Researcher profile

Simone Romano

Simone Romano contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 19 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
5works
0followers
3topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

5 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

CATTO: Just-in-time Test Case Selection and Execution

Regression testing ensures a System Under Test (SUT) still works as expected after changes to it. The simplest approach for regression testing consists of re-running the entire test suite against the changed version of the SUT. However, this might result in a time- and resource-consuming process; \eg when dealing with large and/or complex SUTs and test suits. To work around this problem, test Case Selection (TCS) strategies can be used. Such strategies seek to build a temporary test suite comprising only those test cases that are relevant to the changes made to the SUT, so avoiding executing those test cases that do not exercise the changed parts. In this paper, we introduce CATTO (Commit Adaptive Tool for Test suite Optimization) and CATTO INTELLIJ PLUGIN. The former is a tool implementing a TCS strategy for SUTs written in Java, while the latter is a wrapper to allow developers to use \toolName directly in IntelliJ. We also conducted a preliminary evaluation of CATTO on seven open-source Java SUTs in terms of reductions in test-suite size, fault-reveling test cases, and fault-detection capability. The results are promising and suggest that CATTO can be of help to developers when performing regression testing. The video demo and the documentation of the tool is available at: \url{https://catto-tool.github.io/}

preprint2020arXiv

A Large Scale Empirical Study of the Impact of Spaghetti Code and Blob Anti-patterns on Program Comprehension

Context: Several studies investigated the impact of anti-patterns (i.e., "poor" solutions to recurring design problems) during maintenance activities and reported that anti-patterns significantly affect the developers' effort required to edit files. However, before developers edit files, they must understand the source code of the systems. This source code must be easy to understand by developers. Objective: In this work, we provide a complete assessment of the impact of two instances of two anti-patterns, Blob or Spaghetti Code, on program comprehension. Method: We analyze the impact of these two anti-patterns through three empirical studies conducted at Polytechnique Montréal (Canada) with 24 participants; at Carlton University (Canada) with 30 participants; and at University Basilicata (Italy) with 79 participants. Results: We collect data from 372 tasks obtained thanks to 133 different participants from the three universities. We use three metrics to assess the developers' comprehension of the source code: (1) the duration to complete each task; (2) their percentage of correct answers; and, (3) the NASA task load index for their effort. Conclusions: We report that, although single occurrences of Blob or Spaghetti code anti-patterns have little effect on code comprehension, two occurrences of either Blob or Spaghetti Code significantly increases the developers' time spent in their tasks, reduce their percentage of correct answers, and increase their effort. Hence, we recommend that developers act on both anti-patterns, which should be refactored out of the source code whenever possible. We also recommend further studies on combinations of anti-patterns rather than on single anti-patterns one at a time.

preprint2020arXiv

Normalized Loss Functions for Deep Learning with Noisy Labels

Robust loss functions are essential for training accurate deep neural networks (DNNs) in the presence of noisy (incorrect) labels. It has been shown that the commonly used Cross Entropy (CE) loss is not robust to noisy labels. Whilst new loss functions have been designed, they are only partially robust. In this paper, we theoretically show by applying a simple normalization that: any loss can be made robust to noisy labels. However, in practice, simply being robust is not sufficient for a loss function to train accurate DNNs. By investigating several robust loss functions, we find that they suffer from a problem of underfitting. To address this, we propose a framework to build robust loss functions called Active Passive Loss (APL). APL combines two robust loss functions that mutually boost each other. Experiments on benchmark datasets demonstrate that the family of new loss functions created by our APL framework can consistently outperform state-of-the-art methods by large margins, especially under large noise rates such as 60% or 80% incorrect labels.

preprint2020arXiv

Researcher Bias in Software Engineering Experiments: a Qualitative Investigation

Researcher Bias (RB) occurs when researchers influence the results of an empirical study based on their expectations.RB might be due to the use of Questionable Research Practices(QRPs). In research fields like medicine, blinding techniques have been applied to counteract RB. We conducted an explorative qualitative survey to investigate RB in Software Engineering (SE)experiments, with respect to (i) QRPs potentially leading to RB, (ii) causes behind RB, and (iii) possible actions to counteract including blinding techniques. Data collection was based on semi-structured interviews. We interviewed nine active experts in the empirical SE community. We then analyzed the transcripts of these interviews through thematic analysis. We found that some QRPs are acceptable in certain cases. Also, it appears that the presence of RB is perceived in SE and, to counteract RB, a number of solutions have been highlighted: some are intended for SE researchers and others for the boards of SE research outlets.

preprint2020arXiv

Results from a replicated experiment on the affective reactions of novice developers when applying test-driven development

Test-driven Development (TDD) is an incremental approach to software development. Despite it is claimed to improve both quality of software and developers' productivity, the research on the claimed effects of TDD has so far shown inconclusive results. Some researchers have ascribed these inconclusive results to the negative affective states that TDD would provoke. A previous (baseline) experiment has, therefore, studied the affective reactions of (novice) developers---i.e., 29 third-year undergraduates in Computer Science (CS)---when practicing TDD to implement software. To validate the results of the baseline experiment, we conducted a replicated experiment that studies the affective reactions of novice developers when applying TDD to develop software. Developers in the treatment group carried out a development task using TDD, while those in the control group used a non-TDD approach. To measure the affective reactions of developers, we used the Self-Assessment Manikin instrument complemented with a liking dimension. The most important differences between the baseline and replicated experiments are: (i) the kind of novice developers involved in the experiments---third-year vs. second-year undergraduates in CS from two different universities; and (ii) their number---29 vs. 59. The results of the replicated experiment do not show any difference in the affective reactions of novice developers. Instead, the results of the baseline experiment suggest that developers seem to like TDD less as compared to a non-TDD approach and that developers following TDD seem to like implementing code less than the other developers, while testing code seems to make them less happy.