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

Seokhyeon Moon

dblp:147/0432 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
2ranked-venue papers
1as first author
1since 2021 · last 2024
0009-0007-7729-611XORCID · reported

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

Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 2 · 1 first-author · 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 testing · 100%

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

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Software testing › fault detection
null pointer detection
0.812024
Effective Unit Test Generation for Java Null Pointer Exceptions · ASE 2024
Software testing › test generation
unit test generation
0.812024
Effective Unit Test Generation for Java Null Pointer Exceptions · ASE 2024
Software testing
fault detection
0.212024
Effective Unit Test Generation for Java Null Pointer Exceptions · ASE 2024

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

static analysis · 0.8evosuite · 0.8dynamic analysis · 0.8
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2024 Effective Unit Test Generation for Java Null Pointer Exceptions
abstract
In this experience paper, we share our experience on enhancing automatic unit test generation to more effectively find Java null pointer exceptions (NPEs). NPEs are among the most common and critical errors in Java applications. However, as we demonstrate in this paper, existing unit test generation tools such as Randoop and EvoSuite are not sufficiently effective at catching NPEs. Specifically, their primary strategy of achieving high code coverage does not necessarily result in triggering diverse NPEs in practice. In this paper, we detail our observation on the limitations of current state-of-the-art unit testing tools in terms of NPE detection and introduce a new strategy to improve their effectiveness. Our strategy utilizes both static and dynamic analyses to guide the test case generator to focus specifically on scenarios that are likely to trigger NPEs. We implemented this strategy on top of EvoSuite, and evaluated our tool, NpeTest, on 108 NPE benchmarks collected from 96 real-world projects. The results show that our NPE-guidance strategy can increase EvoSuite's reproduction rate of the NPEs from 56.9% to 78.9%, a 38.7% improvement. Furthermore, NpeTest successfully detected 89 previously unknown NPEs from an industry project.
Myungho Lee, Jiseong Bak, Seokhyeon Moon, Yoonchan Jhi, Hakjoo Oh
ASE3
2014 Ask the Mutants: Mutating Faulty Programs for Fault Localization
abstract
We present MUSE (MUtation-baSEd fault localization technique), a new fault localization technique based on mutation analysis. A key idea of MUSE is to identify a faulty statement by utilizing different characteristics of two groups of mutants-one that mutates a faulty statement and the other that mutates a correct statement. We also propose a new evaluation metric for fault localization techniques based on information theory, called Locality Information Loss (LIL): it can measure the aptitude of a localization technique for automated fault repair systems as well as human debuggers. The empirical evaluation using 14 faulty versions of the five real-world programs shows that MUSE localizes a fault after reviewing 7.4 statements on average, which is about 25 times more precise than the state-of-the-art SBFL technique Op2.
Seokhyeon Moon, Moonzoo Kim, Shin Yoo
ICST1