Automated program repair recently received considerable attentions, and many techniques on this research area have been proposed. Among them, two genetic-programmingbased techniques, GenProg and Par, have shown the promising results. In particular, GenProg has been used as the baseline technique to check the repair effectiveness of new techniques in much literature. Although GenProg and Par have shown their strong ability of fixing real-life bugs in nontrivial programs, to what extent GenProg and Par can benefit from genetic programming, used by them to guide the patch search process, is still unknown.To address the question, we present a new automated repair technique using random search, which is commonly considered much simpler than genetic programming, and implement a prototype tool called RSRepair. Experiment on 7 programs with 24 versions shipping with real-life bugs suggests that RSRepair, in most cases (23/24), outperforms GenProg in terms of both repair effectiveness (requiring fewer patch trials) and efficiency (requiring fewer test case executions), justifying the stronger strength of random search over genetic programming. According to experimental results, we suggest that every proposed technique using optimization algorithm should check its effectiveness by comparing it with random search.

Many techniques on automated fault localization (AFL) have been introduced to assist developers in debugging. Prior studies evaluate the localization technique from the viewpoint of developers: measuring how many benefits that developers can obtain from the localization technique used when debugging. However, these evaluation approaches are not always suitable, because it is difficult to quantify precisely the benefits due to the complex debugging behaviors of developers. In addition, recent user studies have presented that developers working with AFL do not correct the defects more efficiently than ones working with only traditional debugging techniques such as breakpoints, even when the effectiveness of AFL is artificially improved.In this paper we attempt to propose a new research direction of developing AFL techniques from the viewpoint of fully automated debugging including the program repair of automation, for which the activity of AFL is necessary. We also introduce the NCP score as the evaluation measurement to assess and compare various techniques from this perspective. Our experiment on 15 popular AFL techniques with 11 subject programs shipping with real-life field failures presents the evidence that these AFL techniques performing well in prior studies do not have better localization effectiveness according to NCP score. We also observe that Jaccard has the better performance over other techniques in our experiment.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract