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

Suvda Myagmar

dblp:34/4470 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
2ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2006
—ORCID · none

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

Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 2

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
2 papers
Software maintenance and evolution · 52% Debugging and program repair · 30% Empirical software engineering · 9%

Topics — the 4 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Software maintenance and evolution
code clone detection
0.122006
CP-Miner: Finding Copy-Paste and Related Bugs in Large-Scale Software Code · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 2006
CP-Miner: A Tool for Finding Copy-paste and Related Bugs in Operating System Code · OSDI 2004
Debugging and program repair
fault localization
0.112006
CP-Miner: Finding Copy-Paste and Related Bugs in Large-Scale Software Code · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 2006
Empirical software engineering
mining software repositories
0.012006
CP-Miner: Finding Copy-Paste and Related Bugs in Large-Scale Software Code · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 2006
Program analysis
source code analysis
0.012006
CP-Miner: Finding Copy-Paste and Related Bugs in Large-Scale Software Code · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 2006

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

frequent subsequence mining · 0.1data mining · 0.1
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2006 CP-Miner: Finding Copy-Paste and Related Bugs in Large-Scale Software Code
abstract
Recent studies have shown that large software suites contain significant amounts of replicated code. It is assumed that some of this replication is due to copy-and-paste activity and that a significant proportion of bugs in operating systems are due to copy-paste errors. Existing static code analyzers are either not scalable to large software suites or do not perform robustly where replicated code is modified with insertions and deletions. Furthermore, the existing tools do not detect copy-paste related bugs. In this paper, we propose a tool, CP-Miner, that uses data mining techniques to efficiently identify copy-pasted code in large software suites and detects copy-paste bugs. Specifically, it takes less than 20 minutes for CP-Miner to identify 190,000 copy-pasted segments in Linux and 150,000 in FreeBSD. Moreover, CP-Miner has detected many new bugs in popular operating systems, 49 in Linux and 31 in FreeBSD, most of which have since been confirmed by the corresponding developers and have been rectified in the following releases. In addition, we have found some interesting characteristics of copy-paste in operating system code. Specifically, we analyze the distribution of copy-pasted code by size (number lines of code), granularity (basic blocks and functions), and modification within copy-pasted code. We also analyze copy-paste across different modules and various software versions.
Zhenmin Li, Shan Lu 0001, Suvda Myagmar, Yuanyuan Zhou 0001
IEEE Trans. Software Eng.3
2004 CP-Miner: A Tool for Finding Copy-paste and Related Bugs in Operating System Code
Zhenmin Li, Shan Lu 0001, Suvda Myagmar, Yuanyuan Zhou 0001
OSDI3