arXiv subjects

Ivan Machado

Publications and source records attributed to Ivan Machado.

14 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

An Empirical Evaluation of Code Smell Detection in Angular Applications

Angular is one of the most widely adopted frameworks for developing large-scale, dynamic web applications. As projects increase in scope and complexity, developers face growing challenges in managing architecture and maintaining clean, modular code. These challenges often lead to design flaws, commonly referred to as code smells. While React-specific smells have been cataloged in prior studies, limited knowledge exists regarding Angular-specific smells and how they manifest. This study investigates Angular code smells through a grey literature review, consolidating community knowledge and technical discussions. From the collected sources, 11 distinct Angular code smells were identified, 6 of which also occur in React-based systems, suggesting that some issues are cross-framework. Each smell was analyzed, exemplified, and grouped according to its technical characteristics. Based on the resulting catalog, we implemented an automated static analysis tool to detect Angular code smells. The tool was empirically evaluated using a manually validated dataset, and its effectiveness was assessed through standard information retrieval metrics. The evaluation results indicate high detection performance across all smells, achieving accuracy values above 0.88 and F1-scores ranging from 0.89 to 1.00. The findings reveal recurring issues such as component overloading, duplicated logic, and inefficient template bindings, reinforcing the relevance of systematic detection support. This study presents the first catalog of Angular-specific code smells derived from grey literature and demonstrates the feasibility and effectiveness of automated detection, providing a solid foundation for future empirical studies and tool development aimed at improving front-end code quality.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2026

Beyond Code, We Are People: A Systematic Mapping of 25 Years of Literature on Soft Skills in Agile Development Teams

Software development is a sociotechnical and human-centered endeavor in which human factors directly influence quality, productivity, and innovation capacity. In this context, career development in computing goes beyond technical mastery, requiring competencies that enable professionals to deal with continuous change and collaborative demands. Among these, non-technical skills (soft skills) stand out, encompassing social, emotional, and communicational dimensions essential to team effectiveness and the success of software projects. Despite their recognized importance, there is still a need for a systematic mapping of the most relevant soft skills over the past 25 years, a period marked by the adoption of agile approaches in industry. This gap limits the integration of human and technical aspects in software development. This study presents a systematic mapping of the literature, analyzing 97 studies published between January 2000 and May 2025 across major scientific databases. The results identify recurring competencies such as communication, adaptability, teamwork, and leadership, as well as their association with different roles in agile contexts. The main agile approaches adopted, particularly Scrum, are also identified, along with key gaps in the literature, such as the lack of studies on role specific soft skills. The findings can support researchers, educators, and practitioners in designing curricula, training strategies, and organizational practices aligned with human factors, reinforcing the importance of integrating social and technical dimensions in the development of collaborative and innovative professionals.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2025

Quality Assessment of Python Tests Generated by Large Language Models

The manual generation of test scripts is a time-intensive, costly, and error-prone process, indicating the value of automated solutions. Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown great promise in this domain, leveraging their extensive knowledge to produce test code more efficiently. This study investigates the quality of Python test code generated by three LLMs: GPT-4o, Amazon Q, and LLama 3.3. We evaluate the structural reliability of test suites generated under two distinct prompt contexts: Text2Code (T2C) and Code2Code (C2C). Our analysis includes the identification of errors and test smells, with a focus on correlating these issues to inadequate design patterns. Our findings reveal that most test suites generated by the LLMs contained at least one error or test smell. Assertion errors were the most common, comprising 64% of all identified errors, while the test smell Lack of Cohesion of Test Cases was the most frequently detected (41%). Prompt context significantly influenced test quality; textual prompts with detailed instructions often yielded tests with fewer errors but a higher incidence of test smells. Among the evaluated LLMs, GPT-4o produced the fewest errors in both contexts (10% in C2C and 6% in T2C), whereas Amazon Q had the highest error rates (19% in C2C and 28% in T2C). For test smells, Amazon Q had fewer detections in the C2C context (9%), while LLama 3.3 performed best in the T2C context (10%). Additionally, we observed a strong relationship between specific errors, such as assertion or indentation issues, and test case cohesion smells. These findings demonstrate opportunities for improving the quality of test generation by LLMs and highlight the need for future research to explore optimized generation scenarios and better prompt engineering strategies.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2024

Evaluating Large Language Models in Detecting Test Smells

Test smells are coding issues that typically arise from inadequate practices, a lack of knowledge about effective testing, or deadline pressures to complete projects. The presence of test smells can negatively impact the maintainability and reliability of software. While there are tools that use advanced static analysis or machine learning techniques to detect test smells, these tools often require effort to be used. This study aims to evaluate the capability of Large Language Models (LLMs) in automatically detecting test smells. We evaluated ChatGPT-4, Mistral Large, and Gemini Advanced using 30 types of test smells across codebases in seven different programming languages collected from the literature. ChatGPT-4 identified 21 types of test smells. Gemini Advanced identified 17 types, while Mistral Large detected 15 types of test smells. Conclusion: The LLMs demonstrated potential as a valuable tool in identifying test smells.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2024

A Catalog of Transformations to Remove Smells From Natural Language Tests

Test smells can pose difficulties during testing activities, such as poor maintainability, non-deterministic behavior, and incomplete verification. Existing research has extensively addressed test smells in automated software tests but little attention has been given to smells in natural language tests. While some research has identified and catalogued such smells, there is a lack of systematic approaches for their removal. Consequently, there is also a lack of tools to automatically identify and remove natural language test smells. This paper introduces a catalog of transformations designed to remove seven natural language test smells and a companion tool implemented using Natural Language Processing (NLP) techniques. Our work aims to enhance the quality and reliability of natural language tests during software development. The research employs a two-fold empirical strategy to evaluate its contributions. First, a survey involving 15 software testing professionals assesses the acceptance and usefulness of the catalog's transformations. Second, an empirical study evaluates our tool to remove natural language test smells by analyzing a sample of real-practice tests from the Ubuntu OS. The results indicate that software testing professionals find the transformations valuable. Additionally, the automated tool demonstrates a good level of precision, as evidenced by a F-Measure rate of 83.70%

cs.SE↗

arXiv2023

Test Code Refactoring Unveiled: Where and How Does It Affect Test Code Quality and Effectiveness?

Context. Refactoring has been widely investigated in the past in relation to production code quality, yet still little is known on how developers apply refactoring on test code. Specifically, there is still a lack of investigation into how developers typically refactor test code and its effects on test code quality and effectiveness. Objective. This paper presents a research agenda aimed to bridge this gap of knowledge by investigating (1) whether test refactoring actually targets test classes affected by quality and effectiveness concerns and (2) the extent to which refactoring contributes to the improvement of test code quality and effectiveness. Method. We plan to conduct an exploratory mining software repository study to collect test refactoring data of open-source Java projects from GitHub and statistically analyze them in combination with quality metrics, test smells, and code/mutation coverage indicators. Furthermore, we will measure how refactoring operations impact the quality and effectiveness of test code.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2023

Manual Tests Do Smell! Cataloging and Identifying Natural Language Test Smells

Background: Test smells indicate potential problems in the design and implementation of automated software tests that may negatively impact test code maintainability, coverage, and reliability. When poorly described, manual tests written in natural language may suffer from related problems, which enable their analysis from the point of view of test smells. Despite the possible prejudice to manually tested software products, little is known about test smells in manual tests, which results in many open questions regarding their types, frequency, and harm to tests written in natural language. Aims: Therefore, this study aims to contribute to a catalog of test smells for manual tests. Method: We perform a two-fold empirical strategy. First, an exploratory study in manual tests of three systems: the Ubuntu Operational System, the Brazilian Electronic Voting Machine, and the User Interface of a large smartphone manufacturer. We use our findings to propose a catalog of eight test smells and identification rules based on syntactical and morphological text analysis, validating our catalog with 24 in-company test engineers. Second, using our proposals, we create a tool based on Natural Language Processing (NLP) to analyze the subject systems' tests, validating the results. Results: We observed the occurrence of eight test smells. A survey of 24 in-company test professionals showed that 80.7% agreed with our catalog definitions and examples. Our NLP-based tool achieved a precision of 92%, recall of 95%, and f-measure of 93.5%, and its execution evidenced 13,169 occurrences of our cataloged test smells in the analyzed systems. Conclusion: We contribute with a catalog of natural language test smells and novel detection strategies that better explore the capabilities of current NLP mechanisms with promising results and reduced effort to analyze tests written in different idioms.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2023

Hearing the voice of experts: Unveiling Stack Exchange communities' knowledge of test smells

Refactorings are transformations to improve the code design without changing overall functionality and observable behavior. During the refactoring process of smelly test code, practitioners may struggle to identify refactoring candidates and define and apply corrective strategies. This paper reports on an empirical study aimed at understanding how test smells and test refactorings are discussed on the Stack Exchange network. Developers commonly count on Stack Exchange to pick the brains of the wise, i.e., to `look up' how others are completing similar tasks. Therefore, in light of data from the Stack Exchange discussion topics, we could examine how developers understand and perceive test smells, the corrective actions they take to handle them, and the challenges they face when refactoring test code aiming to fix test smells. We observed that developers are interested in others' perceptions and hands-on experience handling test code issues. Besides, there is a clear indication that developers often ask whether test smells or anti-patterns are either good or bad testing practices than code-based refactoring recommendations.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2022

Refactoring Assertion Roulette and Duplicate Assert test smells: a controlled experiment

Test smells can reduce the developers' ability to interact with the test code. Refactoring test code offers a safe strategy to handle test smells. However, the manual refactoring activity is not a trivial process, and it is often tedious and error-prone. This study aims to evaluate RAIDE, a tool for automatic identification and refactoring of test smells. We present an empirical assessment of RAIDE, in which we analyzed its capability at refactoring Assertion Roulette and Duplicate Assert test smells and compared the results against both manual refactoring and a state-of-the-art approach. The results show that RAIDE provides a faster and more intuitive approach for handling test smells than using an automated tool for smells detection combined with manual refactoring.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2021

Label it be! A large-scale study of issue labeling in modern open-source repositories

In a wave of growth, open-source projects need to modernize and change how they deal with processes, methods, and communication with their contributors. We could observe that open-source projects are constantly evolving to improve their management of the entire community. Starting with community communication, software development, managing open-source projects faces crucial challenges. One of the enabling environments that open-source communities found to achieve community communications objectives was code repositories with integration with issue trackers. Using issue trackers in their projects should encompass an infrastructure capable of hosting the project source code and community participation. Some issue trackers use a structure in which the issue's title and description are the key information. However, we have observed a slight change in this strategy over the years, as more and more data are fundamental to solving the issue. For example, labeling the issues could enable users to provide the issue with more contextual information. By understanding how modern issue trackers handle issue labeling, this study analyzes the impact, engagement, and influence that labels have on the Github repositories, based on a database of 10,673,459 issues mined from 13,280 repositories in 180 Github featured topics. We found that 78.75\% of the repositories label their issues, with more adherence from those repositories that contain big numbers of issues. The labeling practice is essential and prioritized as a first step in the issue resolution process in 65.91\% of the first events. Issues with labels draw more attention and impact by collecting more subscribers, assigns, and comments, helping to engage contributors to the resolution.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2021

A Survey on Software Engineering Practices in Brazilian Startups

Today's significant technological advancement allows early-stage software startups to build and launch innovative products quickly on the market. However, many of them die in the early years of their path due to market conditions, ignorance of customer needs, lack of resources, or focus, such as the misuse of well-established practices. The study's motivation is to analyze software engineering practices in startups from a practitioner's perspective. Our objective was to identify practices and tools the startups employ in their daily routines. We carried out an expert survey study with 140 software developers involved in software startups from different domains. The results show that startups in the initial and validation phases select practices and tools on an ad-hoc basis and based on the development team's prior knowledge. When they move into the growth phase, they recognize that they could have adopted better practices beforehand to support product scaling with a more mature team. The results also indicated that support tools are selected based on their integration with other tools and their ability to automate operational activities.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2021

Developers perception on the severity of test smells: an empirical study

Unit testing is an essential component of the software development life-cycle. A developer could easily and quickly catch and fix software faults introduced in the source code by creating and running unit tests. Despite their importance, unit tests are subject to bad design or implementation decisions, the so-called test smells. These might decrease software systems quality from various aspects, making it harder to understand, more complex to maintain, and more prone to errors and bugs. Many studies discuss the likely effects of test smells on test code. However, there is a lack of studies that capture developers perceptions of such issues. This study empirically analyzes how developers perceive the severity of test smells in the test code they develop. Severity refers to the degree to how a test smell may negatively impact the test code. We selected six open-source software projects from GitHub and interviewed their developers to understand whether and how the test smells affected the test code. Although most of the interviewed developers considered the test smells as having a low severity to their code, they indicated that test smells might negatively impact the project, particularly in test code maintainability and evolution. Also, detecting and removing test smells from the test code may be positive for the project.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2021

From Blackboard to the Office: A Look Into How Practitioners Perceive Software Testing Education

The teaching-learning process may require specific pedagogical approaches to establish a relationship with industry practices. Recently, some studies investigated the educators' perspectives and the undergraduate courses curriculum to identify potential weaknesses and solutions for the software testing teaching process. However, it is still unclear how the practitioners evaluate the acquisition of knowledge about software testing in undergraduate courses. This study carried out an expert survey with 68 newly graduated practitioners to determine what the industry expects from them and what they learned in academia. The yielded results indicated that those practitioners learned at a similar rate as others with a long industry experience. Also, they studied less than half of the 35 software testing topics collected in the survey and took industry-backed extracurricular courses to complement their learning. Additionally, our findings point out a set of implications for future research, as the respondents' learning difficulties (e.g., lack of learning sources) and the gap between academic education and industry expectations (e.g., certifications).

cs.SE↗

arXiv2020

A survey on test practitioners' awareness of test smells

Developing test code may be a time-consuming task that usually requires much effort and cost, especially when it is done manually. Besides, during this process, developers and testers are likely to adopt bad design choices, which may lead to the introduction of the so-called test smells in test code. Test smells are bad solutions to either implement or design test code. As the test code with test smells increases in size, these tests might become more complex, and as a consequence, much harder to understand and evolve correctly. Therefore, test smells may have a negative impact on the quality and maintenance of test code and may also harm the whole software testing activities. In this context, this study aims to understand whether test professionals non-intentionally insert test smells. We carried out an expert survey to analyze the usage frequency of a set of test smells. Sixty professionals from different companies participated in the survey. We selected 14 widely studied smells from the literature, which are also implemented in existing test smell detection tools. The yielded results indicate that experienced professionals introduce test smells during their daily programming tasks, even when they are using standardized practices from their companies, and not only for their personal assumptions. Another relevant evidence was that developers' professional experience can not be considered as a root-cause for the insertion of test smells in test code.

cs.SE↗