Cited by 47Software Engineering ResearchSoftware Engineering Techniques and PracticesNeuroscience, Education and Cognitive Function

WAP: understanding the brain at software debugging

Duraes, J., Madeira, H., Castelhano, J., Duarte, C., Branco, M. Castelo·2016·2016 IEEE 27th International Symposium on Software Reliability Engineering (ISSRE)

Abstract

We propose that understanding functional patterns of activity in mapped brain regions associated with code comprehension tasks and, more specifically, to the activity of finding bugs in traditional code inspections could reveal useful insights to improve software reliability and to improve the software development process in general. This includes helping to select the best professionals for the debugging effort, improving the conditions for code inspections, and identify new directions to follow for training code reviewers. This paper presents an interdisciplinary study to analyze the brain activity during code inspection tasks using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), which is a well-established tool in cognitive neuroscience research. We used several programs where realistic bugs representing the most frequent types of software faults found in the field were injected. The code inspectors involved in the research include programmers with different levels of expertise and experience in real code reviews. The goal is to understand brain activity patterns associated with code comprehension tasks and, more specifically, the brain activity when the code reviewer identifies a bug in the code ('eureka' moment), which can be a true positive or a false positive. Our results confirmed that brain areas associated with language processing and mathematics are highly active during code reviewing and shows that there are specific brain activity patterns that can be related to the decision-making moment of suspicion/bug detection. Importantly, the activity at the anterior insula region that we find to play a relevant role in the process of identifying software bugs is positively correlated to the precision of bug detection by the inspectors. This finding provides a new perspective on the role of this region on error awareness and monitoring and of its potential predictive value in predicting the quality of bug removing.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/issre.2016.53

Cites

14 of 14 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 15 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Duraes, J., Madeira, H., Castelhano, J., Duarte, C., & Branco, M. C.
Affiliations
  • Universidade Politécnica de Coimbra (PT)
  • University of Coimbra (PT)
Venue
2016 IEEE 27th International Symposium on Software Reliability Engineering (ISSRE)
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2016-10
Pages
87-92
ISSN
1071-9458 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2560572048
Cited by
47
References
15
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 1
FWCI
2.27
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Proceedings/Proceedings - International Symposium on Software Reliability Engineering (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Software Engineering Research
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Software Engineering Techniques and Practices
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neuroscience, Education and Cognitive Function
Keywords
software debugging, code review, program comprehension, brain activity, anterior insula, bug detection, eureka moments, software reliability, programmer expertise, error awareness, language processing, decision-making, functional MRI

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review