying app reviews,” in Requirements Engineering Conference (RE), 2015 IEEE 23rd International, pp. 116–125, aug 2015.
[15]
S. Panichella, A. Di Sorbo, E. Guzman, C. A. Visaggio, G. Canfora, and H. C. Gall, “How can i improve my app? classifying user reviews for software maintenance and evolution,” in Software Maintenance and Evolution (ICSME), 2015 IEEE International Conference on, pp. 281–290, Sept 2015.
[16]
A. Di Sorbo, S. Panichella, C. A. Visaggio, M. Di Penta, G. Canfora, and H. C. Gall, “Development emails content analyzer: Intention mining in developer discussions (t),” in Automated Software Engineering (ASE), 2015 30th IEEE/ACM International Conference on, pp. 12–23, Nov 2015.
[17]
A. Di Sorbo, S. Panichella, C. A. Visaggio, M. Di Penta, G. Canfora, and H. C. Gall, “DECA: development emails content analyzer,” in Proceedings of the 38th International Conference on Software Engineering, ICSE 2016, Austin, TX, USA, May 14-22, 2016 - Companion Volume, pp. 641–644, 2016.
[18]
C. D. Manning, M. Surdeanu, J. Bauer, J. Finkel, S. J. Bethard, and D. McClosky, “The Stanford CoreNLP natural language processing toolkit,” in Proceedings of 52nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics: System Demonstrations, pp. 55–60, 2014.
[19]
M.-C. de Marneffe and C. D. Manning, “The stanford typed dependencies representation,” in Coling 2008: Proceedings of the Workshop on Cross-Framework and Cross-Domain Parser Evaluation, CrossParser ’08, (Stroudsburg, PA, USA), pp. 1–8, Association for Computational Linguistics, 2008.
[20]
L. Hoon, M. A. Rodriguez-Garc´ıa, R. Vasa, R. Valencia-Garc´ıa, and J.-G. Schneider, “App reviews: Breaking the user and developer language barrier,” in Trends and Applications in Software Engineering, pp. 223–233, Springer, 2016.
[21]
W. B. Frakes and R. Baeza-Yates, eds., Information Retrieval: Data Structures and Algorithms. Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1992.
[22]
M. Hall, E. Frank, G. Holmes, B. Pfahringer, P. Reutemann, and I. H. Witten, “The weka data mining software: An update,” SIGKDD Explor. Newsl., vol. 11, pp. 10–18, Nov. 2009.
[23]
A. Di Sorbo, S. Panichella, C. Alexandru, J. Shimagaki, C. Visaggio, G. Canfora, and H. Gall, “What would users change in my app? summarizing app reviews for recommending software changes,” in Foundations of Software Engineering (FSE), 2016 ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on the, p. to appear, 2016.

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Tickets or privacy? understand the ecosystem of chinese ticket grabbing appsProceedings of the 33rd USENIX Conference on Security Symposium10.5555/3698900.3699186(5107-5124)Online publication date: 14-Aug-2024
  • (2024)Do User Backgrounds Matter? Impact of Gender and Countries on App Reviews and Tweets2024 IEEE 32nd International Requirements Engineering Conference Workshops (REW)10.1109/REW61692.2024.00022(119-127)Online publication date: 24-Jun-2024
  • (2024)Which API is Faster: Mining Fine-grained Performance Opinion from Online Discussions2024 IEEE 24th International Conference on Software Quality, Reliability and Security (QRS)10.1109/QRS62785.2024.00066(608-619)Online publication date: 1-Jul-2024
  • Show More Cited By

Index Terms

  1. ARdoc: app reviews development oriented classifier

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

    Information & Contributors

    Information

    Published In

    cover image ACM Conferences
    FSE 2016: Proceedings of the 2016 24th ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Foundations of Software Engineering
    November 2016
    1156 pages
    ISBN:9781450342186
    DOI:10.1145/2950290
    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

    Sponsors

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    Published: 01 November 2016

    Permissions

    Request permissions for this article.

    Check for updates

    Author Tags

    1. Mobile Applications
    2. Natural Language Processing
    3. Sentiment Analysis
    4. Text classification
    5. User Reviews

    Qualifiers

    • Research-article

    Conference

    FSE'16
    Sponsor:

    Acceptance Rates

    Overall Acceptance Rate 17 of 128 submissions, 13%

    Contributors

    Other Metrics

    Bibliometrics & Citations

    Bibliometrics

    Article Metrics

    • Downloads (Last 12 months)44
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)5
    Reflects downloads up to 17 Jan 2025

    Other Metrics

    Citations

    Cited By

    View all
    • (2024)Tickets or privacy? understand the ecosystem of chinese ticket grabbing appsProceedings of the 33rd USENIX Conference on Security Symposium10.5555/3698900.3699186(5107-5124)Online publication date: 14-Aug-2024
    • (2024)Do User Backgrounds Matter? Impact of Gender and Countries on App Reviews and Tweets2024 IEEE 32nd International Requirements Engineering Conference Workshops (REW)10.1109/REW61692.2024.00022(119-127)Online publication date: 24-Jun-2024
    • (2024)Which API is Faster: Mining Fine-grained Performance Opinion from Online Discussions2024 IEEE 24th International Conference on Software Quality, Reliability and Security (QRS)10.1109/QRS62785.2024.00066(608-619)Online publication date: 1-Jul-2024
    • (2024)Review-Pulse: A Dashboard for Managing User Feedback for Android Applications2024 IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance and Evolution (ICSME)10.1109/ICSME58944.2024.00095(878-882)Online publication date: 6-Oct-2024
    • (2024)How Do Crowd-Users Express Their Opinions Against Software Applications in Social Media? A Fine-Grained Classification ApproachIEEE Access10.1109/ACCESS.2024.342583012(98004-98028)Online publication date: 2024
    • (2024)The best ends by the best means: ethical concerns in app reviewsEmpirical Software Engineering10.1007/s10664-024-10463-729:6Online publication date: 17-Aug-2024
    • (2024)Recommending and release planning of user-driven functionality deletion for mobile appsRequirements Engineering10.1007/s00766-024-00430-529:4(459-480)Online publication date: 10-Sep-2024
    • (2024)Elicitation Revisited for More Inclusive Requirements EngineeringEquity, Diversity, and Inclusion in Software Engineering10.1007/978-1-4842-9651-6_6(91-104)Online publication date: 21-Sep-2024
    • (2023)A Novel Hybrid Deep Learning Model for Detecting and Classifying Non-Functional Requirements of Mobile Apps IssuesElectronics10.3390/electronics1205125812:5(1258)Online publication date: 6-Mar-2023
    • (2023)Not Seen, Not Heard in the Digital World! Measuring Privacy Practices in Children’s AppsProceedings of the ACM Web Conference 202310.1145/3543507.3583327(2166-2177)Online publication date: 30-Apr-2023
    • Show More Cited By

    View Options

    Login options

    View options

    PDF

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    Media

    Figures

    Other

    Tables

    Share

    Share

    Share this Publication link

    Share on social media