Since 2009, the deep learning revolution --- which was triggered by the introduction of ImageNet --- has stimulated the synergy between Software Engineering (SE) and Machine Learning (ML)/Deep Learning (DL). Meanwhile, critical reviews have emerged that suggest that ML/DL should be used cautiously. To improve the applicability and generalizability of ML/DL-related SE studies, we conducted a 12-year Systematic Literature Review (SLR) on 1,428 ML/DL-related SE papers published between 2009 and 2020. Our trend analysis demonstrated the impacts that ML/DL brought to SE. We examined the complexity of applying ML/DL solutions to SE problems and how such complexity led to issues concerning the reproducibility and replicability of ML/DL studies in SE. Specifically, we investigated how ML and DL differ in data preprocessing, model training, and evaluation when applied to SE tasks, and what details need to be provided with respect to ensure that a study can be reproduced or replicated. By categorizing the rationales behind the selection of ML/DL techniques into five themes, we analyzed how model performance, robustness, interpretability, complexity, and data simplicity affected choices of ML/DL models.

The definitions of two coreference scoring metrics— B3 and CEAF—are underspecified with respect to predicted, as opposed to key (or gold) mentions. Several variations have been proposed that manipulate either, or both, the key and predicted mentions in order to get a one-to-one mapping. On the other hand, the metric BLANC was, until recently, limited to scoring partitions of key mentions. In this paper, we (i) argue that mention manipulation for scoring predicted mentions is unnecessary, and potentially harmful as it could produce unintuitive results; (ii) illustrate the application of all these measures to scoring predicted mentions; (iii) make available an open-source, thoroughly-tested reference implementation of the main coreference evaluation measures; and (iv) rescore the results of the CoNLL-2011/2012 shared task systems with this implementation. This will help the community accurately measure and compare new end-to-end coreference resolution algorithms.

Recent years have seen the remarkable capabilities of large language models (LLMs) for code generation. Different from existing work that evaluate the correctness of the code generated by LLMs, we propose to further evaluate its efficiency. More efficient code can lead to higher performance and execution efficiency of programs and software completed by LLM-assisted programming. First, we evaluate the efficiency of the code generated by LLMs on two benchmarks, HumanEval and MBPP. Then, we choose a set of programming problems from the online judge platform LeetCode to conduct a more difficult evaluation. Finally, we explore several prompts that would enable LLMs to generate more efficient code.

Yi Feng, Chuanyi Li, Vincent Ng. Proceedings of the 62nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers). 2024.