Answering conceptual queries with Ferret
Abstract
Programmers seek to answer questions as they investigate the functioning of a software system, such as "which execution path is being taken in this case?" Programmers attempt to answer these questions, which we call conceptual queries, using a variety of tools. Each type of tool typically highlights one kind of information about the system, such as static structural information or control-flow information. Unfortunately for the programmer, the tools seldom directly answer the programmer's conceptual queries. Instead, the programmer must piece together results from different tools to determine an answer to the initial query. At best, this process is time consuming and at worst, this process can lead to data overload and disorientation.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Ferret allows developers to ask conceptual queries about a particular program element and shows the number of results for the query, allowing the developer to gain some idea of the sum of all the E(Cw)s they will incur.
“Ferret allows developers to ask conceptual queries about a particular program element such as”
From Foraging and navigations, fundamentally: developers' predictions of value and cost (2016) · cites this paper as [7]
Ferret helps developers predict E(Cw) beyond the one-click-away distance.
“Another useful example is the query system Ferret [7], which helps developers predict E(C w ) beyond the one-click-away distance.”
From Foraging and navigations, fundamentally: developers' predictions of value and cost (2016) · cites this paper as [7]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 36 · Cited by 63
- Authors
- de Alwis, B., & Murphy, G. C.
- Affiliations
- University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
- University of British Columbia (CA)
- ORCID
- Murphy, Gail C.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the 30th international conference on Software engineering
- Publisher
- ACM
- Published
- 2008-05-10
- Pages
- 21-30
- ISSN
- 0270-5257 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2131398643
- Cited by
- 63
- References
- 36
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 4
- FWCI
- 6.55
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- ACM/IEEE International Conference on Software Engineering: Companion Proceedings (ICSE-Companion) (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Software Engineering Research
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Software › Software Testing and Debugging Techniques
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Software Engineering Techniques and Practices
- Keywords
- ferrets, software debugging, program comprehension, data overload
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
