Pattern-Based Mining of Opinions in Q&A Websites

B. Lin, Fiorella Zampetti, G. Bavota, M. D. Penta, Michele Lanza
{"title":"Pattern-Based Mining of Opinions in Q&A Websites","authors":"B. Lin, Fiorella Zampetti, G. Bavota, M. D. Penta, Michele Lanza","doi":"10.1109/ICSE.2019.00066","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Informal documentation contained in resources such as Q&A websites (e.g., Stack Overflow) is a precious resource for developers, who can find there examples on how to use certain APIs, as well as opinions about pros and cons of such APIs. Automatically identifying and classifying such opinions can alleviate developers' burden in performing manual searches, and can be used to recommend APIs that are good from some points of view (e.g., performance), or highlight those less ideal from other perspectives (e.g., compatibility). We propose POME (Pattern-based Opinion MinEr), an approach that leverages natural language parsing and pattern-matching to classify Stack Overflow sentences referring to APIs according to seven aspects (e.g., performance, usability), and to determine their polarity (positive vs negative). The patterns have been inferred by manually analyzing 4,346 sentences from Stack Overflow linked to a total of 30 APIs. We evaluated POME by (i) comparing the pattern-matching approach with machine learners leveraging the patterns themselves as well as n-grams extracted from Stack Overflow posts; (ii) assessing the ability of POME to detect the polarity of sentences, as compared to sentiment-analysis tools; (iii) comparing POME with the state-of-the-art Stack Overflow opinion mining approach, Opiner, through a study involving 24 human evaluators. Our study shows that POME exhibits a higher precision than a state-of-the-art technique (Opiner), in terms of both opinion aspect identification and polarity assessment.","PeriodicalId":6736,"journal":{"name":"2019 IEEE/ACM 41st International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-05-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"54","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2019 IEEE/ACM 41st International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSE.2019.00066","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 54

Abstract

Informal documentation contained in resources such as Q&A websites (e.g., Stack Overflow) is a precious resource for developers, who can find there examples on how to use certain APIs, as well as opinions about pros and cons of such APIs. Automatically identifying and classifying such opinions can alleviate developers' burden in performing manual searches, and can be used to recommend APIs that are good from some points of view (e.g., performance), or highlight those less ideal from other perspectives (e.g., compatibility). We propose POME (Pattern-based Opinion MinEr), an approach that leverages natural language parsing and pattern-matching to classify Stack Overflow sentences referring to APIs according to seven aspects (e.g., performance, usability), and to determine their polarity (positive vs negative). The patterns have been inferred by manually analyzing 4,346 sentences from Stack Overflow linked to a total of 30 APIs. We evaluated POME by (i) comparing the pattern-matching approach with machine learners leveraging the patterns themselves as well as n-grams extracted from Stack Overflow posts; (ii) assessing the ability of POME to detect the polarity of sentences, as compared to sentiment-analysis tools; (iii) comparing POME with the state-of-the-art Stack Overflow opinion mining approach, Opiner, through a study involving 24 human evaluators. Our study shows that POME exhibits a higher precision than a state-of-the-art technique (Opiner), in terms of both opinion aspect identification and polarity assessment.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
基于模式的问答网站意见挖掘
在问答网站(如Stack Overflow)等资源中包含的非正式文档对开发人员来说是宝贵的资源,他们可以找到如何使用某些api的示例,以及关于这些api的优缺点的意见。自动识别和分类这些意见可以减轻开发人员执行手动搜索的负担,并且可以用于推荐从某些角度(例如,性能)来看是好的api,或者从其他角度(例如,兼容性)突出显示那些不太理想的api。我们提出了POME(基于模式的意见挖掘器),这是一种利用自然语言解析和模式匹配的方法,根据七个方面(例如,性能,可用性)对引用api的Stack Overflow句子进行分类,并确定它们的极性(积极与消极)。这些模式是通过手动分析Stack Overflow中的4346个句子推断出来的,这些句子链接到总共30个api。我们通过(i)将模式匹配方法与利用模式本身以及从Stack Overflow帖子中提取的n-grams的机器学习方法进行比较来评估POME;(ii)与情感分析工具相比,评估POME检测句子极性的能力;(iii)通过一项涉及24名人类评价者的研究,将POME与最先进的堆栈溢出意见挖掘方法Opiner进行比较。我们的研究表明,在意见方面识别和极性评估方面,POME表现出比最先进的技术(Opiner)更高的精度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
VFix: Value-Flow-Guided Precise Program Repair for Null Pointer Dereferences Search-Based Energy Testing of Android Scalable Approaches for Test Suite Reduction A System Identification Based Oracle for Control-CPS Software Fault Localization Training Binary Classifiers as Data Structure Invariants
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1