Search arXiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2407.09872

A Systematic Literature Review on Task Recommendation Systems for Crowdsourced Software Engineering

Shashiwadana Nirmani·Mojtaba Shahin·Hourieh Khalajzadeh·Xiao Liu
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Crowdsourced Software Engineering (CSE) offers outsourcing work to software practitioners by leveraging a global online workforce. However, these software practitioners struggle to identify suitable tasks due to the variety of options available. Hence, there have been a growing number of studies on introducing recommendation systems to recommend CSE tasks to software practitioners. The goal of this study is to analyze the existing CSE task recommendation systems, investigating their extracted data, recommendation methods, key advantages and limitations, recommended task types, the use of human factors in recommendations, popular platforms, and features used to make recommendations. This SLR was conducted according to the Kitchenham and Charters' guidelines. We used both manual and automatic search strategies without putting any time limitation for searching the relevant papers. We selected 65 primary studies for data extraction, analysis, and synthesis based on our predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. From the results of the data analysis, we classified the extracted data into four categories based on the data extraction source, categorized the proposed recommendation systems to fit into a taxonomy, and identified the key advantages and limitations of these systems. Our results revealed that human factors play a major role in CSE task recommendation. Further, we identified five popular task types recommended, popular platforms, and their features used in task recommendation. We also provided recommendations for future research directions. This SLR provides insights into current trends, gaps, and future research directions in CSE task recommendation systems

Explore related subjects

cs.SE

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Shashiwadana Nirmani, Mojtaba Shahin, Hourieh Khalajzadeh, Xiao Liu. 2025-03-18. A Systematic Literature Review on Task Recommendation Systems for Crowdsourced Software Engineering. https://arxiv.org/abs/2407.09872

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

LLM-Based Repair of Static Nullability Errors

Modern Java projects increasingly adopt static analysis tools that prevent null-pointer exceptions by treating nullness as a type property. However, integrating such tools into large, existing codebases remains a significant challenge. While annotation inference can eliminate many errors automatically, a subset of residual errors $-$ typically a mix of real bugs and false positives $-$ often persists and can only be resolved via code changes. Manually addressing these errors is tedious and error-prone. Large language models (LLMs) offer a promising path toward automating these repairs, but naively prompted LLMs often generate incorrect, contextually inappropriate edits. We present NullRepair, a system that integrates LLMs into a structured workflow for resolving the errors from a nullability checker. NullRepair's decision process follows a flowchart derived from manual analysis of 200 real-world errors. It leverages static analysis to identify safe and unsafe usage regions of symbols, using error-free usage examples to contextualize model prompts. Patches are generated through an iterative interaction with the LLM that incorporates project-wide context and decision logic. Our evaluation on 12 real-world Java projects shows that NullRepair resolves 63% of the 1,119 nullability errors that remain after applying a state-of-the-art annotation inference technique. Unlike two baselines (single-shot prompt and mini-SWE-agent), NullRepair also largely preserves program semantics, with all unit tests passing in 10/12 projects after applying every edit proposed by NullRepair, and 98% or more tests passing in the remaining two projects.

cs.SE↗
arXiv2026

Metamodel-Guided Model Generation with Layered Constraints

Large language models (LLMs) enable natural-language interaction in engineering modeling, but generated models may violate structural constraints, domain rules, or task requirements. We propose a metamodel-guided model generation method that coordinates generation-time constraints and post-generation validation. The method transforms metamodel information, uses its terminology to guide structured constraint extraction from specifications, and links constraints to metamodel elements while recording their sources in an Integrated Constraint Model (ICM). For each task, relevant constraints are bound to concrete objects, values, and references. The generation-time constraint layer (L1) restricts candidate content. The post-generation validation layer (L2) checks constructed models and serialized artifacts, and task acceptance checks retain the original requirements throughout repair. Deterministic procedures construct and serialize models, while LLMs propose candidate content and repairs. Validation uses existing domain tools and checkers written by humans with LLM assistance. Experiments cover AUTOSAR, railway models, and structured decisions in private international law. All 60 AUTOSAR generation runs passed acceptance within the declared task scope, and all 255 resulting ARXML files passed XSD validation. In a separate controlled AUTOSAR repair experiment, all 85 core fault units and 15 prespecified substitute units were restored within one repair round. A local AUTOSAR experiment recorded interventions during stepwise generation. The results support coordinating generation constraints, domain checks, and task acceptance to construct models and guide bounded repair.

cs.SE↗
arXiv2026

VeriSoftBench: Repository-Scale Formal Verification Benchmarks for Lean

Large language models have achieved striking results in interactive theorem proving, particularly in Lean. However, most benchmarks for LLM-based proof automation are drawn from mathematics in the Mathlib ecosystem, whereas proofs in software verification are developed inside definition-rich codebases with substantial project-specific libraries. We introduce VeriSoftBench, a benchmark of 500 Lean 4 proof obligations drawn from open-source formal-methods developments and packaged to preserve realistic repository context and cross-file dependencies. Our evaluation of frontier LLMs and specialized provers yields three observations. First, provers tuned for Mathlib-style mathematics transfer poorly to this repository-centric setting. Second, success is strongly correlated with transitive repository dependence: tasks whose proofs draw on large, multi-hop dependency closures are less likely to be solved. Third, providing curated context restricted to a proof's dependency closure improves performance relative to exposing the full repository, but nevertheless leaves substantial room for improvement. Our benchmark and evaluation suite are released at https://github.com/utopia-group/VeriSoftBench.

cs.SE↗