Ranking Plausible Patches by Historic Feature Frequencies

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2407.17240v1
• Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2024 12:58:14 GMT
• Title: Ranking Plausible Patches by Historic Feature Frequencies
• Authors: Shifat Sahariar Bhuiyan, Abhishek Tiwari, Yu Pei, Carlo A. Furia,
• Abstract summary: This paper presents PrevaRank, a technique that ranks plausible patches according to their feature similarity with historic programmer-written fixes for similar bugs. PrevaRank consistently improved the ranking of correct fixes. It works robustly with a variety of APR tools and bugs, with negligible overhead.
• Score: 4.129445293427074
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Automated program repair (APR) techniques have achieved conspicuous progress, and are now capable of producing genuinely correct fixes in scenarios that were well beyond their capabilities only a few years ago. Nevertheless, even when an APR technique can find a correct fix for a bug, it still runs the risk of ranking the fix lower than other patches that are plausible (they pass all available tests) but incorrect. This can seriously hurt the technique's practical effectiveness, as the user will have to peruse a larger number of patches before finding the correct one. This paper presents PrevaRank, a technique that ranks plausible patches produced by any APR technique according to their feature similarity with historic programmer-written fixes for similar bugs. PrevaRank implements simple heuristics, which help make it scalable and applicable to any APR tool that produces plausible patches. In our experimental evaluation, after training PrevaRank on the fix history of 81 open-source Java projects, we used it to rank patches produced by 8 Java APR tools on 168 Defects4J bugs. PrevaRank consistently improved the ranking of correct fixes: for example, it ranked a correct fix within the top-3 positions in 27% more cases than the original tools did. Other experimental results indicate that PrevaRank works robustly with a variety of APR tools and bugs, with negligible overhead.

Related papers

• Probably Approximately Precision and Recall Learning [62.912015491907994]
  Precision and Recall are foundational metrics in machine learning. One-sided feedback--where only positive examples are observed during training--is inherent in many practical problems. We introduce a PAC learning framework where each hypothesis is represented by a graph, with edges indicating positive interactions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-20T04:21:07Z)
• A Novel Approach for Automatic Program Repair using Round-Trip Translation with Large Language Models [50.86686630756207]
  Research shows that grammatical mistakes in a sentence can be corrected by translating it to another language and back. Current generative models for Automatic Program Repair (APR) are pre-trained on source code and fine-tuned for repair. This paper proposes bypassing the fine-tuning step and using Round-Trip Translation (RTT): translation of code from one programming language to another programming or natural language, and back.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-15T22:36:31Z)
• Enhancing Redundancy-based Automated Program Repair by Fine-grained Pattern Mining [18.3896381051331]
  We propose a new repair technique named Repatt, which incorporates a two-level pattern mining process for guiding effective patch generation. We have conducted an experiment on the widely-used Defects4J benchmark and compared Repatt with eight state-of-the-art APR approaches.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-26T08:42:32Z)
• RAP-Gen: Retrieval-Augmented Patch Generation with CodeT5 for Automatic Program Repair [75.40584530380589]
  We propose a novel Retrieval-Augmented Patch Generation framework (RAP-Gen) RAP-Gen explicitly leveraging relevant fix patterns retrieved from a list of previous bug-fix pairs. We evaluate RAP-Gen on three benchmarks in two programming languages, including the TFix benchmark in JavaScript, and Code Refinement and Defects4J benchmarks in Java.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-12T08:52:56Z)
• PatchZero: Zero-Shot Automatic Patch Correctness Assessment [13.19425284402493]
  We propose toolname, the patch correctness assessment by adopting a large language model for code. toolname prioritizes labeled patches from existing APR tools that exhibit semantic similarity to those generated by new APR tools. Our experimental results showed that toolname can achieve an accuracy of 84.4% and an F1-score of 86.5% on average.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-01T03:12:11Z)
• Generation Probabilities Are Not Enough: Uncertainty Highlighting in AI Code Completions [54.55334589363247]
  We study whether conveying information about uncertainty enables programmers to more quickly and accurately produce code. We find that highlighting tokens with the highest predicted likelihood of being edited leads to faster task completion and more targeted edits.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-14T18:43:34Z)
• APPT: Boosting Automated Patch Correctness Prediction via Fine-tuning Pre-trained Models [15.179895484968476]
  We propose APPT, a pre-trained model-based automated patch correctness assessment technique by both pre-training and fine-tuning. We conduct an experiment on 1,183 Defects4J patches and the experimental results show that APPT achieves prediction accuracy of 79.7% and recall of 83.2%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-01-29T14:28:26Z)
• Invalidator: Automated Patch Correctness Assessment via Semantic and Syntactic Reasoning [6.269370220586248]
  In this paper, we propose a novel technique to automatically assess the correctness of APR-generated patches via semantic and syntactic reasoning. We have conducted experiments on a dataset of 885 patches generated on real-world programs in Defects4J. Experiment results show that INVALIDATOR correctly classified 79% overfitting patches, accounting for 23% more overfitting patches being detected by the best baseline.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-01-03T14:16:32Z)
• BigIssue: A Realistic Bug Localization Benchmark [89.8240118116093]
  BigIssue is a benchmark for realistic bug localization. We provide a general benchmark with a diversity of real and synthetic Java bugs. We hope to advance the state of the art in bug localization, in turn improving APR performance and increasing its applicability to the modern development cycle.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-07-21T20:17:53Z)
• Break-It-Fix-It: Unsupervised Learning for Program Repair [90.55497679266442]
  We propose a new training approach, Break-It-Fix-It (BIFI), which has two key ideas. We use the critic to check a fixer's output on real bad inputs and add good (fixed) outputs to the training data. Based on these ideas, we iteratively update the breaker and the fixer while using them in conjunction to generate more paired data. BIFI outperforms existing methods, obtaining 90.5% repair accuracy on GitHub-Python and 71.7% on DeepFix.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-11T20:31:04Z)
• CURE: Code-Aware Neural Machine Translation for Automatic Program Repair [11.556110575946631]
  We propose CURE, a new NMT-based APR technique with three major novelties. CURE pre-trains a programming language (PL) model on a large software to learn developer-like source code before the APR task. Second, CURE designs a new code-aware search strategy that finds more correct fixes by focusing on compilable patches and patches that are close in length to the buggy code.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-02-26T22:30:28Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.