mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

FRUGAL: Unlocking SSL for Software Analytics

arXiv 2108.09847 ↗First posted 22 Aug 2021cs.SE cs.LGcited by 6

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Standard software analytics often involves having a large amount of data with labels in order to commission models with acceptable performance. However, prior work has shown that such requirements can be expensive, taking several weeks to label thousands of commits, and not always available when traversing new research problems and domains. Unsupervised Learning is a promising direction to learn hidden patterns within unlabelled data, which has only been extensively studied in defect prediction. Nevertheless, unsupervised learning can be ineffective by itself and has not been explored in other domains (e.g., static analysis and issue close time). Motivated by this literature gap and technical limitations, we present FRUGAL, a tuned semi-supervised method that builds on a simple optimization scheme that does not require sophisticated (e.g., deep learners) and expensive (e.g., 100% manually labelled data) methods. FRUGAL optimizes the unsupervised learner's configurations (via a simple grid search) while validating our design decision of labelling just 2.5% of the data before prediction. As shown by the experiments of this paper FRUGAL outperforms the state-of-the-art adoptable static code warning recognizer and issue closed time predictor, while reducing the cost of labelling by a factor of 40 (from 100% to 2.5%). Hence we assert that FRUGAL can save considerable effort in data labelling especially in validating prior work or researching new problems. Based on this work, we suggest that proponents of complex and expensive methods should always baseline such methods against simpler and cheaper alternatives. For instance, a semi-supervised learner like FRUGAL can serve as a baseline to the state-of-the-art software analytics.

Key facts. Cited by 6 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 22 of its 111 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 22 Aug 2021.

Builds on

22 of 111 references.

References · 22

  1. 2014Neural Machine Translation by Jointly Learning to Align and Translatecited by 4,530
  2. 2013Efficient Estimation of Word Representations in Vector Spacecited by 4,346
  3. 2013Distributed Representations of Words and Phrases and their Compositionalitycited by 3,462
  4. 2014Deep Learning in Neural Networks: An Overviewcited by 765
  5. 2017Easy over Hard: A Case Study on Deep Learningcited by 20
  6. 2018DeepTriage: Exploring the Effectiveness of Deep Learning for Bug Triagingcited by 20
  7. 2016Tuning for Software Analytics: is it Really Necessary?cited by 18
  8. 2017Is "Better Data" Better than "Better Data Miners"? (On the Benefits of Tuning SMOTE for Defect Prediction)cited by 17
  9. 2019Better Data Labelling with EMBLEM (and how that Impacts Defect Prediction)cited by 13
  10. 2019How to "DODGE" Complex Software Analytics?cited by 11
  11. 2018Improving Vulnerability Inspection Efficiency Using Active Learningcited by 10
  12. 2020Identifying Self-Admitted Technical Debts with Jitterbug: A Two-step Approachcited by 10
10 more
  1. 20199.6 Million Links in Source Code Comments: Purpose, Evolution, and Decaycited by 6
  2. 2018Applications of Psychological Science for Actionable Analyticscited by 5
  3. 2019Replication Can Improve Prior Results: A GitHub Study of Pull Request Acceptancecited by 4
  4. 2020Learning to Recognize Actionable Static Code Warnings (is Intrinsically Easy)cited by 4
  5. 2021Mining Scientific Workflows for Anomalous Data Transferscited by 4
  6. 2017FLASH: A Faster Optimizer for SBSE Taskscited by 3
  7. 2017Revisiting Unsupervised Learning for Defect Predictioncited by 2
  8. 2020The Changing Nature of Computational Science Softwarecited by 2
  9. 2020Revisiting Process versus Product Metrics: a Large Scale Analysiscited by 2
  10. 2019How to Better Distinguish Security Bug Reports (using Dual Hyperparameter Optimizationcited by 1

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2021: 1; 2022: 0; 2023: 2; 2024: 0; 2025: 1; 2026: 2.

6 papers.