skip to main content
10.1145/3071178.3071263acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesgeccoConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Empirical evaluation of conditional operators in GP based fault localization

Published:01 July 2017Publication History

ABSTRACT

Genetic Programming has been successfully applied to learn to rank program elements according to their likelihood of containing faults. However, all GP-evolved formulæ that have been studied in the fault localization literature up to now are single expressions that only use a small set of basic functions. Based on recent theoretical analysis that different formulæ may be more effective against different classes of faults, we evaluate the impact of allowing ternary conditional operators in GP-evolved fault localization by extending our fault localization tool called FLUCCS. An empirical study based on 210 real world Java faults suggests that the simple inclusion of ternary conditional operator can help fault localization by placing up to 11% more faults at the top compared to our baseline, FLUCCS, which in itself can already rank 50% more faults at the top compared to the state-of-the-art SBFL formulæ.

References

  1. JaCoCo. http://www.eclemma.org/jacoco/. (????). http://www.eclemma.org/jacoco/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. R. Abreu, P. Zoeteweij, and A.J.C. van Gemund. 2009. Spectrum-Based Multiple Fault Localization. In Proceedings of the 24th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE 2009). 88--99. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Tien-Duy B. Le, David Lo, Claire Le Goues, and Lars Grunske. 2016. A Learning-to-rank Based Fault Localization Approach Using Likely Invariants. In Proceedings of the 25th International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis (ISSTA 2016). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 177--188. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Yanping Chen, Robert L. Probert, and D. Paul Sims. 2002. Specification-based regression test selection with risk analysis. In Proceedings of the Conference of the Centre for Advanced Studies on Collaborative research (GASCON 2002). IBM Press, 1--14. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Valentin Dallmeier, Christian Lindig, and Andreas Zeller. 2005. Lightweight bug localization with AMPLE. In Proceedings of the sixth international symposium on Automated, analysis-driven debugging (AADEBUG'05). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 99--104. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Michael D. Ernst, Jake Cockrell, William G. Griswold, and David Notkin. 1999. Dynamically Discovering Likely Program Invariants to Support Program Evolution. In Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE-99). ACM Press, NY, 213--225. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Gordon Fraser and Andrea Arcuri. 2013. Whole Test Suite Generation. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 39, 2 (Feb. 2013), 276--291. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Mark Harman, S. Afshin Mansouri, and Yuanyuan Zhang. 2012. Search-based software engineering: Trends, techniques and applications. Comput. Surveys 45, 1, Article 11 (December 2012), 61 pages. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Jerry L. Hintze and Ray D. Nelson. 1998. Violin Plots: A Box Plot-Density Trace Synergism. The American Statistician 52, 2 (1998), 181--184.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Paul Jaccard. 1901. Étude comparative de la distribution florale dans une portion des Alpes et des Jura. Bulletin del la Société Vaudoise des Sciences Naturelles 37 (1901), 547--579.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Tom Janssen, Rui Abreu, and Arjan J. C. van Gemund. 2009. Zoltar: A Toolset for Automatic Fault Localization. In Proceedings of the 2009 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE '09). IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA, 662--664. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. James A.Jones and Mary Jean Harro Id. 2005. Empirical evaluation of the tarantula automatic fault-localization technique. In Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE2005). ACM Press, 273--282. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. James A. Jones, Mary Jean Harrold, and John Stasko. 2002. Visualization of test information to assist fault localization. In Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Software Engineering. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 467--477. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. James A. Jones, Mary Jean Harrold, and John T. Stasko. 2001. Visualization for Fault Localization. In Proceedings of ICSE Workshop on Software Visualization. 71--75.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. René Just, Darioush Jalali, and Michael D. Ernst. 2014. Defects4J: A Database of Existing Faults to Enable Controlled Testing Studies for Java Programs. In Proceedings of the 2014 International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis (ISSTA 2014). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 437--440. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Ke Mao, Mark Harman, and Yue Jia. 2016. Sapienz: Multi-objective Automated Testing for Android Applications. In Proceedings of the 25th International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis (ISSTA 2016). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 94--105. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Phil McMinn. 2007. IGUANA: Input Generation Using Automated Novel Algorithms. A Plug and Play Research Tool. Technical Report CS-07--14. Department of Computer Science, University of Sheffield.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Lee Naish, Hua Jie Lee, and Kotagiri Ramamohanarao. 2011. A model for spectra-based software diagnosis. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering Methodology 20, 3, Article 11 (August 2011), 32 pages. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. A Ochiai. 1957. Zoogeographic studies on the soleoid fishes found in Japan and its neighbouring regions. Bulletin of the Japanese Society of Scientific Fisheries 22, 9(1957), 526--530.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. Chris Parnin and Alessandro Orso. 2011. Are automated debugging techniques actually helping programmers?. In Proceedings of the 2011 International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis (ISSTA 2011). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 199--209. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Jeongju Sohn and Shin Yoo. 2017. Using Source Code Metrics to Improve Fault Localisation. Technical Report CS-TR-2017--408. School of Computing, Korean Advanced Institute of Science and Technology.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Gregory Tassey. 2002. The Economic Impacts of Inadequate Infrastructure for Software Testing. Technical Report. National Institute of Standards and Technology.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. András Vargha and Harold D. Delaney. 2000. A Critique and Improvement of the "CL" Common Language Effect Size Statistics of McGraw and Wong. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics 25, 2 (2000), pp. 101--132.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. W. E. Wong, Ruizhi Gao, Yihao Li, Rui Abreu, and Franz Wotawa. 2016. A Survey on Software Fault Localization. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 42, 8 (August 2016), 707. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. W. Eric Wong, Yu Qi, Lei Zhao, and Kai-Yuan Cai. 2007. Effective Fault Localization using Code Coverage. In Proceedings of the 31st Annual International Computer Software and Applications Conference - Volume 01 (COMPSAC '07). IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA, 449--456. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Xiaoyuan Xie. 2012. On the analysis of spectrum-based fault localization. Ph.D. Dissertation. Swinburne University of Technology.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Xiaoyuan Xie, Tsong Yueh Chen, Fei-Ching Kuo, and Baowen Xu. 2013. A Theoretical Analysis of the Risk Evaluation Formulas for Spectrum-based Fault Localization. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering Methodology 22, 4, Article 31 (October 2013), 40 pages. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Xiaoyuan Xie, Fei-Ching Kuo, Tsong Yueh Chen, Shin Yoo, and Mark Harman. 2013. Provably Optimal and Human-Competitive Results in SBSE for Spectrum Based Fault Localisation. In Search Based Software Engineering, Günther Ruhe and Yuanyuan Zhang (Eds.). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 8084. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 224--238. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Jifeng Xuan and M. Monperrus. 2014. Learning to Combine Multiple Ranking Metrics for Fault Localization. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance and Evolution (ICSME 2014). 191--200. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. Shin Yoo. 2012. Evolving Human Competitive Spectra-Based Fault Localisation Techniques. In Search Based Software Engineering, Gordon Fraser and Jerffeson Teixeira de Souza (Eds.). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 7515. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 244--258. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Shin Yoo, Xiaoyuan Xie, Fei-Ching Kuo, Tsong Yueh Chen, and Mark Harman. 2014. No Pot of Gold at the End of Program Spectrum Rainbow: Greatest Risk Evaluation Formula Does Not Exist. Technical Report RN/14/14. University College London.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Empirical evaluation of conditional operators in GP based fault localization

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      GECCO '17: Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference
      July 2017
      1427 pages
      ISBN:9781450349208
      DOI:10.1145/3071178

      Copyright © 2017 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 1 July 2017

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      GECCO '17 Paper Acceptance Rate178of462submissions,39%Overall Acceptance Rate1,669of4,410submissions,38%

      Upcoming Conference

      GECCO '24
      Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference
      July 14 - 18, 2024
      Melbourne , VIC , Australia

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader