An Empirical Investigation into the Reproduction of Bug Reports for Android Apps
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
One of the key tasks related to ensuring mobile app quality is the reporting, management, and resolution of bug reports. As such, researchers have committed considerable resources toward automating various tasks of the bug management process for mobile apps, such as reproduction and triaging. However, the success of these automated approaches is largely dictated by the characteristics and properties of the bug reports they operate upon. As such, understanding mobile app bug reports is imperative to drive the continued advancement of report management techniques. While prior studies have examined high-level statistics of large sets of reports, we currently lack an in-depth investigation of how the information typically reported in mobile app issue trackers relates to the specific details generally required to reproduce the underlying failures. In this paper, we perform an in-depth analysis of 180 reproducible bug reports systematically mined from Android apps on GitHub and investigate how the information contained in the reports relates to the task of reproducing the described bugs. In our analysis, we focus on three pieces of information: the environment needed to reproduce the bug report, the steps to reproduce (S2Rs), and the observed behavior. Focusing on this information, we characterize failure types, identify the modality used to report the information, and characterize the quality of the information within the reports. We find that bugs are reported in a multi-modal fashion, the environment is not always provided, and S2Rs often contain missing or non-specific enough information. These findings carry with them important implications on automated bug reproduction techniques as well as automated bug report management approaches more generally.
Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 3 Jan 2023.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2024: 3; 2025: 1.
4 papers.
- 2024On the Workflows and Smells of Leaderboard Operations (LBOps): An Exploratory Study of Foundation Model Leaderboardscited by 6
- 2025Combining Language and App UI Analysis for the Automated Assessment of Bug Reproduction Stepscited by 2
- 2024Semantic GUI Scene Learning and Video Alignment for Detecting Duplicate Video-based Bug Reportscited by 1
- 2024AURORA: Navigating UI Tarpits via Automated Neural Screen Understandingcited by 0
- 2025Combining Language and App UI Analysis for the Automated Assessment of Bug Reproduction Steps6 Feb 2025
- 2024Semantic GUI Scene Learning and Video Alignment for Detecting Duplicate Video-based Bug Reports11 Jul 2024
- 2024On the Workflows and Smells of Leaderboard Operations (LBOps): An Exploratory Study of Foundation Model Leaderboards4 Jul 2024
- 2024AURORA: Navigating UI Tarpits via Automated Neural Screen Understanding1 Apr 2024