Emerging Results on Automated Support for Searching and Selecting Evidence for Systematic Literature Review Updates

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2402.05317v1
• Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2024 23:39:20 GMT
• Title: Emerging Results on Automated Support for Searching and Selecting Evidence for Systematic Literature Review Updates
• Authors: Bianca Minetto Napole\~ao, Ritika Sarkar, Sylvain Hall\'e, Fabio Petrillo, Marcos Kalinowski
• Abstract summary: We present emerging results on an automated approach to support searching and selecting studies for SLR updates in Software Engineering. We developed an automated tool prototype to perform the snowballing search technique and support selecting relevant studies for SLR updates using Machine Learning (ML) algorithms.
• Score: 1.1153433121962064
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Context: The constant growth of primary evidence and Systematic Literature Reviews (SLRs) publications in the Software Engineering (SE) field leads to the need for SLR Updates. However, searching and selecting evidence for SLR updates demands significant effort from SE researchers. Objective: We present emerging results on an automated approach to support searching and selecting studies for SLR updates in SE. Method: We developed an automated tool prototype to perform the snowballing search technique and support selecting relevant studies for SLR updates using Machine Learning (ML) algorithms. We evaluated our automation proposition through a small-scale evaluation with a reliable dataset from an SLR replication and its update. Results: Effectively automating snowballing-based search strategies showed feasibility with minor losses, specifically related to papers without Digital Object Identifier (DOI). The ML algorithm giving the highest performance to select studies for SLR updates was Linear Support Vector Machine, with approximately 74% recall and 15% precision. Using such algorithms with conservative thresholds to minimize the risk of missing papers can significantly reduce evidence selection efforts. Conclusion: The preliminary results of our evaluation point in promising directions, indicating the potential of automating snowballing search efforts and of reducing the number of papers to be manually analyzed by about 2.5 times when selecting evidence for updating SLRs in SE.

Related papers

• Self-Calibrated Listwise Reranking with Large Language Models [137.6557607279876]
  Large language models (LLMs) have been employed in reranking tasks through a sequence-to-sequence approach. This reranking paradigm requires a sliding window strategy to iteratively handle larger candidate sets. We propose a novel self-calibrated listwise reranking method, which aims to leverage LLMs to produce global relevance scores for ranking.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-07T10:31:31Z)
• AutoSurvey: Large Language Models Can Automatically Write Surveys [77.0458309675818]
  This paper introduces AutoSurvey, a speedy and well-organized methodology for automating the creation of comprehensive literature surveys. Traditional survey paper creation faces challenges due to the vast volume and complexity of information. Our contributions include a comprehensive solution to the survey problem, a reliable evaluation method, and experimental validation demonstrating AutoSurvey's effectiveness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-10T12:56:06Z)
• Prompt Optimization with EASE? Efficient Ordering-aware Automated Selection of Exemplars [66.823588073584]
  Large language models (LLMs) have shown impressive capabilities in real-world applications. The quality of these exemplars in the prompt greatly impacts performance. Existing methods fail to adequately account for the impact of exemplar ordering on the performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-25T08:23:05Z)
• Automated Evaluation of Retrieval-Augmented Language Models with Task-Specific Exam Generation [9.390902237835457]
  We propose a new method to measure the task-specific accuracy of Retrieval-Augmented Large Language Models (RAG) Evaluation is performed by scoring the RAG on an automatically-generated synthetic exam composed of multiple choice questions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-22T13:14:11Z)
• System for systematic literature review using multiple AI agents: Concept and an empirical evaluation [5.194208843843004]
  We introduce a novel multi-AI agent model designed to fully automate the process of conducting Systematic Literature Reviews. The model operates through a user-friendly interface where researchers input their topic. It generates a search string used to retrieve relevant academic papers. The model then autonomously summarizes the abstracts of these papers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-13T10:27:52Z)
• Zero-shot Retrieval: Augmenting Pre-trained Models with Search Engines [83.65380507372483]
  Large pre-trained models can dramatically reduce the amount of task-specific data required to solve a problem, but they often fail to capture domain-specific nuances out of the box. This paper shows how to leverage recent advances in NLP and multi-modal learning to augment a pre-trained model with search engine retrieval.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-29T05:33:28Z)
• CSMeD: Bridging the Dataset Gap in Automated Citation Screening for Systematic Literature Reviews [10.207938863784829]
  We introduce CSMeD, a meta-dataset consolidating nine publicly released collections. CSMeD serves as a comprehensive resource for training and evaluating the performance of automated citation screening models. We introduce CSMeD-FT, a new dataset designed explicitly for evaluating the full text publication screening task.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-21T09:36:11Z)
• ReEval: Automatic Hallucination Evaluation for Retrieval-Augmented Large Language Models via Transferable Adversarial Attacks [91.55895047448249]
  This paper presents ReEval, an LLM-based framework using prompt chaining to perturb the original evidence for generating new test cases. We implement ReEval using ChatGPT and evaluate the resulting variants of two popular open-domain QA datasets. Our generated data is human-readable and useful to trigger hallucination in large language models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-19T06:37:32Z)
• Prompts Matter: Insights and Strategies for Prompt Engineering in Automated Software Traceability [45.235173351109374]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have the potential to revolutionize automated traceability. This paper explores the process of prompt engineering to extract link predictions from an LLM.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-01T01:56:22Z)
• Don't Be So Sure! Boosting ASR Decoding via Confidence Relaxation [7.056222499095849]
  beam search seeks the transcript with the greatest likelihood computed using the predicted distribution. We show that recently proposed Self-Supervised Learning (SSL)-based ASR models tend to yield exceptionally confident predictions. We propose a decoding procedure that improves the performance of fine-tuned ASR models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-12-27T06:42:26Z)
• Automated Machine Learning Techniques for Data Streams [91.3755431537592]
  This paper surveys the state-of-the-art open-source AutoML tools, applies them to data collected from streams, and measures how their performance changes over time. The results show that off-the-shelf AutoML tools can provide satisfactory results but in the presence of concept drift, detection or adaptation techniques have to be applied to maintain the predictive accuracy over time.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-14T11:42:46Z)

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.