An Entropy Evaluation Approach for Triaging Field Crashes: A Case Study of Mozilla Firefox
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A crash is an unexpected termination of an application during normal execution. Crash reports record stack traces and run-time information once a crash occurs. A group of similar crash reports represents a crash-type. The triaging of crash-types is critical to shorten the development and maintenance process. Crash triaging process decides the priority of crash-types to be fixed. The decision typically depends on many factors, such as the impact of the crash-type, (i.e, its severity), the frequency of occurring, and the effort required to implement a fix for the crash-type. In this paper, we propose the use of entropy region graphs to triage crash-types. An entropy region graph captures the distribution of the occurrences of crash-types among the users of a system. We conduct an empirical study on crash reports and bugs, collected from 10 beta releases of Fire fox 4. We show that our proposed triaging technique enables a better classification of crash-types than the current triaging used by Fire fox teams. Developers and managers could use such a technique to prioritize crash-types during triage, to estimate developer workloads, and to decide which crash-types patches should be included in a next release.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it