Paper detail

Evaluating Pre-Trained Models for User Feedback Analysis in Software Engineering: A Study on Classification of App-Reviews

Context: Mobile app reviews written by users on app stores or social media are significant resources for app developers.Analyzing app reviews have proved to be useful for many areas of software engineering (e.g., requirement engineering, testing). Automatic classification of app reviews requires extensive efforts to manually curate a labeled dataset. When the classification purpose changes (e.g. identifying bugs versus usability issues or sentiment), new datasets should be labeled, which prevents the extensibility of the developed models for new desired classes/tasks in practice. Recent pre-trained neural language models (PTM) are trained on large corpora in an unsupervised manner and have found success in solving similar Natural Language Processing problems. However, the applicability of PTMs is not explored for app review classification Objective: We investigate the benefits of PTMs for app review classification compared to the existing models, as well as the transferability of PTMs in multiple settings. Method: We empirically study the accuracy and time efficiency of PTMs compared to prior approaches using six datasets from literature. In addition, we investigate the performance of the PTMs trained on app reviews (i.e. domain-specific PTMs) . We set up different studies to evaluate PTMs in multiple settings: binary vs. multi-class classification, zero-shot classification (when new labels are introduced to the model), multi-task setting, and classification of reviews from different resources. The datasets are manually labeled app review datasets from Google Play Store, Apple App Store, and Twitter data. In all cases, Micro and Macro Precision, Recall, and F1-scores will be used and we will report the time required for training and prediction with the models.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.