Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Detailed Answer
Quick Answer
Concise responses based on abstracts only
Detailed Answer
Well-researched responses based on abstracts and relevant paper content.
Custom Instructions Pro
Preferences or requirements that you'd like Emergent Mind to consider when generating responses
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash 44 tok/s
Gemini 2.5 Pro 41 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 Medium 13 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 High 15 tok/s Pro
GPT-4o 86 tok/s Pro
Kimi K2 208 tok/s Pro
GPT OSS 120B 447 tok/s Pro
Claude Sonnet 4 36 tok/s Pro
2000 character limit reached

Can Automated Program Repair Refine Fault Localization? (1910.01270v1)

Published 3 Oct 2019 in cs.SE

Abstract: Software bugs are prevalent in modern software systems and notoriously hard to debug manually. Therefore, a large body of research efforts have been dedicated to automated software debugging, including both automated fault localization and program repair. However, the existing fault localization techniques are usually ineffective on real-world software systems while even the most advanced program repair techniques can only fix a small ratio of real-world bugs. Although fault localization and program repair are inherently connected, we observe that in the literature their only connection is that program repair techniques usually use off-the-shelf fault localization techniques (e.g., Ochiai) to determine the potential candidate statements/elements for patching. In this work, we explore their connection in the other direction, i.e., can program repair in turn help with fault localization? In this way,we not only open a new dimension for more powerful fault localization, but also extend the application scope of program repair to all possible bugs (not only the bugs that can be directly automatically fixed).We have designed ProFL, a simplistic approach using patch-execution results (from program repair) as the feedback information for fault localization. The experimental results on the widely used Defects4J benchmark show that the basic ProFL can already localize 161 of the 395 studied bugs within Top-1, while state-of-the-art spectrum and mutation based fault localization techniques at most localize 117 within Top-1. We also demonstrate ProFL's effectiveness under different settings. Lastly, we show that ProFL can further boost state-of-the-art fault localization via both unsupervised and supervised learning.

Citations (5)

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

List To Do Tasks Checklist Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.

Lightbulb On Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Continue Learning

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.