Find research datasets worth reusing
Search datasets from major research repositories and use ShareScore to quickly assess how well each record supports discovery, access, and reuse.
8
datasets available to search
ShareScore release 0.9.0
Dataset results
8 results for “variability bugs”
Are Neural Bug Detectors Comparable to Software Developers on Variable Misuse Bugs?
<p>Artifact for "Are Neural Bug Detectors Comparable to Software Developers on Variable Misuse Bugs?"</p> <p><strong>Abstract:</strong> </p> <p>Debugging, that is, identifying and fixing bugs in software, is a central part of software development. Developers are therefore often confronted with the task of deciding whether a given code snippet contains a bug, and if yes, where. Recently, data-driven methods have been employed to learn this task of bug detection, resulting (amongst others) in so called neural bug detectors. Neural bug detectors are trained on millions of buggy and correct code snippets.</p> <p>Given the “neural learning” procedure, it seems likely that neu- ral bug detectors – on the specific task of finding bugs – have a performance similar to human software developers. For this work, we set out to substantiate or refute such a hypothesis. We report on the results of an empirical study with over 100 software developers, targeting the comparison of humans and neural bug detectors. As detection task, we chose a specific form of bugs (variable misuse bugs) for which neural bug detectors have recently made significant progress. Our study shows that despite the fact that neural bug detectors see millions of such misuse bugs during training, software developers – when conducting bug detection as a majority decision – are slightly better than neural bug detectors on this class of bugs. Altogether, we find a large overlap in the performance, both for classifying code as buggy and for localizing the buggy line in the code. In comparison to developers, one of the two evaluated neural bug detectors, however, raises a higher number of false alarms in our study.</p> <p><strong>Content:</strong> The artifact includes the following components:</p> <ul> <li> <p><strong>Web UI:</strong> The developer survey was performed online in the browser of the participants. For this, we created a custom web interface tailored for our study task. We included both the implementation of the frontend (website) and backend implementation (buisness logic and database) in this artifact. Therefore, it is not only possible to replicate our survey with same interface and a new group of participants but it is also possible to extend the interface for future studies. </p> </li> <li> <p><strong>Neural bug detectors: </strong>We evaluate the performance of the developers against two neural bug detectors. In this artifact, we include the bug detectors (implementation + trained models) and the evaluation script used for producing our results. Besides the replication of our bug detector evaluation, the detectors can also be used in future projects for detecting variable misuse bugs in Java methods.</p> </li> <li> <p><strong>Analysis scripts</strong>: After collecting the raw results from the developers and neural bug detectors, we performed several analysis to gain insights how developers and bug detectors compare on the variable misuse task. We include all analysis steps in form of Jupyter notebooks in the artifact. With this, it is possible to reproduce all the figures of our paper. </p> </li> </ul> <p>In addition, we also provide further artifacts that were successfully evaluated at ASE 2022:</p> <p><strong>ASE 2022 Artifact: </strong><a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6958242">10.5281/zenodo.6958242</a></p> <p><strong>Virtual machine: </strong><a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6957849">10.5281/zenodo.6957849</a></p>
Dataset for Variability Warning and Bugs Study
<p>This is the dataset for our study of variability warnings and bugs. Our raw data was much too large (461GB) to upload, so we provide our results and the scripts we use to manipulate and process those results.</p>
Figure 6 from: Quadros A, Bugs P, Beatriz de Araujo P (2012) Tonic immobility in terrestrial isopods: intraspecific and interspecific variability. ZooKeys 176: 155-170. https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.176.2355
Figure 6 - Relationship between the time elapsed until the beginning of tonic immobility and the duration of response, for responsive individuals in experiment 2. The values indicate the results of the linear regression analysis.
Figure 5 from: Quadros A, Bugs P, Beatriz de Araujo P (2012) Tonic immobility in terrestrial isopods: intraspecific and interspecific variability. ZooKeys 176: 155-170. https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.176.2355
Figure 5 - Responsiveness of Balloniscus sellowii individuals in relation to size. The line models the probability of being responsive according to the individual size (after a logistic regression). The black and grey symbols show the responsive and non-responsive individuals, respectively.
Figure 3 from: Quadros A, Bugs P, Beatriz de Araujo P (2012) Tonic immobility in terrestrial isopods: intraspecific and interspecific variability. ZooKeys 176: 155-170. https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.176.2355
Figure 3 - A Percentage of responsive individuals to each specific stimulus, in relation to the total number of responsive individuals of each species. B Percentage of responsive males and females in relation to the total number of males and females of each species tested. The * indicates a significant difference between stimuli, after a χ2 test.
Figure 4 from: Quadros A, Bugs P, Beatriz de Araujo P (2012) Tonic immobility in terrestrial isopods: intraspecific and interspecific variability. ZooKeys 176: 155-170. https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.176.2355
Figure 4 - Size and response to the stimuli in A Porcellio dilatatus and B Balloniscus glaber. Responsive individuals are represented with black marks and non-responsive individuals with grey marks.
Figure 2 from: Quadros A, Bugs P, Beatriz de Araujo P (2012) Tonic immobility in terrestrial isopods: intraspecific and interspecific variability. ZooKeys 176: 155-170. https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.176.2355
Figure 2 - Responsiveness and tonic immobility duration in terrestrial isopods. A Percentage of responsive individuals in the three species tested. The * indicates a significant difference between species, after a G-test. B Mean tonic immobility duration in seconds for each terrestrial isopod (considering all stimuli pooled) in experiment 1. Different letters indicate significant differences, after ANOVA and Tukey test.
Figure 1 from: Quadros A, Bugs P, Beatriz de Araujo P (2012) Tonic immobility in terrestrial isopods: intraspecific and interspecific variability. ZooKeys 176: 155-170. https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.176.2355
Figure 1 - Terrestrial isopods studied in dorsal view: Balloniscus sellowii, Balloniscus glaber (Balloniscidae) and Porcellio dilatatus (Porcellionidae) (top) and their respective postures during tonic immobility (bottom). For Balloniscus sellowii a drawing made from a photograph is presented. Bars = 2 mm.
ScienceDex guides
Understand access before you commit
These curated guides explain access requirements, typical timelines, costs, and reuse considerations for widely used research datasets.
Allen Brain Atlas
Allen Brain Atlas is an Allen Institute collection of brain map atlases, datasets, APIs, and analysis tools covering mouse, human, and non-human primate brain resources.
Annotated Behaviour and Observability Dataset (ABODe)
ABODe is a University of Edinburgh DataShare dataset for behavior classification in group-housed mice using home-cage video, identities, bounding boxes, ground-plate positions, and annotator labels.
DANDI Archive for NWB datasets
DANDI is a BRAIN Initiative archive for publishing and sharing neurophysiology data, including electrophysiology, optophysiology, and behavioral data packaged as NWB and related standards.
International Brain Laboratory public data
The International Brain Laboratory public data releases expose standardized mouse decision-making experiments, including Neuropixels recordings, widefield calcium imaging, behavior, and session metadata accessed through the ONE API.
OpenNeuro
OpenNeuro is a free, open platform for sharing neuroimaging datasets, with public search, dataset pages, and download paths for web, S3, DataLad, and the OpenNeuro CLI.