Portraying method and device, storage medium and electronic equipment

Abstract

The invention discloses a portraying method and device, a storage medium and electronic equipment, and relates to the technical field of data processing, and the method comprises the steps: obtaining work data corresponding to a target programmer in a plurality of project modules; based on the work data, work indexes corresponding to the target programmer in the multiple project modules are determined, and the work indexes are used for representing the work quality and work efficiency of the target programmer; and inputting the working indexes into the working condition evaluation model for weighted analysis to obtain a working condition evaluation result of the target programmer for each project module, and generating a working portrait of the target programmer based on the working condition evaluation result. Compared with the prior art, the method has the advantages that evaluation is performed from multiple dimensions by using the working condition evaluation model, and a more accurate and comprehensive comprehensive evaluation result can be obtained.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present application relates to the field of data processing technology, and in particular to a profiling method, device, storage medium and electronic device. Background Art

[0002] In data analysis and artificial intelligence, profiling refers to the characteristic model of an individual or group based on a large number of data points. Specifically, profiling the work ability of programmers can help companies better understand the technical level, skill combination and development potential of employees.

[0003] At present, the work ability profile of programmers is mainly based on the evaluation data of relevant staff and programmers themselves, as well as the codes written by programmers to evaluate the programmers' work situation and obtain the programmers' work profile.

[0004] However, using this profiling method, which is based only on the evaluation data of relevant staff and programmers themselves and the code written by programmers, will result in the evaluation results being unable to accurately analyze the programmer's work situation and work ability, and thus unable to obtain an accurate work portrait. Summary of the invention

[0005] In view of this, the present application provides a profiling method, device, storage medium and electronic device, the main purpose of which is to improve the current existing technology that only evaluates based on the evaluation data of relevant staff and programmers themselves and the code written by programmers, which will result in the evaluation results being unable to accurately analyze the programmer's work situation and work ability, and thus unable to obtain an accurate work portrait.

[0006] In a first aspect, the present application provides a portrait method, comprising: Obtain the target programmer's corresponding work data in multiple project modules; Based on the work data, determining the work indicators corresponding to the target programmer in the multiple project modules respectively, wherein the work indicators are used to represent the work quality and work efficiency of the target programmer; The work indicator is input into the work situation evaluation model for weighted analysis to obtain the work situation evaluation result of the target programmer for each project module. The work situation evaluation model is a model that evaluates the work situation of each project module based on multiple dimensions of the work indicator, and performs threshold judgment on the weighted values ​​of the evaluation results of different dimensions to obtain a comprehensive evaluation result. The work situation evaluation model is used to comprehensively evaluate the work situation of programmers in different project modules; Based on the work situation evaluation result, a work profile of the target programmer is generated.

[0007] In a second aspect, the present application provides a portrait device, comprising: An acquisition module is configured to acquire work data corresponding to the target programmer in the plurality of project modules; A determination module configured to determine, based on the work data, work indicators corresponding to the target programmer in the plurality of project modules, respectively, wherein the work indicators are used to represent the work quality and work efficiency of the target programmer; an analysis module configured to input the work indicator into a work situation evaluation model for weighted analysis to obtain the work situation evaluation result of the target programmer for each project module, wherein the work situation evaluation model is a model that evaluates the work situation of each project module based on multiple dimensions of the work indicator, performs threshold judgment on weighted values ​​of evaluation results of different dimensions to obtain a comprehensive evaluation result, and the work situation evaluation model is used to comprehensively evaluate the work situation of programmers in different project modules; A generation module is configured to generate a work profile of the target programmer based on the work situation evaluation result.

[0008] In a third aspect, the present application provides a computer-readable storage medium having a computer program stored thereon, and when the computer program is executed by a processor, the portrait method described in the first aspect is implemented.

[0009] In a fourth aspect, the present application provides an electronic device, comprising a storage medium, a processor, and a computer program stored on the storage medium and executable on the processor, wherein the processor implements the portrait method described in the first aspect when executing the computer program.

[0010] By means of the above technical scheme, the present application provides a profiling method, device, storage medium and electronic device. Compared with the current prior art, the present application collects the work data of the target programmer in multiple project modules, determines the work indicators representing the work efficiency and work quality of the target programmer through the work data, and then inputs the work indicators into the work situation evaluation model to evaluate the work situation of the target programmer from multiple dimensions, and generates the work portrait of the target programmer based on the obtained comprehensive evaluation results. By using the work situation evaluation model to evaluate from multiple dimensions, a more accurate and comprehensive comprehensive evaluation result can be obtained, which provides a comprehensive self-cognition tool for programmers themselves, helping them understand their own strengths and weaknesses, so as to improve their technical level and work efficiency in a targeted manner. At the same time, it also provides a scientific decision-making basis for team managers, which helps to optimize team configuration and improve project success rate. By accurately evaluating the work quality of programmers, team managers can more reasonably allocate tasks and formulate training plans, thereby improving the collaboration efficiency and project delivery quality of the entire team. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0011] The accompanying drawings, which are incorporated in and constitute a part of this specification, illustrate embodiments consistent with the present application and, together with the description, serve to explain the principles of the present application.

[0012] In order to more clearly illustrate the embodiments of the present application or the technical solutions in the prior art, the drawings required for use in the embodiments or the description of the prior art will be briefly introduced below. Obviously, for ordinary technicians in this field, other drawings can be obtained based on these drawings without paying any creative labor.

[0013] Figure 1 A schematic diagram of a process flow of a portrait method provided in an embodiment of the present application is shown; Figure 2 A schematic diagram of a process flow of a portrait method provided in an embodiment of the present application is shown; Figure 3 A schematic diagram of an example process provided by an embodiment of the present application is shown; Figure 4 A schematic diagram of the structure of an image processing device provided in an embodiment of the present application is shown; Figure 5 A schematic structural diagram of an electronic device provided in an embodiment of the present application is shown. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0014] The embodiments of the present application will be described in more detail below with reference to the accompanying drawings. It should be noted that the embodiments and features in the embodiments of the present application can be combined with each other without conflict.

[0015] In order to improve the technical problem that the existing technology only evaluates based on the evaluation data of relevant staff and programmers themselves and the code written by programmers, the evaluation results obtained cannot accurately analyze the programmer's work situation and work ability, and thus cannot obtain an accurate work portrait. This embodiment provides a portrait method, such as Figure 1 As shown, the method includes: Step 101: Obtain the corresponding work data of the target programmer in multiple project modules.

[0016] In an embodiment of the present application, the target programmer may be a programmer for whom work profiling needs to be performed, and correspondingly, the project module may be a project module in which the target programmer has participated; for example, if the target programmer for whom work profiling needs to be performed is programmer A, it is necessary to determine the multiple project modules in which programmer A participates, and obtain the work data corresponding to programmer A in the multiple project modules.

[0017] In some examples, a project module can be a relatively independent sub-part divided according to function, responsibility or business logic in a larger software project or system. Each module is usually responsible for completing specific tasks or providing specific functions, and can interact with other modules to achieve more complex functions; accordingly, work data can include the proportion of functional module tasks in the project, complexity, estimated project duration, actual project duration, vulnerability level, number of restarts, repair hours and quantity, actual hours, estimated hours, complexity of tasks in each module that the programmer is responsible for, etc.

[0018] Step 102: Based on the work data, determine the work indicators corresponding to the target programmer in multiple project modules.

[0019] Among them, work indicators are used to represent the work quality and work efficiency of the target programmers.

[0020] For this embodiment, work indicators may include project contribution score, project delivery rate, vulnerability quantification rate, task completion rate, smoke test pass rate and module complexity, among which the project contribution score can be determined by the proportion of functional module tasks and the complexity level within the project; the project delivery rate is determined by the ratio of the project estimated duration to the actual duration; the vulnerability quantification rate is obtained based on the vulnerability level, number of reopenings, repair hours and quantity; and the task completion rate is determined by the ratio of actual hours to estimated hours.

[0021] Furthermore, smoke testing is a software testing method that aims to quickly verify whether the basic functions of the software are working properly and ensure that the newly built code does not introduce obvious errors or defects. The pass rate is an important indicator to measure the results of smoke testing, which reflects the successful proportion of test case execution. The smoke test pass rate can be determined by the ratio of the number of passed test cases to the total number of test cases.

[0022] Optionally, factors affecting complexity include but are not limited to: 1. Technical difficulty: involving new technologies or unfamiliar technology stacks; 2. Business logic complexity: processing complex business rules or algorithms; 3. Data interaction: complex data exchange with other systems, databases or external application programming interfaces (APIs); 4. Dependencies: tasks depend on other unfinished tasks or modules; 5. Risk level: high-risk tasks may lead to greater negative impacts; 6. Testing difficulty: tasks that are difficult to test or require special environments to test; 7. Code maintenance: the impact on the existing code base, such as whether refactoring is needed; By way of example, the complexity of the tasks of each module that the programmer is responsible for can be scored based on the above-mentioned influencing factors, and then the complexity score of the tasks of each module that the programmer is responsible for can be obtained.

[0023] Step 103: Input the work indicators into the work situation evaluation model for weighted analysis to obtain the work situation evaluation results of the target programmer for each project module.

[0024] Among them, the work situation evaluation model is a model that evaluates the work situation of each project module based on multiple dimensions of work indicators, and performs threshold judgment on the weighted values ​​of the evaluation results of different dimensions to obtain a comprehensive evaluation result. The work situation evaluation model is used to comprehensively evaluate the work situation of programmers in different project modules.

[0025] In an embodiment of the present application, the work situation evaluation model may be a pre-trained model for evaluating work situation. In the work situation evaluation model, evaluations of different dimensions may be performed based on input work indicators to obtain a comprehensive work situation evaluation result.

[0026] In some examples, the embodiments of the present application require an evaluation of the target programmer's work in each project module. For example, if the target programmer who needs to conduct a work profiling is programmer A, and the multiple project modules in which programmer A participates include project module 1, project module 2, project module 3, and project module 4, then it is necessary to obtain the work quality evaluation result of project module 1 based on the work indicators corresponding to project module 1. Correspondingly, it is necessary to obtain the work quality evaluation result of project module 2 based on the work indicators corresponding to project module 2, and so on. Examples are not given one by one here.

[0027] Step 104: Generate a work profile of the target programmer based on the work situation evaluation results.

[0028] For this embodiment, the work situation evaluation results may include the target programmer's strong technical points information and weak technical points information in multiple project modules. The strong technical points information and weak technical points information can represent the target programmer's skills, work habits, project contributions and other key information, and then the work situation evaluation results can accurately generate the programmer's work profile.

[0029] Compared with the current existing technology, this embodiment collects the work data of the target programmer in multiple project modules, determines the work indicators representing the work efficiency and work quality of the target programmer through the work data, and then inputs the work indicators into the work situation evaluation model to evaluate the work situation of the target programmer from multiple dimensions, and generates the work portrait of the target programmer based on the obtained comprehensive evaluation results. By using the work situation evaluation model to evaluate from multiple dimensions, a more accurate and comprehensive comprehensive evaluation result can be obtained, providing programmers with a comprehensive self-cognition tool to help them understand their own strengths and weaknesses, so as to improve their technical level and work efficiency in a targeted manner. At the same time, it also provides a scientific decision-making basis for team managers, which helps to optimize team configuration and improve project success rate. By accurately evaluating the work quality of programmers, team managers can more reasonably allocate tasks and formulate training plans, thereby improving the collaboration efficiency and project delivery quality of the entire team.

[0030] As a refinement and extension of the above embodiment, when inputting the work indicators into the work situation evaluation model for weighted analysis to obtain the work situation evaluation results of the target programmer for each project module, the following methods may be used but are not limited to: Figure 2 As shown, the method includes: Step 201: Input the work indicators into the work situation evaluation model.

[0031] In an embodiment of the present application, work indicators may include project contribution score, project delivery rate, vulnerability quantification rate, task completion rate, smoke test pass rate and module complexity, among which the project contribution score can be determined by the proportion of functional module tasks in the project and the complexity level; the project delivery rate is determined by the ratio of the estimated project duration to the actual duration; the vulnerability quantification rate is obtained based on the vulnerability level, number of restarts, repair hours and quantity; and the task completion rate is determined by the ratio of actual working hours to estimated working hours.

[0032] Furthermore, smoke testing is a software testing method that aims to quickly verify whether the basic functions of the software are working properly and ensure that the newly built code does not introduce obvious errors or defects. The pass rate is an important indicator to measure the results of smoke testing, which reflects the successful proportion of test case execution. The smoke test pass rate can be determined by the ratio of the number of passed test cases to the total number of test cases.

[0033] Step 202: Evaluate the target programmer's work in each project module from different dimensions, including project contribution score, project delivery rate, vulnerability quantification rate, task completion rate, smoke test pass rate, and project module complexity, to obtain a first work evaluation index of the target programmer from the dimensions of project contribution and code quality, a second work evaluation index from the dimensions of work efficiency and code stability, and a third work evaluation index from the dimensions of handling complex tasks and technical depth.

[0034] In the embodiment of the present application, the project contribution score indicates that the system calculates the project contribution score based on the proportion of functional module tasks that each programmer is responsible for in the project and the complexity level of the task module in charge. The higher the score, the greater the contribution of the programmer to the success of the project; the project delivery rate is calculated by the system by comparing the estimated project duration with the actual duration. A high delivery rate indicates that the project is proceeding smoothly as planned, and a low delivery rate may mean that the project plan needs to be adjusted or project management needs to be strengthened. The vulnerability quantification rate is calculated by the system based on the vulnerability level, the number of restarts, the repair hours and the number. The lower the quantification rate, the better the programmer's performance in code quality and bug repair; the task completion rate is calculated by the system by comparing the actual hours with the estimated hours. A high completion rate indicates that the programmer can complete the work task efficiently; the smoke test pass rate is the pass rate of each smoke test recorded by the system. A high pass rate indicates that the code quality is high, and a low pass rate may mean that more testing and debugging work is required; the module complexity is the system based on the complexity of the tasks of each module that the programmer is responsible for, and the complexity score is calculated. A high score indicates that the programmer can handle more complex technical challenges.

[0035] In some examples, the process of determining the project contribution score may include: performing code quality assessment and project contribution calculation, wherein the code quality assessment uses a code quality assessment tool to assess the quality of the code submitted by the programmer, including code readability, maintainability, performance, etc. The project contribution calculation combines factors such as code quality assessment results, project progress, and team collaboration to calculate the programmer's contribution to the project.

[0036] For this embodiment, the process of determining the project delivery rate may include: performing data collection and delivery rate calculation, wherein the data collection collects the delivery status of the programmer's project participation through a project management tool, including delivery time, delivery quality, etc. The delivery rate calculation calculates the programmer's project delivery rate based on the collected data, that is, the proportion of the number of projects delivered on time and with qualified quality to the total number of projects.

[0037] Optionally, the process of determining the vulnerability quantification rate may include: vulnerability tracking and vulnerability quantification rate calculation, wherein vulnerability tracking collects data such as the number of vulnerabilities introduced by programmers in the project, the repair speed, and the repair quality through a defect tracking system; the vulnerability quantification rate calculation calculates the programmer's vulnerability quantification rate based on the collected data, that is, the ratio of the number of introduced vulnerabilities to the total code volume or project size.

[0038] Furthermore, the first work evaluation index from the project contribution and code quality dimensions can be determined based on the project contribution score, project delivery rate and bug quantification rate. It should be noted that the project contribution score, project delivery rate and bug quantification rate are all coefficients that can evaluate the quality of programmer code, but because each programmer is good at different codes, it is impossible to accurately evaluate the quality of programmer code based on a single coefficient. Combining these three coefficients can comprehensively judge the quality of programmer code, and make the obtained programmer code quality more objective. Specifically, a high project contribution score can be combined with a high delivery rate and a low bug quantification rate to evaluate the programmer's contribution to the success of the project and the quality of the code.

[0039] Correspondingly, the second work situation evaluation index from the work efficiency and code stability dimensions can be determined based on the task completion rate and the smoke test pass rate. It should be noted that both the task completion rate and the smoke test pass rate are coefficients that can evaluate the programmer's work efficiency and stability. However, since each programmer has different strengths and weaknesses in efficiency and stability, it is not possible to accurately evaluate the programmer's efficiency and stability based on a single coefficient, and there is also contingency. Combining these two coefficients can comprehensively judge the programmer's efficiency and stability, and can also make the obtained programmer's efficiency and stability more objective. Specifically, a high task completion rate can be combined with a high smoke test pass rate to evaluate the programmer's work efficiency and code stability.

[0040] Correspondingly, the third work situation evaluation index from the dimension of handling complex tasks and technical depth can be determined based on the module complexity score and the technical proficiency score. It should be noted that the module complexity score and the technical proficiency score are coefficients that can evaluate the programmer's technical depth, but because each programmer is proficient in different technologies, it is impossible to accurately evaluate the programmer's technical depth based on a single coefficient. Combining these two coefficients can comprehensively judge the programmer's technical depth, and can also make the obtained programmer's technical depth more objective. Specifically, the module complexity score and the technical proficiency score can be combined to evaluate the programmer's ability to handle complex tasks and technical depth.

[0041] It should be noted that by evaluating through the first work situation indicator, the second work situation indicator and the third work situation indicator, the influence of a single data on the overall evaluation situation can be avoided to a greater extent, and the overall situation of the programmer can be evaluated more objectively and comprehensively, making the obtained evaluation result more accurate.

[0042] For example, if the programmer who needs to conduct work profiling is programmer B, it is necessary to determine programmer B's project contribution score, project delivery rate, vulnerability quantification rate, task completion rate, smoke test pass rate and project module complexity in each project module, and then obtain programmer B's first work situation evaluation index B from the dimensions of project contribution and code quality in each project module, the second work situation evaluation index B from the dimensions of work efficiency and code stability, and the third work situation evaluation index B from the dimensions of handling complex tasks and technical depth.

[0043] Step 203: Perform weighted analysis on the first working situation evaluation index, the second working situation evaluation index and the third working situation evaluation index of each project module to obtain weighted values ​​of working situation evaluation indicators of different dimensions corresponding to each project module.

[0044] In an embodiment of the present application, weighted analysis can assign a corresponding weight to each work situation evaluation indicator, and then based on the assigned weight and the work situation evaluation indicator, obtain the weighted value of the work situation evaluation indicator of different dimensions corresponding to each project module.

[0045] In some examples, based on step 202, if the programmer who needs to conduct work profiling is programmer B, and the multiple project modules in which programmer B participates are project module 1, project module 2, project module 3 and project module 4, then it is necessary to perform an evaluation based on work data 1 in project module 1 to obtain the first work situation evaluation indicator, the second work situation evaluation indicator and the third work situation evaluation indicator of programmer B in project module 1, and then perform weighted analysis on the three indicators to obtain a weighted value 1 corresponding to project module 1; accordingly, it is also necessary to perform an evaluation based on work data 2 in project module 2 to obtain the first work situation evaluation indicator, the second work situation evaluation indicator and the third work situation evaluation indicator of programmer B in project module 2, and then perform weighted analysis on the three indicators to obtain a weighted value 2 corresponding to project module 2; further, it is also necessary to evaluate the work situation of programmer B in project module 3 and project module 4 respectively, and then obtain a weighted value 3 corresponding to project module 3 and a weighted value 4 corresponding to project module 4.

[0046] Further, when executing step 203, the following steps may be adopted but are not limited to: Step 11: Based on the project contribution score, project delivery rate and vulnerability quantification rate, determine the first work performance evaluation indicator corresponding to the target programmer in each project module from the dimensions of project contribution and code quality.

[0047] Specifically, a high project contribution score combined with a high delivery rate and a low bug quantification rate can evaluate the programmer's contribution to project success and the quality of the code.

[0048] Step 12: Based on the task completion rate and the smoke test pass rate, determine the second work performance evaluation index corresponding to the target programmer in each project module from the dimensions of work efficiency and code stability; A high task completion rate combined with a high smoke test pass rate can reflect the programmer's work efficiency and code stability.

[0049] Step 13: Based on the complexity of the project modules, determine the third work performance evaluation index corresponding to the target programmers in each project module from the dimensions of handling complex tasks and technical depth.

[0050] The module complexity score is combined with the technical proficiency score to assess the programmer's ability to handle complex tasks and technical depth.

[0051] Step 204: Perform threshold judgment on the weighted values ​​of the work performance evaluation indicators of different dimensions to obtain the work performance evaluation results of the target programmer in each project module.

[0052] Further, when executing step 204, the following steps may be adopted but are not limited to: Step 21: Compare the weighted values ​​of the work status evaluation indicators of different dimensions with the work status threshold. If the weighted value corresponding to the target project module is greater than or equal to the work status threshold, execute step 22; if the weighted value corresponding to the target project module is less than the work status threshold, execute step 23.

[0053] In an embodiment of the present application, the threshold judgment may be to compare the weighted value with the work status threshold, wherein the work status threshold may be pre-set or determined based on programmer information. For example, the work status threshold may be determined based on the programmer's name, gender, position, age, Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) personality type, communication skills, skills, etc.

[0054] Exemplarily, based on step 203, if the programmer who needs to conduct work profiling is programmer B, and the multiple project modules in which programmer B participates are project module 1, project module 2, project module 3 and project module 4, after determining the weighted values ​​corresponding to each project module, each weighted value needs to be compared with the work status threshold; for example, weighted value 1, weighted value 2, weighted value 3 and weighted value 4 need to be compared with the threshold respectively.

[0055] Step 22: Determine that the working condition evaluation result of the target project module is good at the technical points in the target project module.

[0056] Further, in the process of comparing weighted value 1 with the work status threshold, if weighted value 1 is greater than or equal to the predetermined threshold, then it is determined that the work status evaluation result of programmer B in project module 1 is that he is good at the technical points in project module 1; correspondingly, if in the process of comparing weighted value 2 with the work status threshold, if weighted value 2 is greater than or equal to the predetermined threshold, then it is determined that the work status evaluation result of programmer B in project module 2 is that he is good at the technical points in project module 2.

[0057] Step 23: Determine that the working condition evaluation result of the target project module is not good at the technical points in the target project module.

[0058] In some examples, in the process of comparing weighted value 3 with the work status threshold, if weighted value 3 is less than the predetermined threshold, it is determined that the work status evaluation result of programmer B in project module 1 is not good at the technical points in project module 1; correspondingly, if in the process of comparing weighted value 4 with the work status threshold, if weighted value 4 is less than the predetermined threshold, it is determined that the work status evaluation result of programmer B in project module 4 is not good at the technical points in project module 2.

[0059] Optionally, when generating a work profile of a target programmer based on the work situation evaluation results, the following methods may be used but are not limited to: Step 31: Based on the work performance evaluation results of each project module, determine the technical proficiency information and technical weakness information corresponding to the target programmers in multiple project modules.

[0060] In the embodiment of the present application, the higher the weighted value of the work performance evaluation result, the more proficient the programmer is in the technical points in the project module. Conversely, the lower the weighted value of the work performance evaluation result, the less proficient the programmer is in the technical points in the project module.

[0061] In some examples, information such as the programmer's skill expertise, work quality, and work efficiency can be determined through the technical proficiency information and the technical non-proficiency information.

[0062] Step 32: Generate a work profile of the target programmer based on the technical proficiency information and technical weakness information.

[0063] For this embodiment, the work portrait generated by the technical proficiency information and the technical proficiency information can include comprehensive analysis results from the dimensions of project contribution and code quality, work efficiency and code stability, and handling complex tasks and technical depth, so as to obtain an accurate work portrait.

[0064] Furthermore, before obtaining the work data corresponding to the target programmer in the multiple project modules, the following steps may be adopted but are not limited to: Step 41: Obtain information about programmers involved in multiple project modules, and determine target programmers who need to be profiled based on the programmer information.

[0065] In an embodiment of the present application, programmer information may include the programmer's name, gender, position, age, MBTI personality type, communication skills, skills and expertise, etc. Through these basic information, the target programmer who needs to be profiled can be determined.

[0066] Compared with the current existing technology, this embodiment collects the work data of the target programmer in multiple project modules, determines the work indicators representing the work efficiency and work quality of the target programmer through the work data, and then inputs the work indicators into the work situation evaluation model to evaluate the work situation of the target programmer from multiple dimensions, and generates the work portrait of the target programmer based on the obtained comprehensive evaluation results. By using the work situation evaluation model to evaluate from multiple dimensions, a more accurate and comprehensive comprehensive evaluation result can be obtained, providing programmers with a comprehensive self-cognition tool to help them understand their own strengths and weaknesses, so as to improve their technical level and work efficiency in a targeted manner. At the same time, it also provides a scientific decision-making basis for team managers, which helps to optimize team configuration and improve project success rate. By accurately evaluating the work quality of programmers, team managers can more reasonably allocate tasks and formulate training plans, thereby improving the collaboration efficiency and project delivery quality of the entire team.

[0067] In order to illustrate the specific implementation process of this embodiment, the following specific application examples are given: Figure 3 As shown, but not limited to: This application can be completed through three modules, including a data collection module, an intelligent analysis module, and a report generation module. The data collection module is responsible for collecting multiple dimensional data of programmers, including but not limited to static portrait data (such as name, gender, position, age, MBTI personality type, communication skills, skills, etc.) and dynamic portrait data (such as technical points of expertise, weak technical points, project contributions, project delivery rate, BUG quantification rate, etc.). These data are stored in a database to provide a basis for subsequent intelligent analysis; the intelligent analysis module uses machine learning algorithms to perform intelligent analysis and modeling on the collected data. Through data mining and processing, key information such as programmers' skills, work habits, project contributions, etc. are identified, and corresponding analysis results are generated; the report generation module generates a detailed work quality analysis report and personalized work portraits based on the output results of the intelligent analysis module. The report content covers multiple aspects such as the programmer's skill level, project performance, work efficiency, etc., providing comprehensive reference information for programmers themselves and team managers.

[0068] Compared with the current existing technology, this embodiment collects the work data of the target programmer in multiple project modules, determines the work indicators representing the work efficiency and work quality of the target programmer through the work data, and then inputs the work indicators into the work situation evaluation model to evaluate the work situation of the target programmer from multiple dimensions, and generates the work portrait of the target programmer based on the obtained comprehensive evaluation results. By using the work situation evaluation model to evaluate from multiple dimensions, a more accurate and comprehensive comprehensive evaluation result can be obtained, providing programmers with a comprehensive self-cognition tool to help them understand their own strengths and weaknesses, so as to improve their technical level and work efficiency in a targeted manner. At the same time, it also provides a scientific decision-making basis for team managers, which helps to optimize team configuration and improve project success rate. By accurately evaluating the work quality of programmers, team managers can more reasonably allocate tasks and formulate training plans, thereby improving the collaboration efficiency and project delivery quality of the entire team.

[0069] Further, as Figure 1 and Figure 2 The specific implementation of the method shown in the embodiment provides a portrait device, such as Figure 4 As shown, the device includes: an acquisition module 31, a determination module 32, an analysis module 33, and a generation module 34.

[0070] An acquisition module 31 is configured to acquire the work data corresponding to the target programmer in the plurality of project modules; A determination module 32 is configured to determine the work indicators corresponding to the target programmer in the multiple project modules respectively based on the work data, wherein the work indicators are used to represent the work quality and work efficiency of the target programmer; The analysis module 33 is configured to input the work indicator into the work situation evaluation model for weighted analysis to obtain the work situation evaluation result of the target programmer for each project module. The work situation evaluation model is a model that evaluates the work situation of each project module based on multiple dimensions of the work indicator, and performs threshold judgment on the weighted values ​​of the evaluation results of different dimensions to obtain a comprehensive evaluation result. The work situation evaluation model is used to comprehensively evaluate the work situation of the programmer in different project modules; The generating module 34 is configured to generate a work profile of the target programmer based on the work situation evaluation result.

[0071] In some examples of this embodiment, the analysis module 33 is specifically configured to input the work indicators into the work situation evaluation model; evaluate the work situation of the target programmer in each project module from different dimensions of project contribution score, project delivery rate, vulnerability quantification rate, task completion rate, smoke test pass rate and project module complexity, and obtain the first work situation evaluation indicator of the target programmer from the dimensions of project contribution and code quality, the second work situation evaluation indicator from the dimensions of work efficiency and code stability, and the third work situation evaluation indicator from the dimensions of processing complex tasks and technical depth; perform weighted analysis on the first work situation evaluation indicator, the second work situation evaluation indicator and the third work situation evaluation indicator of each project module to obtain the weighted values ​​of the work situation evaluation indicators of different dimensions corresponding to each project module; perform threshold judgment on the weighted values ​​of the work situation evaluation indicators of different dimensions to obtain the work situation evaluation results of the target programmer in each project module.

[0072] In some examples of the present embodiment, the analysis module 33 is further specifically configured to compare the weighted values ​​of the work status evaluation indicators of different dimensions with the work status threshold; if the weighted value corresponding to the target project module is greater than or equal to the work status threshold, then the work status evaluation result of the target project module is determined to be good at the technical points in the target project module; if the weighted value corresponding to the target project module is less than the work status threshold, then the work status evaluation result of the target project module is determined to be not good at the technical points in the target project module.

[0073] In some examples of the present embodiment, the analysis module 33 is further specifically configured to determine, based on the project contribution score, the project delivery rate and the vulnerability quantification rate, a first work situation evaluation indicator from the dimensions of project contribution and code quality corresponding to the target programmer in each project module; based on the task completion rate and the smoke test pass rate, a second work situation evaluation indicator from the dimensions of work efficiency and code stability corresponding to the target programmer in each project module; and based on the complexity of the project module, a third work situation evaluation indicator from the dimensions of handling complex tasks and technical depth corresponding to the target programmer in each project module.

[0074] In some examples of this embodiment, the generation module 34 is specifically configured to determine the strong technical point information and weak technical point information corresponding to the target programmer in the multiple project modules based on the work performance evaluation results of each project module; and generate a work profile of the target programmer based on the strong technical point information and the weak technical point information.

[0075] In some examples of this embodiment, the acquisition module 31 is further configured to acquire information of programmers participating in the multiple project modules, and determine the target programmers who need to perform work profiling based on the programmer information.

[0076] It should be noted that for other corresponding descriptions of the functional units involved in the image processing device provided in this embodiment, please refer to Figure 1 and Figure 2 The corresponding description in will not be repeated here.

[0077] Based on the above Figure 1 and Figure 2 The method shown in the embodiment also provides a computer-readable storage medium on which a computer program is stored. When the computer program is executed by a processor, the above-mentioned Figure 1 and Figure 2 The method shown.

[0078] Based on this understanding, the technical solution of the present application can be embodied in the form of a software product, which can be stored in a non-volatile storage medium (which can be a CD-ROM, USB flash drive, mobile hard disk, etc.), including a number of instructions for enabling a computer device (which can be a personal computer, server, or network device, etc.) to execute the methods of various implementation scenarios of the present application.

[0079] like Figure 5 The figure shows a hardware structure diagram of an electronic device of the present invention, including: at least one processor 401; and, A memory 402 is communicatively connected to at least one of the processors 401; wherein, The memory 402 stores instructions that can be executed by at least one of the processors. The instructions are executed by at least one of the processors so that the at least one of the processors can execute the portrait method as described above.

[0080] Figure 5 A processor 401 is taken as an example.

[0081] The electronic device may further include: an input device 403 and a display device 404 .

[0082] The processor 401, the memory 402, the input device 403 and the display device 404 may be connected via a bus or other means. Figure 5 The example of connecting through bus is taken in the following.

[0083] The memory 402 is a non-volatile computer-readable storage medium that can be used to store non-volatile software programs, non-volatile computer executable programs and modules, such as program instructions / modules corresponding to the portrait method in the embodiment of the present application, for example, Figure 1 and Figure 2 The processor 401 executes various functional applications and data processing by running the non-volatile software programs, instructions and modules stored in the memory 402, that is, implementing the portrait method in the above embodiment.

[0084] The memory 402 may include a program storage area and a data storage area, wherein the program storage area may store an operating system, an application required for at least one function; the data storage area may store data created according to the use of the portrait method, etc. In addition, the memory 402 may include a high-speed random access memory, and may also include a non-volatile memory, such as at least one disk storage device, a flash memory device, or other non-volatile solid-state storage device. In some embodiments, the memory 402 may optionally include a memory remotely arranged relative to the processor 401, and these remote memories may be connected to the device for executing the portrait method via a network. Examples of the above-mentioned network include, but are not limited to, the Internet, an intranet, a local area network, a mobile communication network, and combinations thereof.

[0085] The input device 403 can receive user clicks and generate signal inputs related to user settings of the portrait method and function control. The display device 404 can include display devices such as a display screen.

[0086] The one or more modules are stored in the memory 402, and when executed by the one or more processors 401, the portrait method in any of the above method embodiments is executed.

[0087] Optionally, the above-mentioned physical device may also include a user interface, a network interface, a camera, a radio frequency (RF) circuit, a sensor, an audio circuit, a WI-FI module, etc. The user interface may include a display, an input unit such as a keyboard, etc., and the optional user interface may also include a USB interface, a card reader interface, etc. The network interface may optionally include a standard wired interface, a wireless interface (such as a WI-FI interface), etc.

[0088] Those skilled in the art will appreciate that the above-mentioned physical device structure provided in this embodiment does not constitute a limitation on the physical device, and may include more or fewer components, or a combination of certain components, or different arrangements of components.

[0089] The storage medium may also include an operating system and a network communication module. The operating system is a program that manages the hardware and software resources of the above-mentioned physical device, and supports the operation of the information processing program and other software and / or programs. The network communication module is used to realize the communication between the components inside the storage medium, and the communication with other hardware and software in the information processing physical device.

[0090] Through the description of the above implementation mode, the technicians in this field can clearly understand that the present application can be implemented by means of software plus the necessary general hardware platform, or by hardware. By applying the scheme of this embodiment, compared with the current prior art, this embodiment collects the work data of the target programmer in multiple project modules, determines the work index representing the work efficiency and work quality of the target programmer through the work data, and then inputs the work index into the work situation evaluation model to evaluate the work situation of the target programmer from multiple dimensions, and generates the work portrait of the target programmer based on the obtained comprehensive evaluation result, and evaluates from multiple dimensions by using the work situation evaluation model, and can obtain more accurate and comprehensive comprehensive evaluation results, which provides a comprehensive self-cognition tool for the programmers themselves, helping them understand their own strengths and weaknesses, so as to improve their technical level and work efficiency in a targeted manner, and at the same time, it also provides a scientific decision-making basis for team managers, which is helpful to optimize team configuration and improve project success rate. By accurately evaluating the work quality of programmers, team managers can more reasonably assign tasks and formulate training plans, thereby improving the collaboration efficiency and project delivery quality of the entire team.

[0091] It should be noted that, in this article, relational terms such as "first" and "second" are only used to distinguish one entity or operation from another entity or operation, and do not necessarily require or imply any such actual relationship or order between these entities or operations. Moreover, the terms "include", "comprise" or any other variants thereof are intended to cover non-exclusive inclusion, so that a process, method, article or device including a series of elements includes not only those elements, but also other elements not explicitly listed, or also includes elements inherent to such process, method, article or device. In the absence of further restrictions, the elements defined by the sentence "comprise a ..." do not exclude the existence of other identical elements in the process, method, article or device including the elements.

[0092] The above is only a specific implementation of the present application, so that those skilled in the art can understand or implement the present application. Various modifications to these embodiments will be apparent to those skilled in the art, and the general principles defined herein can be implemented in other embodiments without departing from the spirit or scope of the present application. Therefore, the present application will not be limited to the embodiments described herein, but will conform to the widest scope consistent with the principles and novel features applied for herein.

Claims

1. A portrait method, characterized in that: include: Obtain the target programmer's corresponding work data in multiple project modules; Based on the work data, determining the work indicators corresponding to the target programmer in the multiple project modules respectively, wherein the work indicators are used to represent the work quality and work efficiency of the target programmer; The work indicator is input into the work situation evaluation model for weighted analysis to obtain the work situation evaluation result of the target programmer for each project module. The work situation evaluation model is a model that evaluates the work situation of each project module based on multiple dimensions of the work indicator, and performs threshold judgment on the weighted values ​​of the evaluation results of different dimensions to obtain a comprehensive evaluation result. The work situation evaluation model is used to comprehensively evaluate the work situation of programmers in different project modules; Based on the work situation evaluation result, a work profile of the target programmer is generated.

2. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that The step of inputting the work indicators into a work situation evaluation model for weighted analysis to obtain the work situation evaluation results of the target programmer for each project module includes: inputting the work indicators into the work situation evaluation model; Evaluate the target programmer's work performance in each project module from different dimensions, including project contribution score, project delivery rate, vulnerability quantification rate, task completion rate, smoke test pass rate, and project module complexity, to obtain a first work performance evaluation index from the dimensions of project contribution and code quality, a second work performance evaluation index from the dimensions of work efficiency and code stability, and a third work performance evaluation index from the dimensions of handling complex tasks and technical depth; Perform weighted analysis on the first work situation evaluation index, the second work situation evaluation index and the third work situation evaluation index of each project module to obtain weighted values ​​of work situation evaluation indicators of different dimensions corresponding to each project module; The weighted values ​​of the work performance evaluation indicators in different dimensions are subjected to threshold judgment to obtain the work performance evaluation result of the target programmer in each project module.

3. The method according to claim 2, characterized in that The step of performing threshold judgment on the weighted values ​​of the work performance evaluation indicators of different dimensions to obtain the work performance evaluation results of the target programmer in each project module includes: Comparing the weighted values ​​of the work situation evaluation indicators of the different dimensions with the work situation thresholds; If the weighted value corresponding to the target project module is greater than or equal to the working condition threshold, then the working condition evaluation result of the target project module is determined to be good at the technical points in the target project module; If the weighted value corresponding to the target project module is less than the working condition threshold, it is determined that the working condition evaluation result of the target project module is not good at the technical points in the target project module.

4. The method according to claim 3, characterized in that The target programmer's work performance in each project module is evaluated from different dimensions, including project contribution score, project delivery rate, vulnerability quantification rate, task completion rate, smoke test pass rate and project module complexity, including: Based on the project contribution score, the project delivery rate and the vulnerability quantification rate, determine a first work performance evaluation indicator corresponding to the target programmer in each project module from the dimensions of project contribution and code quality; Based on the task completion rate and the smoke test pass rate, determining a second work performance evaluation index corresponding to the target programmer in each project module from the dimensions of work efficiency and code stability; Based on the complexity of the project modules, a third work performance evaluation index corresponding to the target programmer in each project module from the dimensions of handling complex task situations and technical depth is determined.

5. The method according to claim 4, characterized in that The generating a work profile of the target programmer based on the work situation evaluation result includes: Based on the work status evaluation results of each project module, determine the technical strengths and weaknesses of the target programmers in the multiple project modules; A work profile of the target programmer is generated based on the information about the strong technical points and the information about the weak technical points.

6. The method according to any one of claims 1 to 5, characterized in that Before obtaining the work data corresponding to the target programmer in the plurality of project modules, the method further includes: The information of programmers participating in the plurality of project modules is obtained, and the target programmers for whom work profiling needs to be performed are determined based on the programmer information.

7. A portrait device, characterized in that: include: An acquisition module is configured to acquire work data corresponding to the target programmer in the plurality of project modules; A determination module configured to determine, based on the work data, work indicators corresponding to the target programmer in the plurality of project modules, respectively, wherein the work indicators are used to represent the work quality and work efficiency of the target programmer; an analysis module configured to input the work indicator into a work situation evaluation model for weighted analysis to obtain the work situation evaluation result of the target programmer for each project module, wherein the work situation evaluation model is a model that evaluates the work situation of each project module based on multiple dimensions of the work indicator, performs threshold judgment on weighted values ​​of evaluation results of different dimensions to obtain a comprehensive evaluation result, and the work situation evaluation model is used to comprehensively evaluate the work situation of programmers in different project modules; A generation module is configured to generate a work profile of the target programmer based on the work situation evaluation result.

8. A computer-readable storage medium having a computer program stored thereon, characterized in that: When the computer program is executed by a processor, the method according to any one of claims 1 to 6 is implemented.

9. An electronic device comprising a storage medium, a processor, and a computer program stored in the storage medium and executable on the processor, characterized in that: When the processor executes the computer program, the method according to any one of claims 1 to 6 is implemented.

10. A computer program product, comprising a computer program, characterized in that The computer program implements the method according to any one of claims 1 to 6 when executed by a processor.

Images