Can We Identify Stack Overflow Questions Requiring Code Snippets? Investigating the Cause & Effect of Missing Code Snippets

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2402.04575v1
• Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2024 04:25:31 GMT
• Title: Can We Identify Stack Overflow Questions Requiring Code Snippets? Investigating the Cause & Effect of Missing Code Snippets
• Authors: Saikat Mondal, Mohammad Masudur Rahman, Chanchal K. Roy
• Abstract summary: On the Stack Overflow (SO) Q&A site, users often request solutions to their code-related problems. They often miss required code snippets during their question submission. This study investigates the cause & effect of missing code snippets in SO questions whenever required.
• Score: 8.107650447105998
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
• Abstract: On the Stack Overflow (SO) Q&A site, users often request solutions to their code-related problems (e.g., errors, unexpected behavior). Unfortunately, they often miss required code snippets during their question submission, which could prevent their questions from getting prompt and appropriate answers. In this study, we conduct an empirical study investigating the cause & effect of missing code snippets in SO questions whenever required. Here, our contributions are threefold. First, we analyze how the presence or absence of required code snippets affects the correlation between question types (missed code, included code after requests & had code snippets during submission) and corresponding answer meta-data (e.g., presence of an accepted answer). According to our analysis, the chance of getting accepted answers is three times higher for questions that include required code snippets during their question submission than those that missed the code. We also investigate whether the confounding factors (e.g., user reputation) affect questions receiving answers besides the presence or absence of required code snippets. We found that such factors do not hurt the correlation between the presence or absence of required code snippets and answer meta-data. Second, we surveyed 64 practitioners to understand why users miss necessary code snippets. About 60% of them agree that users are unaware of whether their questions require any code snippets. Third, we thus extract four text-based features (e.g., keywords) and build six ML models to identify the questions that need code snippets. Our models can predict the target questions with 86.5% precision, 90.8% recall, 85.3% F1-score, and 85.2% overall accuracy. Our work has the potential to save significant time in programming question-answering and improve the quality of the valuable knowledge base by decreasing unanswered and unresolved questions.

Related papers

• I Could've Asked That: Reformulating Unanswerable Questions [89.93173151422636]
  We evaluate open-source and proprietary models for reformulating unanswerable questions. GPT-4 and Llama2-7B successfully reformulate questions only 26% and 12% of the time, respectively. We publicly release the benchmark and the code to reproduce the experiments.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-24T17:59:07Z)
• Reproducibility of Issues Reported in Stack Overflow Questions: Challenges, Impact & Estimation [2.2160604288512324]
  Software developers often submit questions to technical Q&A sites like Stack Overflow (SO) to resolve code-level problems. In practice, they include example code snippets with questions to explain the programming issues. Unfortunately, such code snippets could not always reproduce the issues due to several unmet challenges.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-13T22:55:35Z)
• Which questions should I answer? Salience Prediction of Inquisitive Questions [118.097974193544]
  We show that highly salient questions are empirically more likely to be answered in the same article. We further validate our findings by showing that answering salient questions is an indicator of summarization quality in news.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-16T21:33:05Z)
• Answering Ambiguous Questions with a Database of Questions, Answers, and Revisions [95.92276099234344]
  We present a new state-of-the-art for answering ambiguous questions that exploits a database of unambiguous questions generated from Wikipedia. Our method improves performance by 15% on recall measures and 10% on measures which evaluate disambiguating questions from predicted outputs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-16T20:23:16Z)
• Asking Clarification Questions to Handle Ambiguity in Open-Domain QA [25.80369529145732]
  We propose to ask a clarification question, where the user's response will help identify the interpretation that best aligns with the user's intention. We first present CAMBIGNQ, a dataset consisting of 5,654 ambiguous questions. We then define a pipeline of tasks and design appropriate evaluation metrics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-23T08:20:01Z)
• Answer ranking in Community Question Answering: a deep learning approach [0.0]
  This work tries to advance the state of the art on answer ranking for community Question Answering by proceeding with a deep learning approach. We created a large data set of questions and answers posted to the Stack Overflow website. We leveraged the natural language processing capabilities of dense embeddings and LSTM networks to produce a prediction for the accepted answer attribute.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-16T18:47:41Z)
• Medical Question Understanding and Answering with Knowledge Grounding and Semantic Self-Supervision [53.692793122749414]
  We introduce a medical question understanding and answering system with knowledge grounding and semantic self-supervision. Our system is a pipeline that first summarizes a long, medical, user-written question, using a supervised summarization loss. The system first matches the summarized user question with an FAQ from a trusted medical knowledge base, and then retrieves a fixed number of relevant sentences from the corresponding answer document.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-09-30T08:20:32Z)
• Features that Predict the Acceptability of Java and JavaScript Answers on Stack Overflow [5.332217496693262]
  We studied the Stack Overflow dataset by analyzing questions and answers for the two most popular tags (Java and JavaScript) Our findings reveal that the length of code in answers, reputation of users, similarity of the text between questions and answers, and the time lag between questions and answers have the highest predictive power for differentiating accepted and unaccepted answers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-01-08T03:09:38Z)
• IIRC: A Dataset of Incomplete Information Reading Comprehension Questions [53.3193258414806]
  We present a dataset, IIRC, with more than 13K questions over paragraphs from English Wikipedia. The questions were written by crowd workers who did not have access to any of the linked documents. We follow recent modeling work on various reading comprehension datasets to construct a baseline model for this dataset.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-11-13T20:59:21Z)
• Improving Quality of a Post's Set of Answers in Stack Overflow [2.0625936401496237]
  A large number of low-quality posts on Stack Overflow require improvement. We propose an approach to automate the identification process of such posts and boost their set of answers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-05-30T19:40:19Z)
• What Are People Asking About COVID-19? A Question Classification Dataset [56.609360198598914]
  We present COVID-Q, a set of 1,690 questions about COVID-19 from 13 sources. The most common questions in our dataset asked about transmission, prevention, and societal effects of COVID. Many questions that appeared in multiple sources were not answered by any FAQ websites of reputable organizations such as the CDC and FDA.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-05-26T05:41:58Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.