首页> 外文会议>Asia-Pacific Software Engineering Conference >Who Should Review this Pull-Request: Reviewer Recommendation to Expedite Crowd Collaboration
【24h】

Who Should Review this Pull-Request: Reviewer Recommendation to Expedite Crowd Collaboration

机译:谁应该审查此请求请求:审查者建议以加快人群协作

获取原文

摘要

Github facilitates the pull-request mechanism as an outstanding social coding paradigm by integrating with social media. The review process of pull-requests is a typical crowd sourcing job which needs to solicit opinions of the community. Recommending appropriate reviewers can reduce the time between the submission of a pull-request and the actual review of it. In this paper, we firstly extend the traditional Machine Learning (ML) based approach of bug triaging to reviewer recommendation. Furthermore, we analyze social relations between contributors and reviewers, and propose a novel approach to recommend highly relevant reviewers by mining comment networks (CN) of given projects. Finally, we demonstrate the effectiveness of these two approaches with quantitative evaluations. The results show that CN-based approach achieves a significant improvement over the ML-based approach, and on average it reaches a precision of 78% and 67% for top-1 and top-2 recommendation respectively, and a recall of 77% for top-10 recommendation.
机译:Github通过与社交媒体集成,将拉取请求机制作为一种出色的社交编码范例进行了推广。拉取请求的审核过程是一项典型的众包工作,需要征求社区意见。建议适当的审阅者可以减少提交拉取请求与实际审阅之间的时间。在本文中,我们首先将基于传统机器学习(ML)的错误分类方法扩展到审阅者推荐。此外,我们分析了投稿人和审稿人之间的社会关系,并提出了一种通过挖掘给定项目的评论网络(CN)来推荐高度相关的审稿人的新颖方法。最后,我们通过定量评估证明了这两种方法的有效性。结果表明,基于CN的方法相对于基于ML的方法有了显着的改进,对于top-1和top-2推荐,平均精度分别为78%和67%,而对召回率的召回率则为77%十大推荐。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号