ESEIW 2022
Sun 18 - Fri 23 September 2022 Helsinki, Finland

ESEM 2022 - Registered Reports Track

Call for Registrations

Following the successful experience of previous editions, Empirical Software Engineering journal (EMSE), in conjunction with the ACM/IEEE International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement (ESEM), is continuing the RR track. The RR track of ESEM 2022 has two goals: (1) to prevent HARKing (hypothesizing after the results are known) for empirical studies; (2) to provide early feedback to authors on their initial study design. For papers submitted to the RR track, methods and proposed analyses are reviewed prior to execution. Pre-registered studies follow a two-step process:

  • Stage 1: A report is submitted that describes the planned study. The submitted report is evaluated by the reviewers of the RR track of ESEM 2022. Authors of accepted pre-registered studies will be given the opportunity to present their work at ESEM.
  • Stage 2: Once a report has passed Phase 1, the study will be conducted, and actual data collection and analysis take place. The results may also be negative! The full paper is submitted for review to EMSE journal.

See the associated Author’s Guide. Please contact the ESEM track chairs – Maria Teresa Baldassarre or Neil Ernst or the ESEM PC co-Chairs - for any questions, clarifications, or comments.


Paper Types, Evaluation Criteria, and Acceptance Types

The RR track of ESEM 2022 supports two types of papers:

Confirmatory: The researcher has a fixed hypothesis (or several fixed hypotheses) and the objective of the study is to find out whether the hypothesis is supported by the facts/data.

An example of a completed confirmatory study:

  • Inozemtseva, L., & Holmes, R. (2014, May). Coverage is not strongly correlated with test suite effectiveness. In Proceedings of the 36th international conference on software engineering (pp. 435-445).

Exploratory: The researcher does not have a hypothesis (or has one that may change during the study). Often, the objective of such a study is to understand what is observed and answer questions such as WHY, HOW, WHAT, WHO, or WHEN. We include in this category registrations for which the researcher has an initial proposed solution for an automated approach (e.g., a new deep-learning-based defect prediction approach) that serves as a starting point for his/her exploration to reach an effective solution.

Examples of completed exploratory studies:

  • Gousios, G., Pinzger, M., & Deursen, A. V. (2014, May). An exploratory study of the pull-based software development model. In Proceedings of the 36th International Conference on Software Engineering (pp. 345-355).
  • Rodrigues, I. M., Aloise, D., Fernandes, E. R., & Dagenais, M. (2020, June). A Soft Alignment Model for Bug Deduplication. In Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Mining Software Repositories (pp. 43-53).

The reviewers will evaluate RR track submissions based on the following criteria:

  • The importance of the research question(s).
  • The logic, rationale, and plausibility of the proposed hypotheses.
  • The soundness and feasibility of the methodology and analysis pipeline (including statistical power analysis where appropriate).
  • (For confirmatory study) Whether the clarity and degree of methodological detail is sufficient to exactly replicate the proposed experimental procedures and analysis pipeline.
  • (For confirmatory study) Whether the authors have pre-specified sufficient outcome-neutral tests for ensuring that the results obtained can test the stated hypotheses, including positive controls and quality checks.
  • (For exploratory study, if applicable) The description of the data set that is the base for exploration.

The outcome of the RR report review is one of the following:

  • In-Principal Acceptance (IPA): The reviewers agree that the study is relevant, the outcome of the study (whether confirmation / rejection of hypothesis) is of interest to the community, the protocol for data collection is sound, and that the analysis methods are adequate. The authors can engage in the actual study for Stage 2. If the protocol is adhered to (or deviations are thoroughly justified), the study is published. Of course, this being a journal submission, a revision of the submitted manuscript may be necessary. Reviewers will especially evaluate how precisely the protocol of the accepted pre-registered report is followed, or whether deviations are justified.
  • Continuity Acceptance (CA): The reviewers agree that the study is relevant, that the (initial) methods appear to be appropriate. However, for exploratory studies, implementation details and post-experiment analyses or discussion (e.g., why the proposed automated approach does not work) may require follow-up checks. We’ll try our best to get the original reviewers. All PC members will be invited on the condition that they agree to review papers in both, Stage 1 and Stage 2. Four (4) PC members will review the Stage 1 submission, and three (3) will review the Stage 2 submission.
  • Rejection: The reviewers do not agree on the relevance of the study or are not convinced that the study design is sufficiently mature. Comments are provided to the authors to improve the study design before starting it.

Note: For ESEM 2022, we will only offer IPA to confirmatory studies. Exploratory studies in software engineering often cannot be adequately assessed until after the study has been completed and the findings are elaborated and discussed in a full paper. For example, consider a study in an RR proposing defect prediction using a new deep learning architecture. This work falls under the exploratory category. It is difficult to offer IPA, as we do not know whether it is any better than a traditional approach based on e.g., decision trees. Negative results are welcome; however, it is important that the negative results paper goes beyond presenting “we tried and failed”, but rather provides interesting insights to readers, e.g., why the results are negative or what that means for further studies on this topic (following criteria of REplication and Negative Results (RENE) tracks,
e.g., https://saner2019.github.io/cfp/RENETrack.html).


Submission Process and Instructions

The timeline for ESEM 2022 RR track will be as follows:

June 30: Authors submit their initial report.

  • Submissions must not exceed 6 pages (plus 1 additional page of references). The page limit is strict.
  • Submissions must be formatted according to the ACM proceedings template, which can be found at ACM Proceedings Template (https://www.acm.org/publications/proceedings-template). Use the Sigconf template.

August 8: Authors receive PC members’ reviews.

August 22: Authors submit a response letter + revised report in a single PDF.

  • The response letter should address reviewer comments and questions.
  • The response letter + revised report must not exceed 12 pages (plus 1 additional page of references).
  • The response letter does not need to follow ACM formatting instructions.

September 2: Notification of Stage 1

  • (Outcome: in-principal acceptance, continuity acceptance, or rejection).

September 9: Authors submit their accepted RR report to arXiv

  • To be checked by PC members for Stage 2
  • Note: Due to the timeline, RR reports will not be published in the ESEM 2022 proceedings. Authors will present their RR during the conference

Before June 30, 2023: Authors submit a full paper to EMSE Journal. Instructions will be provided later. However, the following constraints will be enforced:

  • Justifications need to be given to any change of authors. If the authors are added/removed or the author order is changed between the original Stage 1 and the EMSE journal submission, all authors will need to complete and sign a “Change of authorship request form”. The Editors in Chief of EMSE and chairs of the RR track reserve the right to deny author changes. If you anticipate any authorship changes, please reach out to the chairs of the RR track as early as possible.
  • PC members who reviewed an RR report in Stage 1 and their directly supervised students cannot be added as authors of the corresponding submission in Stage 2.

Submissions can be made via the submission site (https://easychair.org/my/conference?conf=esem22) by the submission deadline. Any submission that does not comply with the aforementioned instructions and the mandatory information specified in the Author Guide is likely to be desk rejected. In addition, by submitting, the authors acknowledge that they are aware of and agree to be bound by the following policies:

  • The ACM plagiarism policy and procedures.
    (http://www.acm.org/publications/policies/plagiarism_policy).
    Papers submitted to ESEM 2022 must not have been published elsewhere and must not be under review or submitted for review elsewhere whilst under consideration for ESEM 2022. Contravention of this concurrent submission policy will be deemed a serious breach of scientific ethics, and appropriate action will be taken in all such cases (including immediate rejection and reporting of the incident to ACM). To check for double submission and plagiarism issues, the chairs reserve the right to (1) share the list of submissions with the PC Chairs of other conferences with overlapping review periods and (2) use external plagiarism detection software, under contract to the ACM, to detect violations of these policies.

  • The ACM policy on Authorship. (https://www.acm.org/publications/policies/roles-and-responsibilities).


Author’s Guide 

NB: Please contact the ESEM RR track chairs with any questions, feedback, or requests for clarification. Specific analysis approaches mentioned below are intended as examples, not mandatory components.


I. Title (required)

Provide the working title of your study. It may be the same title that you submit for publication of your final manuscript, but it is not mandatory.
Example: Should your family travel with you on the enterprise? Subtitle (optional): Effect of accompanying families on the work habits of crew members


II. Authors (required)

At this stage, we believe that a single blind review is most productive.


III. Structured Abstract (required)

The abstract should describe the following in 200 words or so:

  • Background/Context
    What is your research about? Why are you doing this research, why is it interesting? Example: “The enterprise is the flag ship of the federation, and it allows families to travel onboard. However, there are no studies that evaluate how this affects the crew members.”

  • Objective/Aim
    What exactly are you studying/investigating/evaluating? What are the objects of the study? We welcome both confirmatory and exploratory types of studies.

    • Example (Confirmatory): We evaluate whether the frequency of sick days, the work effectiveness and efficiency differ between science officers who bring their family with them, compared to science officers who are serving without their family.
    • Example (Exploratory): We investigate the problem of frequent Holodeck use on interpersonal relationships with an ethnographic study using participant observation, in order to derive specific hypotheses about Holodeck usage.
  • Method
    How are you addressing your objective? What data sources are you using?

    • Example: We conduct an observational study and use a between subject design. To analyze the data, we use a t-test or Wilcoxon test, depending on the underlying distribution. Our data comes from computer monitoring of Enterprise crew members.


IV. Introduction

Give more details on the bigger picture of your study and how it contributes to this bigger picture. An important component of phase 1 review is assessing the importance and relevance of the study questions, so be sure to explain this.


V. Hypotheses (required for confirmatory study) or research questions

Clearly state the research hypotheses that you want to test with your study, and a rationalization for the hypotheses. Hypothesis: Science officers with their family on board have more sick days than science officers without their family Rationale: Since toddlers are often sick, we can expect that crew members with their family onboard need to take sick days more often.


VI. Variables (required for confirmatory study)

  • Independent Variable(s) and their operationalization
  • Dependent Variable(s) and their operationalization (e.g., time to solve a specified task)
  • Confounding Variable(s) and how their effect will be controlled (e.g., species type (Vulcan, Human, Tribble) might be a confounding factor; we control for it by separating our sample additionally into Human/Non-Human and using an ANOVA (normal distribution) or Friedman (non-normal distribution) to distill its effect).

For each variable, you should give:

  • name (e.g., presence of family)
  • abbreviation (if you intend to use one)
  • description (whether the family of the crew members travels on board)
  • scale type (nominal: either the family is present or not)
  • operationalization (crew members without family on board vs. crew members with family onboard)


VII. Participants/Subjects/Datasets (required)

Describe how and why you select the sample. When you conduct a meta-analysis, describe the primary studies / work on which you base your meta-analysis.

Example: We recruit crew members from the science department on a voluntary basis. They are our targeted population.


VIII. Execution Plan (required)

Describe the experimental setting and procedure. This includes the methods/tools that you plan to use (be specific on whether you developed it (and how) or whether it is already defined), and the concrete steps that you plan to take to support/reject the hypotheses or answer the research questions.

Example: Each crew member needs to sign the informed consent and agreement to process their data according to GDPR. Then, we conduct the interviews. Afterwards, participants need to complete the simulated task …


Examples:

Confirmatory:
https://osf.io/5fptj/ - Do Explicit Review Strategies Improve Code Review Performance?

Exploratory:
https://osf.io/kfu9t - The Impact of Dynamics of Collaborative Software Engineering on Introverts: A Study Protocol
https://osf.io/acnwk - Large-Scale Manual Validation of Bugfixing Changes

Dates
Tracks
You're viewing the program in a time zone which is different from your device's time zone change time zone

Wed 21 Sep

Displayed time zone: Athens change

18:00 - 19:00
Welcome reception at Helsinki City HallESEIW ESEM at City Hall
18:00
60m
Social Event
Welcome reception at Helsinki City Hall
ESEIW ESEM

Thu 22 Sep

Displayed time zone: Athens change

09:00 - 10:30
Opening & Keynote ZimmermannESEIW ESEM at Bysa
Chair(s): Casper Lassenius Aalto University, Finland and Simula Metropolitan Center for Digital Engineering, Norway
09:00
15m
Other
Conference Opening
ESEIW ESEM

09:15
75m
Keynote
Everything Everywhere All at Once: The New Hybrid Future of Software Engineering
ESEIW ESEM
Thomas Zimmermann Microsoft Research
Media Attached
10:30 - 11:00
10:30
30m
Coffee break
Coffee
ESEIW ESEM

11:00 - 12:30
Session 1A - Behavioral Software EngineeringESEM Journal-First Papers / ESEM Technical Papers / ESEM Industry Forum at Bysa
Chair(s): Valentina Lenarduzzi University of Oulu
11:00
15m
Full-paper
Relative estimates of software development effort: Are they more accurate or less time-consuming to produce than absolute estimates, and to what extent are they person-independent?
ESEM Journal-First Papers
Magne Jørgensen SimulaMet, Eban Escott Codebots
11:15
20m
Full-paper
Software Artifact Mining in Software Engineering Conferences: A Meta-Analysis
ESEM Technical Papers
Zeinab Abou Khalil Inria, Stefano Zacchiroli Télécom Paris, Polytechnic Institute of Paris
11:35
20m
Full-paper
What Soft Skills Does the Software Industry *Really* Want? An Exploratory Study of Software Positions in New Zealand
ESEM Technical Papers
Matthias Galster University of Canterbury, Antonija Mitrovic Intelligent Computer Tutoring Group, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, Sanna Malinen University of Canterbury, Jay Holland University of Canterbury
11:55
15m
Talk
Procurement Models and Types of Information Systems
ESEM Industry Forum
Aapo Koski 61 NorthPoint Solutions Oy
11:00 - 12:30
Session 1B - Testing & SecurityESEM Technical Papers at Sonck
Chair(s): Guilherme Horta Travassos Federal University of Rio de Janeiro
11:00
20m
Full-paper
Do Static Analysis Tools Affect Software Quality when Using Test-driven Development?
ESEM Technical Papers
Simone Romano University of Salerno, Fiorella Zampetti University of Sannio, Italy, Maria Teresa Baldassarre Department of Computer Science, University of Bari , Massimiliano Di Penta University of Sannio, Italy, Giuseppe Scanniello University of Salerno
11:20
20m
Full-paper
Understanding the Implementation of Technical Measures in the Process of Data Privacy Compliance: A Qualitative Study
ESEM Technical Papers
Oleksandra Klymenko Technical University of Munich, Oleksandr Kosenkov fortiss GmbH, Stephen Meisenbacher Technical University of Munich, Parisa Elahidoost fortiss GmbH, Daniel Mendez Blekinge Institute of Technology, Florian Matthes Technical University of Munich
11:40
20m
Full-paper
Does Collaborative Editing Help Mitigate Security Vulnerabilities in Crowd-Shared IoT Code Examples?
ESEM Technical Papers
Madhu Selvaraj University of Calgary, Gias Uddin University of Calgary, Canada
12:00
20m
Full-paper
An Exploratory Study on Regression Vulnerabilities
ESEM Technical Papers
Larissa Braz University of Zurich, Enrico Fregnan University of Zurich, Vivek Arora Independent Researcher, Alberto Bacchelli University of Zurich
Pre-print Media Attached
12:30 - 13:30
12:30
60m
Lunch
Lunch
ESEIW ESEM

13:30 - 15:00
Session 2A - Open Source SoftwareESEM Journal-First Papers / ESEM Technical Papers at Bysa
Chair(s): Gustavo Pinto Federal University of Pará (UFPA) and Zup Innovation
13:30
20m
Full-paper
How to Choose a Task? Mismatches in Perspectives of Newcomers and Existing Contributors
ESEM Technical Papers
Fabio Marcos De Abreu Santos Northern Arizona University, USA, Bianca Trinkenreich Northern of Arizona Univeristy, João Felipe Pimentel , Igor Scaliante Wiese Federal University of Technology – Paraná - UTFPR, Igor Steinmacher Northern Arizona University, USA, Anita Sarma Oregon State University, Marco Gerosa Northern Arizona University, USA
13:50
20m
Full-paper
On the Relationship Between Story Points and Development Effort in Agile Open-Source Software
ESEM Technical Papers
Vali Tawosi University College London, Rebecca Moussa University College London, Federica Sarro University College London
Pre-print
14:10
20m
Full-paper
Analyzing the Relationship between Community and Design Smells in Open-Source Software Projects: An Empirical Study
ESEM Technical Papers
Haris Mumtaz University of Auckland, Paramvir Singh The University of Auckland, Kelly Blincoe University of Auckland
14:30
15m
Full-paper
On the analysis of non-coding roles in open source development
ESEM Journal-First Papers
Javier Luis Cánovas Izquierdo IN3 - UOC, Jordi Cabot Open University of Catalonia, Spain
13:30 - 15:00
Session 2B - Technical Debt & Effort EstimationESEM Industry Forum / ESEM Emerging Results and Vision Papers / ESEM Technical Papers at Sonck
Chair(s): Carolyn Seaman University of Maryland Baltimore County
13:30
20m
Full-paper
Asking about Technical Debt: Characteristics and Automatic Identification of Technical Debt Questions on Stack Overflow
ESEM Technical Papers
Nicholas Kozanidis Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Roberto Verdecchia Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Emitzá Guzmán Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
Pre-print
13:50
15m
Vision and Emerging Results
An Experience Report on Technical Debt in Pull Requests: Challenges and Lessons Learned
ESEM Emerging Results and Vision Papers
Shubhashis Karmakar University of Saskatchewan, Zadia Codabux University of Saskatchewan, Melina Vidoni Australian National University
DOI
14:05
20m
Full-paper
Bayesian Analysis of Bug-Fixing Time using Report Data
ESEM Technical Papers
Renan Vieira Federal University of Ceará, Diego Mesquita Getulio Vargas Foundation, César Lincoln Mattos Federal University of Ceará, Ricardo Britto Ericsson / Blekinge Institute of Technology, Lincoln Souza Rocha Federal University of Ceará, João Gomes Federal University of Ceará
14:25
15m
Talk
Investigating a NASA Cyclomatic Complexity Policy on Maintenance of a Critical System
ESEM Industry Forum
Daniel Port University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa, Bill Taber Jet Propulsion Laboratory
14:40
15m
Vision and Emerging Results
An Empirical Study on the Occurrences of Code Smells in Open Source and Industrial Projects
ESEM Emerging Results and Vision Papers
Md. Masudur Rahman Institute of Information Technology (IIT), University of Dhaka, Abdus Satter University of Dhaka, Mahbubul Alam Joarder Institute of Information Technology (IIT), University of Dhaka, Kazi Sakib Institute of Information Technology, University of Dhaka
DOI Media Attached
15:00 - 15:30
15:00
30m
Coffee break
Coffee
ESEIW ESEM

15:30 - 15:45
ESEM 2023 AnnouncementESEIW ESEM at Bysa
Chair(s): Casper Lassenius Aalto University, Finland and Simula Metropolitan Center for Digital Engineering, Norway
15:30
15m
ESEM 2023 Announcement
ESEIW ESEM

15:45 - 17:00
Session 3A - Software development teams and ecosystemsESEM Journal-First Papers / ESEM Emerging Results and Vision Papers / ESEM Industry Forum at Bysa
Chair(s): Daniela Cruzes Norwegian University of Science and Technology
15:45
15m
Full-paper
A teamwork effectiveness model for agile software development
ESEM Journal-First Papers
Torgeir Dingsøyr Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Diane Strode Whitireia Polytechnic, Yngve Lindsjørn University of Oslo
16:00
15m
Talk
Organization culture and burnout in software development teams
ESEM Industry Forum
Bianca Trinkenreich Northern of Arizona Univeristy, Igor Steinmacher Northern Arizona University, USA, Marco Gerosa Northern Arizona University, USA, Michael Feathers Globant, Kevin Bishop Globant, Marcelo Lara Globant, Nick Ross Globant, Esteban Sancho Globant, Anita Sarma Oregon State University
16:15
15m
Full-paper
Open data ecosystems - an empirical investigation into an emerging industry collaboration concept
ESEM Journal-First Papers
Per Runeson Lund University, Thomas Olsson RISE Research Institutes of Sweden AB, Johan Linåker Lund University
16:30
15m
Vision and Emerging Results
In the Zone: An Analysis of the Music Practices of Remote Software Developers
ESEM Emerging Results and Vision Papers
Makayla Moster Clemson University, Aarav Chandra Clemson University, Christal Chu Clemson University, Weiyi Liu Clemson University, Paige Rodeghero Clemson University
15:45 - 17:00
Session 3B - Registered Reports 1ESEM Registered Reports at Sonck
Chair(s): Sérgio Soares Universidade Federal de Pernambuco
15:45
10m
The Relevance of Model Transformation Language Features on Qualitative Properties of MTLs: A Study Protocol
ESEM Registered Reports
Stefan Höppner Ulm University, Matthias Tichy Ulm University, Germany
DOI
15:55
10m
On the acceptance by code reviewers of candidate security patches suggested by Automated Program Repair tools
ESEM Registered Reports
Aurora Papotti Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Ranindya Paramitha University of Trento, Fabio Massacci University of Trento; Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
DOI Pre-print
16:06
10m
Does Road Diversity Really Matter in Testing Automated Driving Systems? A Registered Report
ESEM Registered Reports
Stefan Klikovits , Vincenzo Riccio USI Lugano, Ezequiel Castellano National Institute of Informatics, Ahmet Cetinkaya Shibaura Institute of Technology, Alessio Gambi IMC University of Applied Sciences Krems, Paolo Arcaini National Institute of Informatics
Link to publication
16:17
10m
A Unified and Holistic Classification Scheme for Software Engineering Research
ESEM Registered Reports
Angelika Kaplan Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Thomas Kühn Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Ralf Reussner Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT) and FZI - Research Center for Information Technology (FZI)
16:27
10m
Studying the explanations for the automated prediction of bug and non-bug issues using LIME and SHAP
ESEM Registered Reports
Benjamin Ledel TU Clausthal, Steffen Herbold TU Clausthal
Pre-print
16:38
10m
Team performance and large-scale agile software development
ESEM Registered Reports
Muhammad Ovais Ahmad Karlstad University, Hadi Ghanbari Aalto University, Tomas Gustavsson Karlstad University
16:49
10m
Research paper
Comparative analysis of real bugs in open-source Machine Learning projects - A Registered Report
ESEM Registered Reports
Tuan Dung Lai Deakin University, Anj Simmons Deakin University, Scott Barnett Deakin University, Jean-Guy Schneider Deakin University, Rajesh Vasa Deakin University, Australia
Link to publication Pre-print
18:30 - 18:31
Leave for social dinner & sauna at LöylyESEIW ESEM at Clarion Lobby
18:30
1m
Dinner
Leave for conference dinner
ESEIW ESEM

19:00 - 21:00
Social Event: Dinner and Finnish saunaESEIW ESEM at Löyly Helsinki
19:00
2h
Social Event
Dinner and Finnish sauna
ESEIW ESEM

Fri 23 Sep

Displayed time zone: Athens change

09:00 - 10:30
Awards & Keynote: LyytinenESEIW ESEM at Bysa
Chair(s): Casper Lassenius Aalto University, Finland and Simula Metropolitan Center for Digital Engineering, Norway
09:00
15m
Awards
Awards
ESEIW ESEM

09:15
75m
Keynote
Opening the black-box of software processes – towards integrated understanding
ESEIW ESEM
10:30 - 11:00
10:30
30m
Coffee break
Coffee
ESEIW ESEM

11:00 - 12:30
Session 4A - DevOps & Development ApproachesESEM Emerging Results and Vision Papers / ESEM Technical Papers at Bysa
Chair(s): Marcela Fabiana Genero Bocco University of Castilla-La Mancha
11:00
20m
Full-paper
Characterizing the Usage of CI Tools in ML Projects
ESEM Technical Papers
Dhia Elhaq Rzig University of Michigan - Dearborn, Foyzul Hassan University of Michigan - Dearborn, Chetan Bansal Microsoft Research, Nachiappan Nagappan Microsoft Research
11:20
20m
Full-paper
Investigating the Impact of Continuous Integration Practices on the Productivity and Quality of Open-Source Projects
ESEM Technical Papers
Jadson Santos Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte, Daniel Alencar Da Costa University of Otago, Uirá Kulesza Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte
11:40
20m
Full-paper
Identifying Source Code File Experts
ESEM Technical Papers
Otávio Cury da Costa Castro Federal University of Piaui, Guilherme Amaral Avelino Federal University of Piaui, Pedro A. Santos Neto LOST/UFPI, Ricardo Britto Ericsson / Blekinge Institute of Technology, Marco Tulio Valente Federal University of Minas Gerais, Brazil
Pre-print
12:00
15m
Vision and Emerging Results
DevOps Practitioners’ Perceptions of the Low-code Trend
ESEM Emerging Results and Vision Papers
Saima Rafi University of Murcia, Muhammad Azeem Akbar LUT University, Mary Sánchez-Gordón Østfold University College, Ricardo Colomo-Palacios Østfold University College
12:15
15m
Vision and Emerging Results
A Preliminary Investigation of MLOps Practices in GitHub
ESEM Emerging Results and Vision Papers
Fabio Calefato University of Bari, Filippo Lanubile University of Bari, Luigi Quaranta University of Bari, Italy
11:00 - 12:30
Session 4B - Code Review & DefectsESEM Technical Papers / ESEM Emerging Results and Vision Papers / ESEM Journal-First Papers at Sonck
Chair(s): Per Runeson Lund University
11:00
20m
Full-paper
To What Extent Cognitive-Driven Development Improves Code Readability?
ESEM Technical Papers
Leonardo Barbosa UFPA, Victor Santiago UFPA, Alberto de Souza Zup Innovation, Gustavo Pinto Federal University of Pará (UFPA) and Zup Innovation
11:20
20m
Full-paper
Only Time Will Tell: Modelling Information Diffusion in Code Review with Time-Varying Hypergraphs
ESEM Technical Papers
Michael Dorner Blekinge Institute of Technology, Darja Šmite Blekinge Institute of Technology, Daniel Mendez Blekinge Institute of Technology, Krzysztof Wnuk Blekinge Institute of Technology , Jacek Czerwonka Developer Services, Microsoft
DOI Pre-print
11:40
20m
Full-paper
MEG: Multi-objective Ensemble Generation for Software Defect Prediction
ESEM Technical Papers
Rebecca Moussa University College London, Giovani Guizzo University College London, Federica Sarro University College London
12:00
15m
Full-paper
Towards a taxonomy of code review smells
ESEM Journal-First Papers
Emre Doğan Bilkent University, Eray Tüzün Bilkent University
12:15
15m
Vision and Emerging Results
Example Driven Code Review Explanation
ESEM Emerging Results and Vision Papers
Shadikur Rahman York University, Umme Ayman Koana York University, Maleknaz Nayebi York University
12:30 - 13:30
12:30
60m
Lunch
Lunch
ESEIW ESEM

13:30 - 15:00
Session 5A - Development ApproachesESEM Journal-First Papers / ESEM Technical Papers at Bysa
Chair(s): Filippo Lanubile University of Bari
13:30
15m
Full-paper
Antipatterns in software classification taxonomies
ESEM Journal-First Papers
Cezar Sas University of Groningen, Andrea Capiluppi University of Groningen
Link to publication DOI
13:45
20m
Full-paper
Android API Field Evolution and Its Induced Compatibility Issues
ESEM Technical Papers
Tarek Mahmud Texas State University, Meiru Che Data61, CSIRO, Guowei Yang University of Queensland
File Attached
14:05
20m
Full-paper
Towards Demystifying the Impact of Dependency Structures on Bug Locations in Deep Learning Libraries
ESEM Technical Papers
Di Cui Xidian University, Xingyu Li Xidian University, Feiyang Liu Xidian University, Siqi Wang Xidian University, Jie Dai Xidian University, Lu Wang Xidian University, Qingshan Li Xidian University
14:25
15m
Full-paper
Bumps in the Code: Error Handling During Software Development
ESEM Journal-First Papers
Tamara Lopez The Open University, Helen Sharp The Open University, Marian Petre The Open University, Bashar Nuseibeh The Open University (UK) & Lero (Ireland)
13:30 - 15:00
Session 5B - Development & Testing & Behavioral 2ESEM Technical Papers at Sonck
Chair(s): Sheila Reinehr Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Paraná (PUCPR)
13:30
15m
Full-paper
Potential Technical Debt and Its Resolution in Code Reviews: An Exploratory Study of the OpenStack and Qt Communities
ESEM Technical Papers
Liming Fu Wuhan University, Peng Liang Wuhan University, China, Zeeshan Rasheed Wuhan University, Zengyang Li Central China Normal University, Amjed Tahir Massey University, Xiaofeng Han Wuhan University, China
Link to publication DOI Pre-print
13:45
15m
Full-paper
MMF3: Neural Code Summarization Based on Multi-Modal Fine-Grained Feature Fusion
ESEM Technical Papers
Zheng Ma Shandong Normal University, Yuexiu Gao Shandong Normal University, Lei Lyu Shandong Normal University, Chen Lyu Shandong Normal University
14:00
15m
Full-paper
PG-VulNet: Detect Supply Chain Vulnerabilities in IoT Devices using Pseudo-code and Graphs
ESEM Technical Papers
Xin Liu Lanzhou University, Yixiong Wu Institute for Network Science and Cyberspace of Tsinghua University, Qingchen Yu Zhejiang University, Shangru Song Beijing Institute of Technology, Yue Liu Southeast University; Qi An Xin Group Corp., Qingguo Zhou Lanzhou University, Jianwei Zhuge Tsinghua University
14:15
15m
Full-paper
Heterogeneous Graph Neural Networks for Software Effort Estimation
ESEM Technical Papers
Hung Phan Iowa State University, Ali Jannesari Iowa State University
Pre-print
14:30
15m
Full-paper
Meetings and Mood - Related or Not? Insights from Student Software Projects
ESEM Technical Papers
Jil Klünder Leibniz Universität Hannover, Oliver Karras TIB - Leibniz Information Centre for Science and Technology
Pre-print
14:45
15m
Full-paper
A Tale of Two Tasks: Automated Issue Priority Prediction with Deep Multi-task Learning
ESEM Technical Papers
Yingling Li , Xing Che , Yuekai Huang Institute of Software, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Junjie Wang Institute of Software at Chinese Academy of Sciences, Song Wang York University, Yawen Wang Institute of Software, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Qing Wang Institute of Software at Chinese Academy of Sciences
15:00 - 15:30
15:00
30m
Coffee break
Coffee
ESEIW ESEM

15:30 - 16:00
Conference closingESEIW ESEM at Bysa
Chair(s): Casper Lassenius Aalto University, Finland and Simula Metropolitan Center for Digital Engineering, Norway
15:30
30m
Other
Conference Closing
ESEIW ESEM