The most natural method for evaluating program repair systems is to run them on bug datasets, such as Defects4J. Yet, using this evaluation technique on arbitrary real-world programs requires heavy configuration. In this paper, we propose a purely static method to evaluate the potential of the search space of repair approaches. This new method enables researchers and practitioners to encode the search spaces of repair approaches and select potentially useful ones without struggling with tool configuration and execution. We encode the search spaces by specifying the repair strategies they employ. Next, we use the specifications to check whether past commits lie in repair search spaces. For a repair approach, including many human-written past commits in its search space indicates its potential to generate useful patches. We implement our evaluation method in LighteR. LighteR gets a Git repository and outputs a list of commits whose source code changes lie in repair search spaces. We run LighteR on 55,309 commits from the history of 72 Github repositories with and show that LighteR's precision and recall are 77% and 92%, respectively. Overall, our experiments show that our novel method is both lightweight and effective to study the search space of program repair approaches.
Much initial research on automatic program repair has focused on experimental results to probe their potential to find patches and reduce development effort. Relatively less effort has been put into understanding the hows and whys of such approaches. For example, a critical assumption of the GenProg technique is that certain bugs can be fixed by copying and re-arranging existing code. In other words, GenProg assumes that the fix ingredients already exist elsewhere in the code. In this paper, we formalize these assumptions around the concept of ''temporal redundancy''. A temporally redundant co…
Just-In-Time defect prediction (JIT-DP) models can identify defect-inducing commits at check-in time. Even though previous studies have achieved a great progress, these studies still have the following limitations: 1) useful information (e.g., semantic information and structure information) are not fully used; 2) existing work can only predict a commit as buggy one or clean one without more information about what type of defect it is; 3) a commit may involve changes in many files, which cause difficulty in locating the defect; 4) prior studies treat defect identification and defect repair as s…
KTH Royal Institute of Technology（瑞典皇家理工学院）；Colorado State University（科罗拉多州立大学）；The College of William and Mary（威廉与玛丽学院）
This paper presents a novel end-to-end approach to program repair based on sequence-to-sequence learning. We devise, implement, and evaluate a system, called SequenceR, for fixing bugs based on sequence-to-sequence learning on source code. This approach uses the copy mechanism to overcome the unlimited vocabulary problem that occurs with big code. Our system is data-driven; we train it on 35,578 samples, carefully curated from commits to open-source repositories. We evaluate it on 4,711 independent real bug fixes, as well on the Defects4J benchmark used in program repair research. SequenceR is…
Benchmarks of bugs are essential to empirically evaluate automatic program repair tools. In this paper, we present Bears, a project for collecting and storing bugs into an extensible bug benchmark for automatic repair studies in Java. The collection of bugs relies on commit building state from Continuous Integration (CI) to find potential pairs of buggy and patched program versions from open-source projects hosted on GitHub. Each pair of program versions passes through a pipeline where an attempt of reproducing a bug and its patch is performed. The core step of the reproduction pipeline is the…
