Automatic repair of buggy if conditions and missing preconditions with SMT

Demarco, Favio; Xuan, Jifeng; Berre, Daniel Le; Monperrus, Martin

doi:10.1145/2593735.2593740

Cited by 100 publications

(72 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In fact, none of the 12 correct patches that PCR generates are within the Debroy and Wong search space. NOPOL: NOPOL [10] is an automatic repair tool focusing on branch conditions. It identifies branch statement directions that can pass negative test cases and then uses SMT solvers to generate repairs for the branch condition.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…2) NOPOL focuses only on patches that change conditions, while PCR can generate patches for a broader class of defects (php-307562-307561, php-307846-307853, php-309516-309535, libtiff-ee2ce-b5691, gmp-13420-13421, and gzip-a1d3d-f17cb). 3) NOPOL was evaluated on two small Java programs (each with less than 5000 lines of code) and two artificial examples in [10], while we evaluate PCR on 105 real world defects in seven C applications with more than one million lines in total. Fix Safety-Policy Violation: Weimer [32] proposed a patch generation technique for safety policy violation errors.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Staged program repair with condition synthesis

Long

Rinard

2015

Proceedings of the 2015 10th Joint Meeting on Foundations of Software Engineering

279

223

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We present PCR, a new automatic patch generation system. PCR uses a new condition synthesis technique to efficiently discover logical expressions that generate desired controlflow transfer patterns. Presented with a set of test cases, PCR deploys condition synthesis to find and repair incorrect if conditions that cause the application to produce the wrong result for one or more of the test cases. PCR also leverages condition synthesis to obtain a set of compound modifications that generate a rich, productive, and tractable search space of candidate patches.We evaluate PCR on a set of 105 defects from the GenProg benchmark set. For 40 of these defects, PCR generates plausible patches (patches that generate correct outputs for all inputs in the test suite used to validate the patch). For 12 of these defects, PCR generates correct patches that are functionally equivalent to developer patches that appear in subsequent versions. For comparison purposes, GenProg generates plausible patches for only 18 defects and correct patches for only 2 defects. AE generates plausible patches for only 27 defects and correct patches for only 3 defects.

show abstract

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Staged program repair with condition synthesis

Long

Rinard

2015

Proceedings of the 2015 10th Joint Meeting on Foundations of Software Engineering

279

223

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Since different approaches, and different experimental evaluations, deal differently with bugs that admit multiple valid fixes, we measure three variants of precision and recall: 1) relative to the number of bugs that were correctly fixed by any of the valid fixes, regardless of the correct fix's rank; 2) relative to the number of bugs that were correctly fixed by a fix ranked among the top 10 in a tool's output; 3) relative to the number of bugs that were correctly fixed by a fix ranked first in a tool's output. JAID achieve the best precision 5 and recall if we disregard ranking; and the second-best precision and third-best recall in the other two cases. Again, note that the only tools that outperform JAID rely on additional input information to sharpen their precision and recall.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…GenProg [33] pioneered the "generate-and-validate" approach, where many plausible fixes are generated based on heuristics, and then are validated against the available tests. More recently, others [5], [21], [22], [24], [36] have pursued the "constraint-based" approach, where fixes are constructed to satisfy suitable constraints that correspond to their validity. The two approaches are not sharply distinct, in that fixes generated by constraintbased techniques may still require validation if the constraints they satisfy by construction are not sufficiently precise to ensure that they are correct-as it often happens when dealing with incomplete specifications.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Contract-based program repair without the contracts

Chen

Pei

Furia

2017

2017 32nd IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE)

102

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-Automated program repair (APR) is a promising approach to automatically fixing software bugs. Most APR techniques use tests to drive the repair process; this makes them readily applicable to realistic code bases, but also brings the risk of generating spurious repairs that overfit the available tests. Some techniques addressed the overfitting problem by targeting code using contracts (such as pre-and postconditions), which provide additional information helpful to characterize the states of correct and faulty computations; unfortunately, mainstream programming languages do not normally include contract annotations, which severely limits the applicability of such contract-based techniques.This paper presents JAID, a novel APR technique for Java programs, which is capable of constructing detailed state abstractions-similar to those employed by contract-based techniques-that are derived from regular Java code without any special annotations. Grounding the repair generation and validation processes on rich state abstractions mitigates the overfitting problem, and helps extend APR's applicability: in experiments with the DEFECTS4J benchmark, a prototype implementation of JAID produced genuinely correct repairs, equivalent to those written by programmers, for 25 bugs-improving over the state of the art of comparable Java APR techniques in the number and kinds of correct fixes.

show abstract

“…Recent advances of the behavior-based repair are the NOPOL reported by DeMarco et al [42]. NOPOL used Satisfiability Modulo Theories (SMT) [43][44] to fix the buggy IF conditions and synthesize additional preconditions.…”

Section: Behavior-based Tbrmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Survey of Test Based Automatic Program Repair

Liu¹,

Long²,

Zhang³

2018

JSW

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Testing and debugging have always been the most time-consuming parts of the software development procedure and require large amounts of human resources. When a bug is located, manually fixing it to repair the buggy program is still a difficult and laborious task for developers. Hence automatic program repair techniques, especially the test-based approaches, have drawn great attentions in recent years. Researchers have explored and proposed various novel methods and tools, pushing the idea closer to reality. In this paper, we systematically survey the work in mainstream of test-based program repair (TBR) and discuss the properties automatically generated patches should have. We classify the state-of-the-art approaches for TBR, and evaluate their strengths and weaknesses according to their functional mechanisms. Finally, we refer to some empirical results and propose four important issues, which are supposed to be critical and constructive in this research area.

show abstract

Automatic repair of buggy if conditions and missing preconditions with SMT

Cited by 100 publications

References 16 publications

Staged program repair with condition synthesis

Staged program repair with condition synthesis

Contract-based program repair without the contracts

A Survey of Test Based Automatic Program Repair

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About