Labelling issue reports in mobile apps

Millions of mobile apps have been released to the market. Developers need to maintain these apps so that they can continue to benefit end users, who usually submit issue reports to describe the bugs, the feature requests, and other changes appearing in apps. The labels (e.g. bug, feature request) are important resources to indicate which issue reports should be resolved first or next. According to the investigation, 35.6% of issue reports in top-17 popular mobile apps are not labelled. Developers have to spend additional time to manually verify each unlabelled issue report so that they can decide to resolve the most important issues. In order to help developers to reduce the workload, in this study, the authors propose a novel approach to automatically tag the unlabelled issue reports. This approach not only computes the similarity between each unlabelled issue report and user reviews related to bugs and features but also calculates the textual similarity scores between each unlabelled issue report and labelled ones. As a result, among all textual similarity measures, this approach using cosine similarity with MCG shows the best performance. Moreover, this approach performs better than the method proposed in the authors' previous study.

[1]  Denys Poshyvanyk,et al.  Journal of Software Maintenance and Evolution: Research and Practice Assigning Change Requests to Software Developers , 2022 .

[2]  Tao Zhang,et al.  Towards more accurate severity prediction and fixer recommendation of software bugs , 2016, J. Syst. Softw..

[3]  David Lo,et al.  Dual analysis for recommending developers to resolve bugs , 2015, J. Softw. Evol. Process..

[4]  David Lo,et al.  Automated Bug Report Field Reassignment and Refinement Prediction , 2016, IEEE Transactions on Reliability.

[5]  Alain Abran,et al.  A systematic literature review: Opinion mining studies from mobile app store user reviews , 2017, J. Syst. Softw..

[6]  Tao Zhang,et al.  Bug Reports for Desktop Software and Mobile Apps in GitHub: What's the Difference? , 2019, IEEE Software.

[7]  Gail C. Murphy,et al.  Automatic Summarization of Bug Reports , 2014, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering.

[8]  Vahid Garousi,et al.  Automated Testing of Simulation Software in the Aviation Industry: An Experience Report , 2019, IEEE Software.

[9]  David Lo,et al.  Automatic, high accuracy prediction of reopened bugs , 2014, Automated Software Engineering.

[10]  Tao Zhang,et al.  A Commit Messages-Based Bug Localization for Android Applications , 2019, Int. J. Softw. Eng. Knowl. Eng..

[11]  Andreas Zeller,et al.  Where Should We Fix This Bug? A Two-Phase Recommendation Model , 2013, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering.

[12]  David Lo,et al.  Improving Automated Bug Triaging with Specialized Topic Model , 2017, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering.

[13]  Keun Ho Ryu,et al.  Comparing the normalization methods for the differential analysis of Illumina high-throughput RNA-Seq data , 2015, BMC Bioinformatics.

[14]  Jignesh M. Patel,et al.  Estimating the selectivity of tf-idf based cosine similarity predicates , 2007, SGMD.

[15]  Linyuan Lü,et al.  Empirical comparison of local structural similarity indices for collaborative-filtering-based recommender systems , 2010 .