After a successful 10 th QuASoQ workshop, we have again included the following topics of interest: • New approaches to measurement, evaluation, comparison, and improvement of software qualspecification and quality assurance are crucial. Although there are many approaches to dealing with quantitative quality aspects, choosing a suitable set of techniques that best fit the specific project and organizational constraints is still challenging.
Even though approaches, methods, and techniques have been known for quite some time, little efort has been spent exchanging real-world problems with quanhas been devoted to empirically evaluating the risks, efity proaches in agile projects • Application of metrics and quantitative ap- titative approaches. For example, only limited research • Case studies and industrial experience reports on ficiency, or limitations of diferent testing techniques in the successful or failed application of quantitative approaches to software quality industrial settings.
Hence, one main goal of the workshop was to exchange • Tools, infrastructure, and environments support- experience, present new promising approaches, and to ing quantitative approaches
discuss how to set up, organize, and maintain quantitative • Empirical studies, evaluation, and comparison of
approaches to software quality.
measurement techniques and models • Quantitative approaches to test process improve
ment, test strategies, or testability • Empirical evaluations or comparisons of testing
techniques in industrial settings • Mining software repositories
Overall, the workshop aimed to gather researchers and practitioners together to discuss experiences in applying state-of-the-art approaches to measure, assess, and evaluate the quality of both software systems and software development processes in general and software test processes in particular.
As software development organizations are constantly forced to develop software in the ”right” quality, quality QuASoQ 2023: 11th International Workshop on Quantitative Korea https://www.utp.edu.my (T. Anwar)
0000-0002-3440-1238 (H. Lichter); 0000-0002-1436-0352 (T. Sunetnanta); 0000-0002-0390-8749 (T. Anwar) CEUR
CEUR
Workshop Proceedings (CEUR-WS.org) 2.
The QuASoQ workshop series has been started in 2013. Since then, the workshop has always been organized as a collocated event of the Asia-Pacific Software Engineering
virtual (Japan) | CEUR Vol-3330 virtual (Taiwan) | CEUR Vol-3062 virtual (Singapore) | CEUR Vol-2767 Putrayaya, Malaysia | CEUR Vol-2511 • 10th QuASoQ 2022 • 9th QuASoQ 2021 • 8th QuASoQ 2020 • 7th QuASoQ 2019 • 6th QuASoQ 2018 • 5th QuASoQ 2017 • 4th QuASoQ 2016 • 3rd QuASoQ 2015 • 2nd QuASoQ 2014
CEUR Workshop Proceedings
ceur-ws.org ISSN1613-0073
The presentations were divided into two sessions with a cofee break in between. Each session was accompanied by a moderator who tried to ensure the schedule was kept to.
The following five papers were submitted and accepted by the program committee for presentation and publication (the speaker is set in bold), covering very diferent topics. • Sanghoon Rho, Philipp Martens, Seungcheol Shin, Yeoneo Kim, Hoon Heo and Seunghyun Oh Coyote C++: An Industrial-Strength Fully Automated Unit Testing Tool • Kun Cheng and Shingo Takada
Software defect prediction based on JavaBERT and CNN-BiLSTM • Natsuda Kasisopha, Songsakdi Rongviriyapanich and Panita Meananeatra Proposals for Improving the Assessment of Medical Device Software in Thailand • Rabaya Sultana Mim, Toukir Ahammed and Kazi Sakib Identifying Vulnerable Functions from Source Code using Vulnerability Reports • Danyang Wang, Jiaqi Yin, Sini Chen and Huibiao Zhu Formalization and Verification of Go-based New Simple Queue System
After the workshop had to take place virtually in the last three years due to the COVID-19 pandemic, we were delighted to be able to hold the workshop again this year in the context of the APSEC in Seoul. However, as some authors couldn’t get a visa in their home country in time, two presentations had to be held on Zoom.
Based on our former experience, we wanted the workshop to be highly interactive. To have an exciting and interactive event sharing lots of experience, we organized the workshop presentations applying the authordiscussant model.
According to this workshop model, papers are presented by one of the authors. After the presentation, a discussant starts the discussion based on pre-formulated questions. Therefore, the discussant had to prepare a set of questions and know the presented paper’s details. The general structure of each talk was as follows: About 12 researchers attended the workshop and participated in the discussions. The participants received the author-discussant model well; it led to intensive discussions. Hereby, other participants, apart from the discussant, also joined the resulting discussions.
The presentations and subsequent discussions showed that we still need new approaches to code-related quality assessment. This was clearly demonstrated by the tool for automated unit testing of C++ programs presented by Philipp Martens. Similar tools do not currently exist, so a comparison with such tools is impossible.
Determining buggy code using defect prediction meth• The paper’s author presented the paper (20 min- ods can help developers and testers detecting defects utes). more specifically. Kun Cheng’s contribution introduced • After that, the paper’s discussant opened the dis- this topic. The same applies to the topic presented by cussion using their questions. Rabaya Sultana Mim. The presented approach allows • Finally, we moderated the discussion among the developers to quickly identify vulnerable code in existing audience (5 minutes). applications.
Natsuda Kasisopha’s talk clearly showed that we need new approaches for particular domains, in this case, medical devices, so that companies can develop such products in accordance with the applicable regulations and standards.
In his contribution, Danyang Wang shows the use of formal procedures, CSP and model checking, to evaluate relevant properties of software. It became apparent that this is not easy and cannot be applied to every type of software.
In summary, during this workshop, the participants proposed and discussed diferent approaches to assess and evaluate relevant aspects of software and software development processes.
It should not go unmentioned that the workshop had to be held in a hybrid format as two speakers were unable to travel to Seoul. We integrated them into the workshop by means of a Zoom call.
Many people contributed to the success of this workshop. First, we want to give thanks to the authors and presenters of the accepted papers. Furthermore, we want to express our gratitude to the APSEC 2023 workshop organizers; they did a perfect job and supported us in running the workshop in a hybrid mode.
Finally, we are glad that these people served on the program committee (most of them for many years) and supported the workshop by soliciting papers and writing peer reviews: