Show Me Why It's Correct: Saving 1/3 of Debugging Time in Program Repair with Interactive Runtime Comparison
Ruixin Wang, Zhongkai Zhao, Le Fang, Nan Jiang, Yiling Lou, Lin Tan, Tianyi Zhang
Abstract
Automated Program Repair (APR) holds the promise of alleviating the burden of debugging and fixing software bugs. Despite this, developers still need to manually inspect each patch to confirm its correctness, which is tedious and time-consuming. This challenge is exacerbated in the presence of plausible patches, which accidentally pass test cases but may not correctly fix the bug. To address this challenge, we propose an interactive approach called iFix to facilitate patch understanding and comparison based on their runtime difference. iFix performs static analysis to identify runtime variables related to the buggy statement and captures their runtime values during execution for each patch. These values are then aligned across different patch candidates, allowing users to compare and contrast their runtime behavior. To evaluate iFix, we conducted a within-subjects user study with 28 participants. Compared with manual inspection and a state-of-the-art interactive patch filtering technique, iFix reduced participants' task completion time by 36% and 33% while also improving their confidence by 50% and 20%, respectively. Besides, quantitative experiments demonstrate that iFix improves the ranking of correct patches by at least 39% compared with other patch ranking methods and is generalizable to different APR tools.
CCS Concepts: • Human-centered computing → Interactive systems and tools; • Software and its engineering;
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 2082b35e-3682-4cd1-aa12-8469c9b009a7Builds on15
- CoCoNuT: combining context-aware neural translation models using ensemble for program repairThibaud Lutellier, Hung Viet Pham, Lawrence Pang, Yitong Li et al.ISSTA 2020 · 325 citations
- CURE: Code-Aware Neural Machine Translation for Automatic Program RepairNan Jiang, Thibaud Lutellier, Lin TanICSE 2021 · 267 citations
- Less training, more repairing please: revisiting automated program repair via zero-shot learningChunqiu Steven Xia, Lingming ZhangFSE 2022 · 223 citations
- DLFix: context-based code transformation learning for automated program repairYi Li, Shaohua Wang, Tien N. NguyenICSE 2020 · 201 citations
- Neural Program Repair with Execution-based BackpropagationHe Ye, Matias Martinez, Martin MonperrusICSE 2022 · 146 citations
Related papers
- Automated Patch Correctness Assessment: How Far are We?Shangwen Wang, Ming Wen, Bo Lin, Hongjun Wu et al.ASE 2020 · 77 citations
- A Large-Scale Empirical Review of Patch Correctness Checking ApproachesJun Yang, Yuehan Wang, Yiling Lou, Ming Wen et al.FSE 2023 · 11 citations
- Concolic program repairRidwan Salihin Shariffdeen, Yannic Noller, Lars Grunske, Abhik RoychoudhuryPLDI 2021 · 45 citations
- Patch correctness assessment in automated program repair based on the impact of patches on production and test codeAli Ghanbari, Andrian MarcusISSTA 2022 · 26 citations
- Towards Boosting Patch Execution On-the-FlySamuel Benton, Yuntong Xie, Lan Lu, Mengshi Zhang et al.ICSE 2022 · 10 citations
