Export Citations
No abstract available.
Proceeding Downloads
Studying Test Case Failure Prediction for Test Case Prioritization
Background: Test case prioritization refers to the process of ranking test cases within a test suite for execution. The goal is ranking fault revealing test cases higher so that in case of limited budget one only executes the top ranked tests and still ...
Clustering Dycom: An Online Cross-Company Software Effort Estimation Study
Background: Software Effort Estimation (SEE) can be formulated as an online learning problem, where new projects are completed over time and may become available for training. In this scenario, a Cross-Company (CC) SEE approach called Dycom can ...
Scripted GUI Testing of Android Apps: A Study on Diffusion, Evolution and Fragility
Background. Evidence suggests that mobile applications are not thoroughly tested as their desktop counterparts. In particular GUI testing is generally limited. Like web-based applications, mobile apps suffer from GUI test fragility, i.e. GUI test classes ...
Code Authorship and Fault-proneness of Open-Source Android Applications: An Empirical Study
Context: In recent years, many research studies have shown how human factors play a significant role in the quality of software components. Code authorship metrics have been introduced to establish a chain of responsibility and simplify management when ...
Ghera: A Repository of Android App Vulnerability Benchmarks
Security of mobile apps affects the security of their users. This has fueled the development of techniques to automatically detect vulnerabilities in mobile apps and help developers secure their apps; specifically, in the context of Android platform due ...
Multi-objective search-based approach to estimate issue resolution time
Background: Resolving issues is central to modern agile software development where a software is developed and evolved incrementally through series of issue resolutions. An issue could represent a requirement for a new functionality, a report of a ...
Context-Centric Pricing: Early Pricing Models for Software Crowdsourcing Tasks
In software crowdsourcing, task price is one of the most important incentive to attract broad worker participation and contribution. Underestimating or overestimating a task's price may lead to task starvation or resource inefficiency. Nevertheless, few ...
The Characteristics of False-Negatives in File-level Fault Prediction
Over the years, a plethora of works has proposed more and more sophisticated machine learning techniques to improve fault prediction models. However, past studies using product metrics from closed-source projects, found a ceiling effect in the ...
A Large-Scale Study of Modern Code Review and Security in Open Source Projects
Background: Evidence for the relationship between code review process and software security (and software quality) has the potential to help improve code review automation and tools, as well as provide a better understanding of the economics for ...
On Applicability of Cross-project Defect Prediction Method for Multi-Versions Projects
Context: Cross-project defect prediction (CPDP) research has been popular, and many CPDP methods have been proposed so far. As the straightforward use of Cross-project (CP) data was useless, those methods filter, weigh, and adapt CP data for a target ...
Boosting Automatic Commit Classification Into Maintenance Activities By Utilizing Source Code Changes
Background: Understanding maintenance activities performed in a source code repository could help practitioners reduce uncertainty and improve cost-effectiveness by planning ahead and pre-allocating resources towards source code maintenance. The research ...
An Extensive Analysis of Efficient Bug Prediction Configurations
Background: Bug prediction helps developers steer maintenance activities towards the buggy parts of a software. There are many design aspects to a bug predictor, each of which has several options, i.e., software metrics, machine learning model, and ...
Recommendations
Acceptance Rates
Year | Submitted | Accepted | Rate |
---|---|---|---|
PROMISE | 25 | 12 | 48% |
PROMISE 2016 | 23 | 10 | 43% |
PROMISE '15 | 16 | 8 | 50% |
PROMISE '14 | 21 | 9 | 43% |
PROMISE '12 | 24 | 12 | 50% |
Promise '11 | 35 | 15 | 43% |
PROMISE '10 | 53 | 19 | 36% |
PROMISE '08 | 16 | 13 | 81% |
Overall | 213 | 98 | 46% |