MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2591607085

An effective method for detecting duplicate crash reports using crash traces and hidden Markov models

2016· article· en· W2591607085 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueComputer Science and Software Engineering · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware Engineering Research
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCrashComputer scienceHidden Markov modelSoftwareTask (project management)EclipseData miningMachine learningArtificial intelligenceOperating systemEngineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When a software system crashes, crash information from user's machine is sent to the developers of the system for repair. For software systems with a large client base (such as Eclipse, Web browsers, etc.), the number of reports that are submitted every day can be quite high. Managing these reports is known to be a tedious and a time consuming task. Fortunately, not all crashes are caused by new faults. Studies have shown that around 30% of the reported crashes are duplicates of previously reported ones. Automatic detection of duplicate crash reports can then reduce the time and effort dealing with crash reports. In this paper, we introduce a novel method for detecting duplicate crash reports using crash traces and Hidden Markov Models. We show that our approach outperforms existing methods in detecting duplicate crash reports.

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.953
Threshold uncertainty score0.980

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.266 · 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