skip to main content
10.1145/3524842.3528457acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesicseConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Beyond duplicates: towards understanding and predicting link types in issue tracking systems

Published:17 October 2022Publication History

ABSTRACT

Software projects use Issue Tracking Systems (ITS) like JIRA to track issues and organize the workflows around them. Issues are often inter-connected via different links such as the default JIRA link types Duplicate, Relate, Block, or Subtask. While previous research has mostly focused on analyzing and predicting duplication links, this work aims at understanding the various other link types, their prevalence, and characteristics towards a more reliable link type prediction. For this, we studied 607,208 links connecting 698,790 issues in 15 public JIRA repositories. Besides the default types, the custom types Depend, Incorporate, Split, and Cause were also common. We manually grouped all 75 link types used in the repositories into five general categories: General Relation, Duplication, Composition, Temporal / Causal, and Workflow. Comparing the structures of the corresponding graphs, we observed several trends. For instance, Duplication links tend to represent simpler issue graphs often with two components and Composition links present the highest amount of hierarchical tree structures (97.7%). Surprisingly, General Relation links have a significantly higher transitivity score than Duplication and Temporal / Causal links.

Motivated by the differences between the link types and by their popularity, we evaluated the robustness of two state-of-the-art duplicate detection approaches from the literature on the JIRA dataset. We found that current deep-learning approaches confuse between Duplication and other links in almost all repositories. On average, the classification accuracy dropped by 6% for one approach and 12% for the other. Extending the training sets with other link types seems to partly solve this issue. We discuss our findings and their implications for research and practice.

References

  1. Mehdi Amoui, Nilam Kaushik, Abraham Al-Dabbagh, Ladan Tahvildari, Shimin Li, and Weining Liu. 2013. Search-based duplicate defect detection: An industrial experience. In 2013 10th Working Conference on Mining Software Repositories (MSR). IEEE, USA, 173--182. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. John Anvik, Lyndon Hiew, and Gail C. Murphy. 2006. Who Should Fix This Bug? Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 361--370. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Deeksha Arya, Wenting Wang, Jin L. C. Guo, and Jinghui Cheng. 2019. Analysis and Detection of Information Types of Open Source Software Issue Discussions. In Proceedings of the 41st International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE '19). IEEE Press, Piscataway, NJ, USA, 454--464. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Dane Bertram, Amy Voida, Saul Greenberg, and Robert Walker. 2010. Communication, Collaboration, and Bugs: The Social Nature of Issue Tracking in Small, Collocated Teams. In Proceedings of the 2010 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW '10). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 291--300. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Nicolas Bettenburg, Rahul Premraj, Thomas Zimmermann, and 3 Sunghun Kim. 2008. Duplicate bug reports considered harmful ... really?. In 2008 IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance. IEEE, USA, 337--345. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Elizabeth Bjarnason, Krzysztof Wnuk, and Björn Regnell. 2011. Requirements are slipping through the gaps --- A case study on causes & effects of communication gaps in large-scale software development. In 2011 IEEE 19th International Requirements Engineering Conference. IEEE, USA, 37--46. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Amar Budhiraja, Kartik Dutta, Raghu Reddy, and Manish Shrivastava. 2018. DWEN: Deep Word Embedding Network for Duplicate Bug Report Detection in Software Repositories. In Proceedings of the 40th International Conference on Software Engineering: Companion Proceeedings (ICSE '18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 193--194. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Yguarata Cerqueira Cavalcanti, Eduardo Santana de Almeida, Carlos Eduardo Albuquerque da Cunha, Daniel Lucrédio, and Silvio Romero de Lemos Meira. 2010. An Initial Study on the Bug Report Duplication Problem. In 2010 14th European Conference on Software Maintenance and Reengineering. ICSE, USA, 264--267. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Xiaoyun Cheng, Naming Liu, Lin Guo, Zhou Xu, and Tao Zhang. 2020. Blocking Bug Prediction Based on XGBoost with Enhanced Features. In 2020 IEEE 44th Annual Computers, Software, and Applications Conference (COMPSAC). IEEE, USA, 902--911. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Jayati Deshmukh, K. M. Annervaz, Sanjay Podder, Shubhashis Sengupta, and Neville Dubash. 2017. Towards Accurate Duplicate Bug Retrieval Using Deep Learning Techniques. In 2017 IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance and Evolution (ICSME). IEEE, USA, 115--124. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Gouri Deshpande, Quim Motger, Cristina Palomares, Ikagarjot Kamra, Katarzyna Biesialska, Xavier Franch, Guenther Ruhe, and Jason Ho. 2020. Requirements Dependency Extraction by Integrating Active Learning with Ontology-Based Retrieval. In 2020 IEEE 28th International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE). IEEE, USA, 78--89. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Qiang Fan, Yue Yu, Gang Yin, Tao Wang, and Huaimin Wang. 2017. Where Is the Road for Issue Reports Classification Based on Text Mining?. In 2017 ACM/IEEE International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement (ESEM). IEEE, USA, 121--130. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Camilo Fitzgerald, Emmanuel Letier, and Anthony Finkelstein. 2011. Early failure prediction in feature request management systems. In 2011 IEEE 19th International Requirements Engineering Conference. IEEE, USA, 229--238. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Davide Fucci, Cristina Palomares, Xavier Franch, Dolors Costal, Mikko Raatikainen, Martin Stettinger, Zijad Kurtanovic, Tero Kojo, Lars Koenig, Andreas Falkner, Gottfried Schenner, Fabrizio Brasca, Tomi Männistö, Alexander Felfernig, and Walid Maalej. 2018. Needs and Challenges for a Platform to Support Large-Scale Requirements Engineering: A Multiple-Case Study. In Proceedings of the 12th ACM/IEEE International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement (ESEM '18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 19, 10 pages. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Derek L. Hansen, Ben Shneiderman, Marc A. Smith, and Itai Himelboim (Eds.). 2020. (second edition ed.). Morgan Kaufmann, USA. 31--51 pages. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Jianjun He, Ling Xu, Meng Yan, Xin Xia, and Yan Lei. 2020. Duplicate Bug Report Detection Using Dual-Channel Convolutional Neural Networks. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 117--127. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Kim Herzig, Sascha Just, and Andreas Zeller. 2013. It's not a bug, it's a feature: How misclassification impacts bug prediction. In 2013 35th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE). IEEE, USA, 392--401. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Gaeul Jeong, Sunghun Kim, and Thomas Zimmermann. 2009. Improving Bug Triage with Bug Tossing Graphs. In Proceedings of the 7th joint meeting of the European software engineering conference and the ACM SIGSOFT symposium on The foundations of software engineering (ESEC/FSE '09). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 111--120. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Ahmed Lamkanfi, Serge Demeyer, Emanuel Giger, and Bart Goethals. 2010. Predicting the severity of a reported bug. In 2010 7th IEEE Working Conference on Mining Software Repositories (MSR 2010). IEEE, USA, 1--10. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. Ahmed Lamkanfi, Serge Demeyer, Quinten David Soetens, and Tim Verdonck. 2011. Comparing mining algorithms for predicting the severity of a reported bug. In 2011 15th European Conference on Software Maintenance and Reengineering. IEEE, IEEE, USA, 249--258.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Alina Lazar, Sarah Ritchey, and Bonita Sharif. 2014. Generating Duplicate Bug Datasets. In Proceedings of the 11th Working Conference on Mining Software Repositories (MSR 2014). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 392--395. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Lisha Li, Zhilei Ren, Xiaochen Li, Weiqin Zou, and He Jiang. 2018. How Are Issue Units Linked? Empirical Study on the Linking Behavior in GitHub. In 2018 25th Asia-Pacific Software Engineering Conference (APSEC). IEEE, USA, 386--395. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. Garm Lucassen, Fabiano Dalpiaz, Jan Martijn E.M. van der Werf, Sjaak Brinkkemper, and Didar Zowghi. 2017. Behavior-Driven Requirements Traceability via Automated Acceptance Tests. In 2017 IEEE 25th International Requirements Engineering Conference Workshops (REW). IEEE, USA, 431--434. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. Robert J. Walker Martin P. Robillard, Walid Maalej and Thomas Zimmermann (Eds.). 2014. . Springer, Berlin Heidelberg. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. Thorsten Merten, Matúš Falis, Paul Hübner, Thomas Quirchmayr, Simone Bürsner, and Barbara Paech. 2016. Software Feature Request Detection in Issue Tracking Systems. In 2016 IEEE 24th International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE). IEEE, USA, 166--175. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. Thorsten Merten, Daniel Krämer, Bastian Mager, Paul Schell, Simone Bürsner, and Barbara Paech. 2016. Do information retrieval algorithms for automated traceability perform effectively on issue tracking system data?. In International Working Conference on Requirements Engineering: Foundation for Software Quality. Springer International Publishing, Cham, 45--62.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Lloyd Montgomery, Clara Lüders, and Walid Maalej. 2022. An Alternative Issue Tracking Dataset of Public Jira Repositories. In 2022 IEEE/ACM 18th International Conference on Mining Software Repositories (MSR). IEEE, USA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. M. E. J. Newman. 2002. Assortative Mixing in Networks. Phys. Rev. Lett. 89 (Oct 2002), 208701. Issue 20. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  29. Alexander Nicholson, Deeksha M. Arya, and Jin L.C. Guo. 2020. Traceability Network Analysis: A Case Study of Links in Issue Tracking Systems. In 2020 IEEE Seventh International Workshop on Artificial Intelligence for Requirements Engineering (AIRE). IEEE, USA, 39--47. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. Patrick Rempel and Parick Mäder. 2017. Preventing Defects: The Impact of Requirements Traceability Completeness on Software Quality. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 43, 8 (2017), 777--797. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Thiago Marques Rocha and André Luiz Da Costa Carvalho. 2021. SiameseQAT: A Semantic Context-Based Duplicate Bug Report Detection Using Replicated Cluster Information. IEEE Access 9 (2021), 44610--44630. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  32. Thomas Schank and Dorothea Wagner. 2005. Finding, Counting and Listing All Triangles in Large Graphs, an Experimental Study. In Experimental and Efficient Algorithms, Sotiris E. Nikoletseas (Ed.). Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 606--609.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Marcus Seiler and Barbara Paech. 2017. Using tags to support feature management across issue tracking systems and version control systems. In International Working Conference on Requirements Engineering: Foundation for Software Quality. Springer International Publishing, Cham, 174--180.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  34. Pannavat Terdchanakul, Hideaki Hata, Passakorn Phannachitta, and Kenichi Matsumoto. 2017. Bug or Not? Bug Report Classification Using N-Gram IDF. In 2017 IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance and Evolution (ICSME). IEEE, USA, 534--538. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  35. C Albert Thompson, Gail C Murphy, Marc Palyart, and Marko Gašparic. 2016. How software developers use work breakdown relationships in issue repositories. In 2016 IEEE/ACM 13th Working Conference on Mining Software Repositories (MSR). IEEE, IEEE, USA, 281--285.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. Juha Tiihonen, Mikko Raatikainen, Lalli Myllyaho, Clara Marie Lüders, Tomi Männistö, et al. 2019. Coping with Inconsistent Models of Requirements. In Proceedings of the 21st Configuration Workshop Hamburg, Germany, September 19th to 20th, 2019. Rheinisch-Westfaelische Technische Hochschule Aachen, Aachen, Germany, 1--8.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Xiaoyin Wang, Lu Zhang, Tao Xie, John Anvik, and Jiasu Sun. 2008. An Approach to Detecting Duplicate Bug Reports Using Natural Language and Execution Information. In Proceedings of the 30th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE '08). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 461--470. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. Jifeng Xuan, He Jiang, Zhilei Ren, and Weiqin Zou. 2012. Developer prioritization in bug repositories. In 2012 34th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE). IEEE, USA, 25--35. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  39. Tao Zhang, He Jiang, Xiapu Luo, and Alvin T.S. Chan. 2016. A Literature Review of Research in Bug Resolution: Tasks, Challenges and Future Directions. Comput. J. 59, 5 (2016), 741--773. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  40. Ye Zhang and Byron Wallace. 2017. A Sensitivity Analysis of (and Practitioners' Guide to) Convolutional Neural Networks for Sentence Classification. In Proceedings of the Eighth International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing (Volume 1: Long Papers). Asian Federation of Natural Language Processing, Taipei, Taiwan, 253--263. https://aclanthology.org/I17-1026Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. Yu Zhou, Yanxiang Tong, Ruihang Gu, and Harald Gall. 2016. Combining text mining and data mining for bug report classification. Journal of Software: Evolution and Process 28, 3 (2016), 150--176.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  42. Thomas Zimmermann, Rahul Premraj, Nicolas Bettenburg, Sascha Just, Adrian Schröter, and Cathrin Weiss. 2010. What Makes a Good Bug Report? IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 36, 5 (2010), 618--643. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Recommendations

Comments

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Sign in
  • Published in

    cover image ACM Conferences
    MSR '22: Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Mining Software Repositories
    May 2022
    815 pages
    ISBN:9781450393034
    DOI:10.1145/3524842

    Copyright © 2022 ACM

    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    • Published: 17 October 2022

    Permissions

    Request permissions about this article.

    Request Permissions

    Check for updates

    Qualifiers

    • research-article

    Upcoming Conference

    ICSE 2025

PDF Format

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader