论文标题
自动预测堆栈溢出中被拒绝的编辑
Automatic Prediction of Rejected Edits in Stack Overflow
论文作者
论文摘要
堆栈溢出中共享知识的内容质量（因此）对于支持软件开发人员的编程问题至关重要。因此，因此允许其用户建议编辑以提高帖子的质量（即问和答案）。但是，现有的研究表明，由于不需要的内容/格式或违反编辑准则，许多建议的编辑被拒绝。这种情况使您沮丧或削弱了想进行优质编辑的用户。因此，我们的研究重点是为用户提供有关如何改善其帖子编辑的建议，以协助用户。首先，我们手动调查764（382个问题 + 382个答案）拒绝了回滚的编辑，并产生了19个拒绝原因的目录。其次，我们提取15个文本和基于用户的功能来捕获这些拒绝原因。第三，我们使用这些功能开发了四个机器学习模型。我们表现最好的模型可以预测69.1％精度，71.2％的召回，70.1％的F1得分和69.8％的总体准确性，可以预测被拒绝的编辑。第四，我们引入了一个名为Editex的在线工具，该工具可与SO编辑系统一起使用。 Editex可以通过建议拒绝的潜在原因来帮助用户编辑帖子。我们招募20名参与者来评估Editex的有效性。一半的参与者（即治疗组）使用Editex，另一半（即对照组）使用SO标准编辑系统来编辑帖子。根据我们的实验，Editex可以支持标准编辑系统，以防止49％的拒绝编辑，包括通常被拒绝的编辑。但是，即使在自由形式的常规编辑中，它也可以防止12％的拒绝。该治疗组发现Editex影响力所确定的潜在拒绝原因。此外，与SO编辑系统相比，使用EDITEX进行编辑的中间工作负载是一半。
The content quality of shared knowledge in Stack Overflow (SO) is crucial in supporting software developers with their programming problems. Thus, SO allows its users to suggest edits to improve the quality of a post (i.e., question and answer). However, existing research shows that many suggested edits in SO are rejected due to undesired contents/formats or violating edit guidelines. Such a scenario frustrates or demotivates users who would like to conduct good-quality edits. Therefore, our research focuses on assisting SO users by offering them suggestions on how to improve their editing of posts. First, we manually investigate 764 (382 questions + 382 answers) rejected edits by rollbacks and produce a catalog of 19 rejection reasons. Second, we extract 15 texts and user-based features to capture those rejection reasons. Third, we develop four machine learning models using those features. Our best-performing model can predict rejected edits with 69.1% precision, 71.2% recall, 70.1% F1-score, and 69.8% overall accuracy. Fourth, we introduce an online tool named EditEx that works with the SO edit system. EditEx can assist users while editing posts by suggesting the potential causes of rejections. We recruit 20 participants to assess the effectiveness of EditEx. Half of the participants (i.e., treatment group) use EditEx and another half (i.e., control group) use the SO standard edit system to edit posts. According to our experiment, EditEx can support SO standard edit system to prevent 49% of rejected edits, including the commonly rejected ones. However, it can prevent 12% rejections even in free-form regular edits. The treatment group finds the potential rejection reasons identified by EditEx influential. Furthermore, the median workload suggesting edits using EditEx is half compared to the SO edit system.
