Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Navdha Agarwal

dblp:279/3907 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2022
0000-0002-4318-6103ORCID · reported

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 1 · 1 since 2021

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
1 paper
Software maintenance and evolution · 67% Compilers and program optimization · 33%

Topics — the 3 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Software maintenance and evolution
code clone detection
0.612022
Modeling Functional Similarity in Source Code With Graph-Based Siamese Networks · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 2022
Compilers and program optimization › dependence analysis
program dependence graph
0.612022
Modeling Functional Similarity in Source Code With Graph-Based Siamese Networks · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 2022
Software maintenance and evolution › code clone detection
semantic code clone detection
0.612022
Modeling Functional Similarity in Source Code With Graph-Based Siamese Networks · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 2022

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

graph-based siamese networks · 0.6geometric neural networks · 0.6deep learning · 0.6
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2022 Modeling Functional Similarity in Source Code With Graph-Based Siamese Networks
abstract
Code clones are duplicate code fragments that share (nearly) similar syntax or semantics. Code clone detection plays an important role in software maintenance, code refactoring, and reuse. A substantial amount of research has been conducted in the past to detect clones. A majority of these approaches use lexical and syntactic information to detect clones. However, only a few of them target semantic clones. Recently, motivated by the success of deep learning models in other fields, including natural language processing and computer vision, researchers have attempted to adopt deep learning techniques to detect code clones. These approaches use lexical information (tokens) and(or) syntactic structures like abstract syntax trees (ASTs) to detect code clones. However, they do not make sufficient use of the available structural and semantic information, hence limiting their capabilities. This paper addresses the problem of semantic code clone detection using program dependency graphs and geometric neural networks, leveraging the structured syntactic and semantic information. We have developed a prototype toolHolmes, based on our novel approach and empirically evaluated it on popular code clone benchmarks. Our results show thatHolmesperforms considerably better than the other state-of-the-art tool, TBCCD. We also assessedHolmeson unseen projects and performed cross dataset experiments to evaluate the generalizability ofHolmes. Our results affirm thatHolmesoutperforms TBCCD since most of the pairs thatHolmesdetected were either undetected or suboptimally reported by TBCCD.
Nikita Mehrotra, Navdha Agarwal, Saket Anand, David Lo 0001, Rahul Purandare
IEEE Trans. Software Eng.2