MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1675491259 · doi:10.1109/qrs.2015.45

An Empirical Study of Highly Impactful Bugs in Mozilla Projects

2015· article· en· W1675491259 on OpenAlexaff
Le An, Foutse Khomh

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware Engineering Research
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSoftware bugComputer scienceCrashSoftware regressionAndroid (operating system)SoftwareSoftware qualitySoftware developmentOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bug triaging is the process that consists in screening and prioritising bugs to allow a software organisation to focus its limited resources on bugs with high impact on software quality. In a previous work, we proposed an entropy-based crash triaging approach that can help software organisations identify crash-types that affect a large user base with high frequency. We refer to bugs associated to these crash-types as highly-impactful bugs. The proposed triaging approach can identify highly-impactful bugs only after they have led to crashes in the field for a certain period of time. Therefore, to reduce the impact of highly-impactful bugs on user perceived quality, an early identification of these bugs is necessary. In this paper, we examine the characteristics of highly-impactful bugs in Mozilla Firefox and Fennec for Android, and propose statistical models to help software organisations predict them early on before they impact a large population of users. Results show that our proposed prediction models can achieve a precision up to 64.2% (in Firefox) and a recall up to 98.3% (in Fennec). We also evaluate the benefits of our proposed models and found that, on average, they could help reduce 23.0% of Firefox' crashes and 13.4% of Fennec's crashes, while reducing 28.6% of impacted machine profiles for Firefox and 49.4% for Fennec. Software organisations could use our prediction models to catch highly-impactful bugs early during the triaging process, preventing them from impacting a larger user base.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.070
Threshold uncertainty score0.270

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.075
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.302 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSoftware Engineering ResearchFrench-language works237,207