{"title":"Benchmarks for software clone detection: A ten-year retrospective","authors":"C. Roy, J. Cordy","doi":"10.1109/SANER.2018.8330194","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"There have been a great many methods and tools proposed for software clone detection. 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 such as precision and recall have only been roughly estimated, due both to problems in creating a validated clone benchmark against which tools can be compared, and to the manual effort required to hand check large numbers of candidate clones. In order to cope with this issue, over the last 10 years we have been working towards building cloning benchmarks for objectively evaluating clone detection tools. Beginning with our WCRE 2008 paper, where we conducted a modestly large empirical study with the NiCad clone detection tool, over the past ten years we have extended and grown our work to include several languages, much larger datasets, and model clones in languages such as Simulink. From a modest set of 15 C and Java systems comprising a total of 7 million lines in 2008, our work has progressed to a benchmark called BigCloneBench with eight million manually validated clone pairs in a large inter-project source dataset of more than 25,000 projects and 365 million lines of code. In this paper, we present a history and overview of software clone detection benchmarks, and review the steps of ourselves and others to come to this stage. We outline a future for clone detection benchmarks and hope to encourage researchers to both use existing benchmarks and to contribute to building the benchmarks of the future.","PeriodicalId":6602,"journal":{"name":"2018 IEEE 25th International Conference on Software Analysis, Evolution and Reengineering (SANER)","volume":"10 1","pages":"26-37"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-03-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"34","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2018 IEEE 25th International Conference on Software Analysis, Evolution and Reengineering (SANER)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/SANER.2018.8330194","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 34
Abstract
There have been a great many methods and tools proposed for software clone detection. 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 such as precision and recall have only been roughly estimated, due both to problems in creating a validated clone benchmark against which tools can be compared, and to the manual effort required to hand check large numbers of candidate clones. In order to cope with this issue, over the last 10 years we have been working towards building cloning benchmarks for objectively evaluating clone detection tools. Beginning with our WCRE 2008 paper, where we conducted a modestly large empirical study with the NiCad clone detection tool, over the past ten years we have extended and grown our work to include several languages, much larger datasets, and model clones in languages such as Simulink. From a modest set of 15 C and Java systems comprising a total of 7 million lines in 2008, our work has progressed to a benchmark called BigCloneBench with eight million manually validated clone pairs in a large inter-project source dataset of more than 25,000 projects and 365 million lines of code. In this paper, we present a history and overview of software clone detection benchmarks, and review the steps of ourselves and others to come to this stage. We outline a future for clone detection benchmarks and hope to encourage researchers to both use existing benchmarks and to contribute to building the benchmarks of the future.