Towards automating precision studies of clone detectors
Authors: 
Vaibhav Saini, Farima Farmahinifarahani, Yadong Lu, Di Yang, Pedro Martins, Hitesh Sajnani, 
Pierre Baldi, 
Cristina V. LopesAuthors Info & Claims
Pages 49 - 59
Abstract
Current research in clone detection suffers from poor ecosystems for evaluating precision of clone detection tools. Corpora of labeled clones are scarce and incomplete, making evaluation labor intensive and idiosyncratic, and limiting inter-tool comparison. Precision-assessment tools are simply lacking.
We present a semiautomated approach to facilitate precision studies of clone detection tools. The approach merges automatic mechanisms of clone classification with manual validation of clone pairs. We demonstrate that the proposed automatic approach has a very high precision and it significantly reduces the number of clone pairs that need human validation during precision experiments. Moreover, we aggregate the individual effort of multiple teams into a single evolving dataset of labeled clone pairs, creating an important asset for software clone research.
References
[1]
B. Hummel, E. Juergens, L. Heinemann, and M. Conradt, "Index-based code clone detection: incremental, distributed, scalable," in IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance (ICSM 2010), pp. 1--9, IEEE, 2010.
[2]
C. K. Roy, J. R. Cordy, and R. Koschke, "Comparison and evaluation of code clone detection techniques and tools: A qualitative approach," Science of Computer Programming, vol. 74, no. 7, pp. 470 -- 495, 2009.
[3]
P. Weissgerber and S. Diehl, "Identifying refactorings from source-code changes," in 21st IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE 2006), pp. 231--240, IEEE, 2006.
[4]
S. Kawaguchi, T. Yamashina, H. Uwano, K. Fushida, Y. Kamei, M. Nagura, and H. Iida, "Shinobi: A tool for automatic code clone detection in the ide," in 2009 16th Working Conference on Reverse Engineering, pp. 313--314, Oct 2009.
[5]
T. Yamashina, H. Uwano, K. Fushida, Y. Kamei, M. Nagura, S. Kawaguchi, and H. Iida, "Shinobi: A real-time code clone detection tool for software maintenance," Nara Institute of Science and Technology, p. 26, 2008.
[6]
D. Rattan, R. Bhatia, and M. Singh, "Software clone detection: A systematic review," Information and Software Technology, vol. 55, no. 7, pp. 1165 -- 1199, 2013.
[7]
M. White, M. Tufano, C. Vendome, and D. Poshyvanyk, "Deep learning code fragments for code clone detection," in Proceedings of the 31st IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering, ASE 2016, (New York, NY, USA), pp. 87--98, ACM, 2016.
[8]
V. Saini, F. Farmahinifarahani, Y. Lu, P. Baldi, and C. Lopes, "Oreo: Detection of clones in the twilight zone," in Proceedings of the 2018 26th ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Foundations of Software Engineering (To Appear), FSE 2018, (New York, NY, USA), ACM, 2018. https://arxiv.org/abs/1806.05837.
[9]
Z. Li, S. Lu, S. Myagmar, and Y. Zhou, "Cp-miner: finding copy-paste and related bugs in large-scale software code," IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. 32, pp. 176--192, March 2006.
[10]
H. Sajnani, V. Saini, J. Svajlenko, C. K. Roy, and C. V. Lopes, "Sourcer-ercc: Scaling code clone detection to big-code," in 2016 IEEE/ACM 38th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE), pp. 1157--1168, May 2016.
[11]
J. Svajlenko and C. K. Roy, "Fast and flexible large-scale clone detection with cloneworks," in 2017 IEEE/ACM 39th International Conference on Software Engineering Companion (ICSE-C), pp. 27--30, May 2017.
[12]
L. Jiang, G. Misherghi, Z. Su, and S. Glondu, "Deckard: Scalable and accurate tree-based detection of code clones," in Proceedings of the 29th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE 2007), pp. 96--105, IEEE Computer Society, 2007.
[13]
I. D. Baxter, A. Yahin, L. Moura, M. Sant' Anna, and L. Bier, "Clone detection using abstract syntax trees," in Proceedings. International Conference on Software Maintenance (Cat. No. 98CB36272), pp. 368--377, Nov 1998.
[14]
M. Gabel, L. Jiang, and Z. Su, "Scalable detection of semantic clones," in Proceedings of the 30th International Conference on Software Engineering, ICSE '08, (New York, NY, USA), pp. 321--330, ACM, 2008.
[15]
C. K. Roy and J. R. Cordy, "Nicad: Accurate detection of near-miss intentional clones using flexible pretty-printing and code normalization," in 2008 16th IEEE International Conference on Program Comprehension, pp. 172--181, June 2008.
[16]
S. Bellon, R. Koschke, G. Antoniol, J. Krinke, and E. Merlo, "Comparison and evaluation of clone detection tools," IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. 33, pp. 577--591, Sept 2007.
[17]
H. Murakami, Y. Higo, and S. Kusumoto, "A dataset of clone references with gaps," in Proceedings of the 11th Working Conference on Mining Software Repositories, MSR 2014, (New York, NY, USA), pp. 412--415, ACM, 2014.
[18]
E. Flores, P. Rosso, L. Moreno, and E. Villatoro-Tello, "On the detection of source code re-use," in Proceedings of the Forum for Information Retrieval Evaluation, FIRE '14, (New York, NY, USA), pp. 21--30, ACM, 2015.
[19]
J. Svajlenko, J. F. Islam, I. Keivanloo, C. K. Roy, and M. M. Mia, "Towards a big data curated benchmark of inter-project code clones," in 2014 IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance and Evolution, pp. 476--480, Sept 2014.
[20]
J. Svajlenko and C. K. Roy, "Bigcloneeval: A clone detection tool evaluation framework with bigclonebench," in 2016 IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance and Evolution (ICSME), pp. 596--600, Oct 2016.
[21]
P. Wang, J. Svajlenko, Y. Wu, Y. Xu, and C. K. Roy, "Ccaligner: A token based large-gap clone detector," in Proceedings of the 40th International Conference on Software Engineering, ICSE '18, (New York, NY, USA), pp. 1066--1077, ACM, 2018.
[22]
J. Svajlenko and C. K. Roy, "Evaluating clone detection tools with bigclonebench," in 2015 IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance and Evolution (ICSME), pp. 131--140, Sept 2015.
[23]
V. Saini, H. Sajnani, and C. Lopes, "Cloned and non-cloned java methods: a comparative study," Empirical Software Engineering, vol. 23, pp. 2232--2278, Aug 2018.
[24]
V. Saini, F. Farmahinifarahani, Y. Lu, P. Baldi, and C. Lopes, "Mondego/oreo-artifact: Oreo first release," July 2018.
[25]
P. Baldi and Y. Chauvin, "Neural networks for fingerprint recognition," Neural Computation, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 402--418, 1993.
[26]
N. Göde and R. Koschke, "Incremental clone detection," in 13th European Conference on Software Maintenance and Reengineering (CSMR), pp. 219--228, IEEE, 2009.
[27]
M. S. Uddin, C. K. Roy, and K. A. Schneider, "Simcad: An extensible and faster clone detection tool for large scale software systems," in IEEE 21st International Conference on Program Comprehension (ICPC), pp. 236--238, IEEE, 2013.
[28]
"Copy/paste detector (cpd)." https://pmd.github.io/pmd-6.6.0/pmd_userdocs_cpd.html. Accessed: 2018-08-23.
Recommendations
Oreo: detection of clones in the twilight zone
ESEC/FSE 2018: Proceedings of the 2018 26th ACM Joint Meeting on European Software Engineering Conference and Symposium on the Foundations of Software EngineeringSource code clones are categorized into four types of increasing difficulty of detection, ranging from purely textual (Type-1) to purely semantic (Type-4). Most clone detectors reported in the literature work well up to Type-3, which accounts for ...
Evaluating Modern Clone Detection Tools
ICSME '14: Proceedings of the 2014 IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance and EvolutionMany clone detection tools and techniques have been introduced in the literature, and these tools have been used to manage clones and study their effects on software maintenance and evolution. However, the performance of these modern tools is not well ...
A Mutation/Injection-Based Automatic Framework for Evaluating Code Clone Detection Tools
ICSTW '09: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Software Testing, Verification, and Validation WorkshopsIn recent years many methods and tools for software clone detection have been proposed. While some work has been done on assessing and comparing performance of these tools, very little empirical evaluation has been done. In particular, accuracy measures ...
Comments
Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
Sponsors
- SIGSOFT: ACM Special Interest Group on Software Engineering
- IEEE-CS: Computer Society
Publisher
IEEE Press
Publication History
Published: 25 May 2019
Check for updates
Badges
Author Tags
Qualifiers
- Research-article
Conference
ICSE '19
Sponsor:
- SIGSOFT
- IEEE-CS
ICSE '19: 41st International Conference on Software Engineering
May 25 - 31, 2019
Quebec, Montreal, Canada
Acceptance Rates
Overall Acceptance Rate 276 of 1,856 submissions, 15%
Upcoming Conference
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- 0Total Citations
- 272Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)6
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 25 Dec 2024
Other Metrics
Citations
View Options
Login options
Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.
Sign in