Machine Learning is the study of methods for programming computers to learn. Computers are applied to a wide range of tasks, and for most of these it is relatively easy for programmers to design and implement the necessary software. However, there are many tasks for which this is difficult or impossible. These can be divided into four general categories. First, there are problems for which there exist no human experts. For example, in modern automated manufacturing facilities, there is a need to predict machine failures before they occur by analyzing sensor readings. Because the machines are new, there are no human experts who can be interviewed by a programmer to provide the knowledge necessary to build a computer system. A machine learning system can study recorded data and subsequent machine failures and learn prediction rules. Second, there are problems where human experts exist, but where they are unable to explain their expertise. This is the case in many perceptual tasks, such as speech recognition, hand-writing recognition, and natural language understanding. Virtually all humans exhibit expert-level abilities on these tasks, but none of them can describe the detailed steps that they follow as they perform them. Fortunately, humans can provide machines with examples of the inputs and correct outputs for these tasks, so machine learning algorithms can learn to map the inputs to the outputs. Third, there are problems where phenomena are changing rapidly. In finance, for example, people would like to predict the future behavior of the stock market, of consumer purchases, or of exchange rates. These behaviors change frequently, so that even if a programmer could construct a good predictive computer program, it would need to be rewritten frequently. A learning program can relieve the programmer of this burden by constantly modifying and tuning a set of learned prediction rules. Fourth, there are applications that need to be customized for each computer user separately. Consider, for example, a program to filter unwanted electronic mail messages. Different users will need different filters. It is unreasonable to expect each user to program his or her own rules, and it is infeasible to provide every user with a software engineer to keep the rules up-to-date. A machine learning system can learn which mail messages the user rejects and maintain the filtering rules automatically. Machine learning addresses many of the same research questions as the fields of statistics, data mining, and psychology, but with differences of emphasis. Statistics focuses on understanding the phenomena that have generated the data, often with the goal of testing different hypotheses about those phenomena. Data mining seeks to find patterns in the data that are understandable by people. Psychological studies of human learning aspire to understand the mechanisms underlying the various learning behaviors exhibited by people (concept learning, skill acquisition, strategy change, etc.).

Machine learning

How to Do Things With Words

Emotion and Adaptation

The importance of contextual information has been recognized by researchers and practitioners in many disciplines, including e-commerce personalization, information retrieval, ubiquitous and mobile computing, data mining, marketing, and management. While a substantial amount of research has already been performed in the area of recommender systems, most existing approaches focus on recommending the most relevant items to users without taking into account any additional contextual information, such as time, location, or the company of other people (e.g., for watching movies or dining out). In this chapter we argue that relevant contextual information does matter in recommender systems and that it is important to take this information into account when providing recommendations. We discuss the general notion of context and how it can be modeled in recommender systems. Furthermore, we introduce three different algorithmic paradigms – contextual prefiltering, post-filtering, and modeling – for incorporating contextual information into the recommendation process, discuss the possibilities of combining several contextaware recommendation techniques into a single unifying approach, and provide a case study of one such combined approach. Finally, we present additional capabilities for context-aware recommenders and discuss important and promising directions for future research.

/pdf/context-aware-recommender-systems-8uash1fwm4.pdf

Context-aware recommender systems

The paper describes the organization of the SemEval 2019 Task 5 about the detection of hate speech against immigrants and women in Spanish and English messages extracted from Twitter. The task is organized in two related classification subtasks: a main binary subtask for detecting the presence of hate speech, and a finer-grained one devoted to identifying further features in hateful contents such as the aggressive attitude and the target harassed, to distinguish if the incitement is against an individual rather than a group. HatEval has been one of the most popular tasks in SemEval-2019 with a total of 108 submitted runs for Subtask A and 70 runs for Subtask B, from a total of 74 different teams. Data provided for the task are described by showing how they have been collected and annotated. Moreover, the paper provides an analysis and discussion about the participant systems and the results they achieved in both subtasks.

/pdf/semeval-2019-task-5-multilingual-detection-of-hate-speech-43evbafeqx.pdf

SemEval-2019 Task 5: Multilingual Detection of Hate Speech Against Immigrants and Women in Twitter

/pdf/evalita-2018-overview-on-the-6th-evaluation-campaign-of-31uip6zr28.pdf

Evalita 2018: Overview on the 6th Evaluation Campaign of Natural Language Processing and Speech Tools for Italian.

Developers experience a wide range of emotions during programming tasks, which may have an impact on job performance. In this paper, we present an empirical study aimed at (i) investigating the link between emotion and progress, (ii) understanding the triggers for developers' emotions and the strategies to deal with negative ones, (iii) identifying the minimal set of non-invasive biometric sensors for emotion recognition during programming task. Results confirm previous findings about the relation between emotions and perceived productivity. Furthermore, we show that developers' emotions can be reliably recognized using only a wristband capturing the electrodermal activity and heart-related metrics.

pdf/recognizing-developers-emotions-while-programming-ga5sl1ju1n.pdf

Recognizing Developers' Emotions while Programming

Code reviews are an important mechanism for assuring quality of source code changes. Reviewers can either add general comments pertaining to the entire change or pinpoint concerns or shortcomings about a specific part of the change using inline comments. Recent studies show that reviewers often do not understand the change being reviewed and its context.Our ultimate goal is to identify the factors that confuse code reviewers and understand how confusion impacts the efficiency and effectiveness of code review(er)s. As the first step towards this goal we focus on the identification of confusion in developers' comments. Based on an existing theoretical framework categorizing expressions of confusion, we manually classify 800 comments from code reviews of the Android project. We observe that confusion can be reasonably well-identified by humans: raters achieve moderate agreement (Fleiss' kappa 0.59 for the general comments and 0.49 for the inline ones). Then, for each kind of comment we build a series of automatic classifiers that, depending on the goals of the further analysis, can be trained to achieve high precision (0.875 for the general comments and 0.615 for the inline ones), high recall (0.944 for the general comments and 0.988 for the inline ones), or substantial precision and recall (0.696 and 0.542 for the general comments and 0.434 and 0.583 for the inline ones, respectively). These results motivate further research on the impact of confusion on the code review process. Moreover, other researchers can employ the proposed classifiers to analyze confusion in other contexts where software development-related discussions occur, such as mailing lists.

/pdf/confusion-detection-in-code-reviews-49h5ijo9ug.pdf

Confusion Detection in Code Reviews

Emotional arousal increases activation and performance but may also lead to burnout in software development. We present the first version of a Software Engineering Arousal lexicon (SEA) that is specifically designed to address the problem of emotional arousal in the software developer ecosystem. SEA is built using a bootstrapping approach that combines word embedding model trained on issue-tracking data and manual scoring of items in the lexicon. We show that our lexicon is able to differentiate between issue priorities, which are a source of emotional activation and then act as a proxy for arousal. The best performance is obtained by combining SEA (428 words) with a previously created general purpose lexicon by Warriner et al. (13,915 words) and it achieves Cohen's d effect sizes up to 0.5.

Bootstrapping a Lexicon for Emotional Arousal in Software Engineering

Code review is a widely used technique of systematic examination of code changes which aims at increasing software quality. Code reviews provide several benefits for the project, including finding bugs, knowledge transfer, and assurance of adherence to project guidelines and coding style. However, code reviews have a major cost: they can delay the merge of the code change, and thus, impact the overall development process. This cost can be even higher if developers do not understand something, i.e., when developers face confusion during the code review. This paper studies the phenomenon of confusion in code reviews. Understanding confusion is an important starting point to help reducing the cost of code reviews and enhance the effectiveness of this practice, and hence, improve the development process. We conducted two complementary studies. The first one aimed at identifying the reasons for confusion in code reviews, its impacts, and the coping strategies developers use to deal with it. Then, we surveyed developers to identify the most frequently experienced reasons for confusion, and conducted a systematic mapping study of solutions proposed for those reasons in the scientific literature. From the first study, we build a framework with 30 reasons for confusion, 14 impacts, and 13 coping strategies. The results of the systematic mapping study shows 38 articles addressing the most frequent reasons for confusion. From those articles, we found 13 different solutions for confusion proposed in the literature, and five impacts were established related to the most frequent reasons for confusion. Based on the solutions identified in the mapping study, or the lack of them, we propose an actionable guideline for developers on how to cope with confusion during code reviews; we also make several suggestions how tool builders can support code reviews. Additionally, we propose a research agenda for researchers studying code reviews.

/pdf/an-exploratory-study-on-confusion-in-code-reviews-3hczleg2wk.pdf

An exploratory study on confusion in code reviews

Handle everyday research tasks with reliable, citation-backed results

Your personal Research Agent to handle research tasks with citation-backed results

Popular Tasks used by Researchers

How can I help with your research?

Meet SciSpace

Get more enhanced response by uploading the PDFs you want me to reference.

No relevant PDFs in your library

SciSpace is the AI research assistant for academics. Run systematic literature reviews on 280M+ papers, and write papers with cited sources. Trusted by 1M+ students, PhDs & researchers.

SciSpace | AI for Research

Analyze PDFs

Code & Manuscripts

Funding & Grants

Literature & Patents

Medical & Clinical Data

Systematic Review

Visualize & Present

Web & Data

Build a Google Scholar-like website for your research.

Build a website

Create charts and images for your research

Create a Chart

Write a paper for submission to a journal

Draft a manuscript

Patent Search

Design eye-catching scientific posters in minutes.

Scientific Poster Generation

Systematic Literature Review

One task is running at the moment. Your messages will be shown right after.

Drag and drop or click here to browse

Loved by <highlight>1 million+</highlight> researchers

Extract a list of specific topics and their sources from unstructured text

Topics

Compare and analyze relevant papers that matches with your search

Papers

Get insights from PDFs and bookmarked papers from your library

My library

Recent searches

Try searching for:

Catch AI-generated content in scholarly and non-scholarly content

{ai} Detector

Ai Writer

Get PDF Summaries, highlighted text explanations 

Chat with PDF

Effortlessly create in-text citations and bibliographies in APA and 2,500 other formats

Citation generator

Get explanations, summaries, and answers on academic papers

Ease up your research workflow with {scispace}'s cohort of exciting AI tools

Elevate your academic writing skills and convey your ideas the way you want

Paraphraser

Explore our range of reading and writing tools

Your file is being prepared and should be ready in a few minutes. If it's a large file, it might take a bit longer. You can close this window, and we'll email you the file when it's done.

You have reached a maximum limit of <strong>{limit}</strong> columns in the table. Remove at least <strong>1</strong> column to add or create another one.

Nicole Novielli

Author Tools

Chat about Author