Paper detail

RegMiner: Towards Constructing a Large Regression Dataset from Code Evolution History

Bug datasets consisting of real-world bugs are important artifacts for researchers and programmers, which lay empirical and experimental foundation for various SE/PL research such as fault localization, software testing, and program repair. All known state-of-the-art datasets are constructed manually, which inevitably limits their scalability, representativeness, and the support for the emerging data-driven research. In this work, we propose an approach to automate the process of harvesting replicable regression bugs from the code evolutionary history. We focus on regression bug dataset, as they (1) manifest how a bug is introduced and fixed (as normal bugs), (2) support regression bug analysis, and (3) incorporate a much stronger specification (i.e., the original passing version) for general bug analysis. Technically, we address an information retrieval problem on code evolution history. Given a code repository, we search for regressions where a test can pass a regression-fixing commit, fail a regressioninducing commit, and pass a working commit. In this work, we address the challenges of (1) identifying potential regression-fixing commits from the code evolution history, (2) migrating the test and its code dependencies over the history, and (3) minimizing the compilation overhead during the regression search. We build our tool, RegMiner, which harvested 537 regressions over 66 projects for 3 weeks, created the largest replicable regression dataset within shortest period, to the best of our knowledge. Moreover, our empirical study on our regression dataset shows a gap between the popular regression fault localization techniques (e.g, delta-debugging) and the real fix, revealing new data-driven research opportunities.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.