Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The effectiveness of context-based change application on automatic program repair

  • Published:
Empirical Software Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

An Automatic Program Repair (APR) technique is an implementation of a repair model to fix a given bug by modifying program behavior. Recently, repair models which collect source code and code changes from software history and use such collected resources for patch generation became more popular. Collected resources are used to expand the patch search space and to increase the probability that correct patches for bugs are included in the space. However, it is also revealed that navigation on such expanded patch search space is difficult due to the sparseness of correct patches in the space. In this study, we evaluate the effectiveness of Context-based Change Application (CCA) technique on change selection, fix location selection and change concretization, which are the key aspects of navigating patch search space. CCA collects abstract subtree changes and their AST contexts, and applies them to fix locations only if their contexts are matched. CCA repair model can address both search space expansion and navigation issues, by expanding search space with collected changes while narrowing down search areas in the search space based on contexts. Since CCA applies changes to a fix location only if their contexts are matched, it only needs to consider the same context changes for each fix location. Also, if there is no change with the same context as a fix location, this fix location can be ignored since it means that past patches did not modify such locations. In addition, CCA uses fine-grained changes preserving changed code structures, but normalizing user-defined names. Hence change concretization can be simply done by replacing normalized names with concrete names available in buggy code. We evaluated CCA’s effectiveness with over 54K unique collected changes (221K in total) from about 5K human-written patches. Results show that using contexts, CCA correctly found 90.1% of the changes required for test set patches, while fewer than 5% of the changes were found without contexts. We discovered that collecting more changes is only helpful if it is supported by contexts for effective search space navigation. In addition, CCA repair model found 44-70% of the actual fix locations of Defects4j patches more quickly compared to using SBFL techniques only. We also found that about 48% of the patches can be fully concretized using concrete names from buggy code.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Apache’s JIRA issue tracker (https://issues.apache.org/jira).

References

  • Arcuri A, Yao X (2008) A novel co-evolutionary approach to automatic software bug fixing. In: IEEE congress on evolutionary computation, 2008. CEC 2008. (IEEE World Congress on Computational Intelligence), pp 162–168. https://doi.org/10.1109/CEC.2008.4630793

  • Barr ET, Brun Y, Devanbu P, Harman M, Sarro F (2014) The plastic surgery hypothesis. In: Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGSOFT international symposium on foundations of software engineering, FSE ’14

  • Barr ET, Harman M, Jia Y, Marginean A, Petke J (2015) Automated software transplantation. In: Proceedings of the 2015 international symposium on software testing and analysis, ISSTA 2015. ACM, New York, pp 257–269, DOI https://doi.org/10.1145/2771783.2771796

  • Chen MY, Kiciman E, Fratkin E, Fox A, Brewer E (2002) Pinpoint: Problem determination in large, dynamic internet services. In: International conference on dependable systems and networks, 2002. DSN 2002. Proceedings, pp 595–604. IEEE

  • Chilowicz M, Duris E, Roussel G, Paris-est U (2009) Syntax tree fingerprinting: a foundation for source code similarity detection

  • Debroy V, Wong WE (2010) Using mutation to automatically suggest fixes for faulty programs. In: Proceedings of the 2010 3rd international conference on software testing, verification and validation, ICST ’10. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, pp 65–74, DOI https://doi.org/10.1109/ICST.2010.66

  • DeMarco F, Xuan J, Le Berre D, Monperrus M (2014) Automatic repair of buggy if conditions and missing preconditions with smt. In: Proceedings of the 6th international workshop on constraints in software testing, verification, and analysis, pp 30–39. ACM

  • Falleri JR, Morandat F, Blanc X, Martinez M, Montperrus M (2014) Fine-grained and accurate source code differencing. In: Proceedings of the 29th ACM/IEEE international conference on automated software engineering, ASE ’14. ACM, New York, pp 313–324, DOI https://doi.org/10.1145/2642937.2642982

  • Fluri B, Wursch M, Pinzger M, Gall H (2007) Change distilling: Tree differencing for fine-grained source code change extraction. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 33(11):725–743. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSE.2007.70731

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gabel M, Su Z (2010) A study of the uniqueness of source code. In: Proceedings of the Eighteenth ACM SIGSOFT international symposium on foundations of software engineering, FSE ’10. ACM, New York, pp 147–156, DOI https://doi.org/10.1145/1882291.1882315

  • Goues CL, Nguyen T, Forrest S, Weimer W (2012) Genprog: A generic method for automatic software repair. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 38(1):54–72. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSE.2011.104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jiang J, Xiong Y, Zhang H, Gao Q, Chen X (2018) Shaping program repair space with existing patches and similar code. In: Proceedings of the 27th ACM SIGSOFT international symposium on software testing and analysis, ISSTA 2018. ACM, New York, pp 298–309, DOI https://doi.org/10.1145/3213846.3213871

  • Just R, Jalali D, Ernst MD (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, pp 437–440, DOI https://doi.org/10.1145/2610384.2628055

  • Ke Y, Stolee KT, Goues CL, Brun Y (2015) Repairing programs with semantic code search (t). In: 2015 30th IEEE/ACM international conference on automated software engineering (ASE), pp 295–306

  • Kim D, Nam J, Song J, Kim S (2013) Automatic patch generation learned from human-written patches. In: Proceedings of the 2013 international conference on software engineering, ICSE’13. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2486788.2486893

  • Kim J, Kim J, Lee E (2018) Vfl: Variable-based fault localization. Information and Software Technology. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0950584918302453

  • Kim J, Kim S (2016) Location aware source code differencing for mining changes. Tech. rep., Hong Kong University of Science and Technology. https://github.com/thwak/LAS. [Online; accessed 05-Mar-2019]

  • Le XB, Lo D, Goues CL (2016) History driven program repair. In: 2016 IEEE 23rd international conference on software analysis, evolution, and reengineering (SANER), vol 01, pp 213–224. https://doi.org/10.1109/SANER.2016.76

  • Le XBD, Chu DH, Lo D, Le Goues C, Visser W (2017a) Jfix: Semantics-based repair of java programs via symbolic pathfinder. In: Proceedings of the 26th ACM SIGSOFT international symposium on software testing and analysis, ISSTA 2017. ACM, New York, pp 376–379, DOI https://doi.org/10.1145/3092703.3098225

  • Le XBD, Chu DH, Lo D, Le Goues C, Visser W (2017b) S3: Syntax- and semantic-guided repair synthesis via programming by examples. In: Proceedings of the 2017 11th joint meeting on foundations of software engineering, ESEC/FSE 2017. ACM, New York, pp 593–604, DOI https://doi.org/10.1145/3106237.3106309

  • Le XBD, Thung F, Lo D, Goues CL (2018) Overfitting in semantics-based automated program repair. Empir Softw Eng 23 (5):3007–3033. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10664-017-9577-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Le Goues C, Dewey-Vogt M, Forrest S, Weimer W (2012) A systematic study of automated program repair: Fixing 55 out of 105 bugs for $8 each. In: Proceedings of the 34th international conference on software engineering, ICSE ’12. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2337223.2337225. IEEE Press, Piscataway, pp 3–13

  • Lipowski A, Lipowska D (2012) Roulette-wheel selection via stochastic acceptance. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications 391(6):2193–2196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physa.2011.12.004. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378437111009010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu K, Koyuncu A, Kim D, Tegawendé F, Bissyandé T (2019) AVATAR: fixing semantic bugs with fix patterns of static analysis violations. In: Proceedings of the 26th IEEE international conference on software analysis, evolution, and reengineering, pp 456–467. IEEE

  • Livshits B, Zimmermann T (2005) Dynamine: Finding common error patterns by mining software revision histories. In: Proceedings of the 10th European software engineering conference held jointly with 13th ACM SIGSOFT international symposium on foundations of software engineering, ESEC/FSE-13. ACM, New York, pp 296–305, DOI https://doi.org/10.1145/1081706.1081754

  • Long F, Amidon P, Rinard M (2017) Automatic inference of code transforms for patch generation. In: Proceedings of the 2017 11th joint meeting on foundations of software engineering, ESEC/FSE 2017. ACM, New York, pp 727–739, DOI https://doi.org/10.1145/3106237.3106253

  • Long F, Rinard M (2015) Staged program repair with condition synthesis. In: Proceedings of the 2015 10th Joint Meeting on Foundations of Software Engineering, ESEC/FSE 2015. ACM, New York, pp 166–178, DOI https://doi.org/10.1145/2786805.2786811

  • Long F, Rinard M (2016a) An analysis of the search spaces for generate and validate patch generation systems. In: Proceedings of the 38th international conference on software engineering, ICSE ’16. ACM, New York, pp 702–713, DOI https://doi.org/10.1145/2884781.2884872

  • Long F, Rinard M (2016b) Automatic patch generation by learning correct code. In: Proceedings of the 43rd annual ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT symposium on principles of programming languages, POPL ’16. ACM, New York, pp 298–312, DOI https://doi.org/10.1145/2837614.2837617

  • Martinez M, Duchien L, Monperrus M (2013) Automatically extracting instances of code change patterns with ast analysis. In: Proceedings of the 2013 IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance, ICSM ’13. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, pp 388–391, DOI https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSM.2013.54

  • Martinez M, Monperrus M (2015) Mining software repair models for reasoning on the search space of automated program fixing. Empir Softw Eng 20(1):176–205. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10664-013-9282-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martinez M, Weimer W, Monperrus M (2014) Do the fix ingredients already exist? an empirical inquiry into the redundancy assumptions of program repair approaches. In: Companion Proceedings of the 36th international conference on software engineering, pp 492–495. ACM

  • Mechtaev S, Yi J, Roychoudhury A (2015) Directfix: Looking for simple program repairs. In: 2015 IEEE/ACM 37th IEEE international conference on software engineering, vol 1, pp 448–458

  • Mechtaev S, Yi J, Roychoudhury A (2016) Angelix: Scalable multiline program patch synthesis via symbolic analysis. In: Proceedings of the 38th international conference on software engineering, ICSE ’16. ACM, New York, pp 691–701, DOI https://doi.org/10.1145/2884781.2884807

  • Meng N, Kim M, McKinley KS (2011a) Sydit: Creating and applying a program transformation from an example. In: Proceedings of the 19th ACM SIGSOFT symposium and the 13th European conference on foundations of software engineering, ESEC/FSE ’11. ACM, New York, pp 440–443, DOI https://doi.org/10.1145/2025113.2025185

  • Meng N, Kim M, McKinley KS (2011b) Systematic editing: Generating program transformations from an example. In: Proceedings of the 32Nd ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation, PLDI ’11. ACM, New York, pp 329–342, DOI https://doi.org/10.1145/1993498.1993537

  • Meng N, Kim M, McKinley KS (2013) Lase: locating and applying systematic edits by learning from examples. In: Proceedings of the 2013 international conference on software engineering, pp 502–511. IEEE Press

  • Meyer ADS, Garcia AAF, Souza APD, Souza CLD Jr (2004) Comparison of similarity coefficients used for cluster analysis with dominant markers in maize (zea mays l). Genet Mol Biol 27(1):83–91

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nguyen HA, Nguyen AT, Nguyen T, Nguyen T, Rajan H (2013) A study of repetitiveness of code changes in software evolution. In: 2013 IEEE/ACM 28th international conference on automated software engineering (ASE), pp 180–190

  • Nguyen HDT, Qi D, Roychoudhury A, Chandra S (2013) Semfix: Program repair via semantic analysis. In: Proceedings of the 2013 international conference on software engineering, pp 772–781. IEEE Press

  • Pearson S, Campos J, Just R, Fraser G, Abreu R, Ernst MD, Pang D, Keller B (2017) Evaluating and improving fault localization. In: Proceedings of the 39th international conference on software engineering, ICSE ’17. IEEE Press, Piscataway, pp 609–620, DOI https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSE.2017.62

  • Perkins JH, Kim S, Larsen S, Amarasinghe S, Bachrach J, Carbin M, Pacheco C, Sherwood F, Sidiroglou S, Sullivan G et al (2009) Automatically patching errors in deployed software. In: Proceedings of the ACM SIGOPS 22nd symposium on operating systems principles, pp 87–102. ACM

  • Petke J, Harman M, Langdon WB, Weimer W (2014) Using genetic improvement & code transplants to specialise a c++ program to a problem class. In: 17th European conference on genetic programming (EuroGP), Granada, Spain

  • Qi Y, Mao X, Lei Y (2013) Efficient automated program repair through fault-recorded testing prioritization. In: Proceedings of the 2013 IEEE international conference on software maintenance, ICSM ’13. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, pp 180–189, DOI https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSM.2013.29

  • Qi Y, Mao X, Lei Y, Dai Z, Wang C (2014) The strength of random search on automated program repair. In: Proceedings of the 36th international conference on software engineering, pp 254–265. ACM

  • Qi Z, Long F, Achour S, Rinard M (2015) An analysis of patch plausibility and correctness for generate-and-validate patch generation systems. In: Proceedings of the 2015 international symposium on software testing and analysis, ISSTA 2015. ACM, New York, pp 24–36, DOI https://doi.org/10.1145/2771783.2771791

  • Raghavan S, Rohana R, Leon D, Podgurski A, Augustine V (2004) Dex: a semantic-graph differencing tool for studying changes in large code bases. In: 20th IEEE international conference on software maintenance, 2004. Proceedings., pp 188–197

  • Ray B, Nagappan M, Bird C, Nagappan N, Zimmermann T (2014) The uniqueness of changes: characteristics and applications. Tech. rep., Microsoft Research Technical Report

  • Rolim R, Soares G, D’Antoni L, Polozov O, Gulwani S, Gheyi R, Suzuki R, Hartmann B (2017) Learning syntactic program transformations from examples. In: Proceedings of the 39th international conference on software engineering, ICSE ’17. IEEE Press, Piscataway, pp 404–415, DOI https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSE.2017.44

  • Saha RK, Lyu Y, Yoshida H, Prasad MR (2017) Elixir: Effective object oriented program repair. In: Proceedings of the 32Nd IEEE/ACM international conference on automated software engineering, ASE 2017. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=3155562.3155643. IEEE Press, Piscataway, pp 648–659

  • Sidiroglou-Douskos S, Lahtinen E, Long F, Rinard M (2015) Automatic error elimination by horizontal code transfer across multiple applications. In: Proceedings of the 36th ACM SIGPLAN conference on programming language design and implementation, PLDI ’15. ACM, New York, pp 43–54, DOI https://doi.org/10.1145/2737924.2737988

  • Smith EK, Barr ET, Le Goues C, Brun Y (2015) Is the cure worse than the disease? overfitting in automated program repair. In: Proceedings of the 2015 10th joint meeting on foundations of software engineering, ESEC/FSE 2015. ACM, New York, pp 532–543, DOI https://doi.org/10.1145/2786805.2786825

  • Tan SH, Roychoudhury A (2015) Relifix: Automated repair of software regressions. In: Proceedings of the 37th international conference on software engineering - Volume 1, ICSE ’15. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2818754.2818813. IEEE Press, Piscataway, pp 471–482

  • Tao Y, Dang Y, Xie T, Zhang D, Kim S (2012) How do software engineers understand code changes?: An exploratory study in industry. In: Proceedings of the ACM SIGSOFT 20th international symposium on the foundations of software engineering, FSE ’12. ACM, New York, pp 51:1–51:11, DOI https://doi.org/10.1145/2393596.2393656

  • Tao Y, Kim S (2015) Partitioning composite code changes to facilitate code review. In: 2015 IEEE/ACM 12th working conference on mining software repositories, pp 180–190

  • Weimer W, Fry ZP, Forrest S (2013) Leveraging program equivalence for adaptive program repair: Models and first results. In: 2013 IEEE/ACM 28th international conference on automated software engineering (ASE), pp 356–366. IEEE

  • Weimer W, Nguyen T, Le Goues C, Forrest S (2009) Automatically finding patches using genetic programming. In: Proceedings of the 31st international conference on software engineering, pp 364–374

  • Wen M, Chen J, Wu R, Hao D, Cheung SC (2018) Context-aware patch generation for better automated program repair. In: Proceedings of the 40th international conference on software engineering, ICSE ’18. ACM, New York, pp 1–11, DOI https://doi.org/10.1145/3180155.3180233

  • Xin Q, Reiss SP (2017) Leveraging syntax-related code for automated program repair. In: Proceedings of the 32Nd IEEE/ACM international conference on automated software engineering, ASE 2017. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=3155562.3155644. IEEE Press, Piscataway, pp 660–670

  • Zhong H, Meng N (2018) Towards reusing hints from past fixes: An exploratory study on thousands of real samples. In: Proceedings of the 40th international conference on software engineering, ICSE ’18. ACM, New York, pp 885–885, DOI https://doi.org/10.1145/3180155.3182550

  • Zhong H, Su Z (2015) An empirical study on real bug fixes. In: Proceedings of the 37th international conference on software engineering - Volume 1, ICSE ’15. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2818754.2818864. IEEE Press, Piscataway, pp 913–923

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Clear Water Bay, Kowloon, Hong Kong

    Jindae Kim & Sunghun Kim

  2. Sungkyunkwan University, Seoul, Republic of Korea

    Jeongho Kim & Eunseok Lee

Authors
  1. Jindae Kim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jeongho Kim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Eunseok Lee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Sunghun Kim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jindae Kim.

Additional information

Communicated by: Martin Monperrus

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kim, J., Kim, J., Lee, E. et al. The effectiveness of context-based change application on automatic program repair. Empir Software Eng 25, 719–754 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10664-019-09770-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10664-019-09770-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation