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 Mun

dblp:251/3399 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2019
—ORCID · none

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

Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 1

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
Debugging and program repair · 100%

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

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Debugging and program repair
fault localization
0.412019
Precise Learn-to-Rank Fault Localization Using Dynamic and Static Features of Target Programs · ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. 2019
Debugging and program repair › fault localization
learning-to-rank fault localization
0.412019
Precise Learn-to-Rank Fault Localization Using Dynamic and Static Features of Target Programs · ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. 2019
Debugging and program repair › fault localization
mutation-based fault localization
0.412019
Precise Learn-to-Rank Fault Localization Using Dynamic and Static Features of Target Programs · ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. 2019
Debugging and program repair › fault localization
spectrum-based fault localization
0.412019
Precise Learn-to-Rank Fault Localization Using Dynamic and Static Features of Target Programs · ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. 2019

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

machine learning · 0.4genetic programming · 0.4
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2019 Precise Learn-to-Rank Fault Localization Using Dynamic and Static Features of Target Programs
abstract
Finding the root cause of a bug requires a significant effort from developers. Automated fault localization techniques seek to reduce this cost by computing the suspiciousness scores (i.e., the likelihood of program entities being faulty). Existing techniques have been developed by utilizing input features of specific types for the computation of suspiciousness scores, such as program spectrum or mutation analysis results. This article presents a novel learn-to-rank fault localization technique called PRecise machINe-learning-based fault loCalization tEchnique (PRINCE). PRINCE uses genetic programming (GP) to combine multiple sets of localization input features that have been studied separately until now. For dynamic features, PRINCE encompasses both Spectrum Based Fault Localization (SBFL) and Mutation Based Fault Localization (MBFL) techniques. It also uses static features, such as dependency information and structural complexity of program entities. All such information is used by GP to train a ranking model for fault localization. The empirical evaluation on 65 real-world faults from CoREBench, 84 artificial faults from SIR, and 310 real-world faults from Defects4J shows that PRINCE outperforms the state-of-the-art SBFL, MBFL, and learn-to-rank techniques significantly. PRINCE localizes a fault after reviewing 2.4% of the executed statements on average (4.2 and 3.0 times more precise than the best of the compared SBFL and MBFL techniques, respectively). Also, PRINCE ranks 52.9% of the target faults within the top ten suspicious statements.
Seokhyeon Mun, Shin Yoo, Moonzoo Kim
ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol.2