Can We Predict the Quality of Spectrum-based Fault Localization?

Mojdeh Golagha, A. Pretschner, L. Briand
{"title":"Can We Predict the Quality of Spectrum-based Fault Localization?","authors":"Mojdeh Golagha, A. Pretschner, L. Briand","doi":"10.1109/icst46399.2020.00012","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Fault localization and repair are time-consuming and tedious. There is a significant and growing need for automated techniques to support such tasks. Despite significant progress in this area, existing fault localization techniques are not widely applied in practice yet and their effectiveness varies greatly from case to case. Existing work suggests new algorithms and ideas as well as adjustments to the test suites to improve the effectiveness of automated fault localization. However, important questions remain open: Why is the effectiveness of these techniques so unpredictable? What are the factors that influence the effectiveness of fault localization? Can we accurately predict fault localization effectiveness? In this paper, we try to answer these questions by collecting 70 static, dynamic, test suite, and fault-related metrics that we hypothesize are related to effectiveness. Our analysis shows that a combination of only a few static, dynamic, and test metrics enables the construction of a prediction model with excellent discrimination power between levels of effectiveness (eight metrics yielding an AUC of.86; fifteen metrics yielding an AUC of.88). The model hence yields a practically useful confidence factor that can be used to assess the potential effectiveness of fault localization. Given that the metrics are the most influential metrics explaining the effectiveness of fault localization, they can also be used as a guide for corrective actions on code and test suites leading to more effective fault localization.","PeriodicalId":235967,"journal":{"name":"2020 IEEE 13th International Conference on Software Testing, Validation and Verification (ICST)","volume":"105 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2020 IEEE 13th International Conference on Software Testing, Validation and Verification (ICST)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/icst46399.2020.00012","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

Abstract

Fault localization and repair are time-consuming and tedious. There is a significant and growing need for automated techniques to support such tasks. Despite significant progress in this area, existing fault localization techniques are not widely applied in practice yet and their effectiveness varies greatly from case to case. Existing work suggests new algorithms and ideas as well as adjustments to the test suites to improve the effectiveness of automated fault localization. However, important questions remain open: Why is the effectiveness of these techniques so unpredictable? What are the factors that influence the effectiveness of fault localization? Can we accurately predict fault localization effectiveness? In this paper, we try to answer these questions by collecting 70 static, dynamic, test suite, and fault-related metrics that we hypothesize are related to effectiveness. Our analysis shows that a combination of only a few static, dynamic, and test metrics enables the construction of a prediction model with excellent discrimination power between levels of effectiveness (eight metrics yielding an AUC of.86; fifteen metrics yielding an AUC of.88). The model hence yields a practically useful confidence factor that can be used to assess the potential effectiveness of fault localization. Given that the metrics are the most influential metrics explaining the effectiveness of fault localization, they can also be used as a guide for corrective actions on code and test suites leading to more effective fault localization.
基于频谱的故障定位质量能否预测?
故障定位和修复既耗时又繁琐。对于支持这些任务的自动化技术的需求越来越大。尽管在这一领域取得了重大进展,但现有的故障定位技术在实际应用中还没有得到广泛应用,其有效性也存在很大差异。现有的工作提出了新的算法和思想,以及对测试套件的调整,以提高自动故障定位的有效性。然而,重要的问题仍然悬而未决:为什么这些技术的有效性如此不可预测?影响故障定位有效性的因素有哪些?我们能否准确预测故障定位的有效性?在本文中,我们试图通过收集70个静态的、动态的、测试套件以及我们假设与有效性相关的与故障相关的度量来回答这些问题。我们的分析表明,只有几个静态、动态和测试指标的组合可以构建一个预测模型,在有效性水平之间具有出色的辨别能力(8个指标产生的AUC为0.86;15个参数产生0.88的AUC)。因此,该模型产生了一个实际有用的置信系数,可用于评估故障定位的潜在有效性。考虑到这些度量是解释错误定位有效性的最具影响力的度量,它们也可以被用作代码和测试套件的纠正操作指南,从而导致更有效的错误定位。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信