MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2620636222 · doi:10.1109/icse-c.2017.3

Fast and Flexible Large-Scale Clone Detection with CloneWorks

2017· article· en· W2620636222 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware Engineering Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
Keywordsclone (Java method)Computer scienceWorkstationScalabilityFlexibility (engineering)Source codeNormalization (sociology)Software maintenanceSoftwareSoftware systemOperating systemMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Clone detection in very-large inter-project repositories has numerous applications in software research and development. However, existing tools do not provide the flexibility researchers need to explore this emerging domain. We introduce CloneWorks, a fast and flexible clone detector for large-scale clone detection experiments. CloneWorks gives the user full control over the representation of the source code before clone detection, including easy plug-in of custom source transformation, normalization and filtering logic. The user can then perform targeted clone detection for any type or kind of clone of interest. CloneWorks uses our fast and scalable partitioned partial indexes approach, which can handle any input size on an average workstation using input partitioning. CloneWorks can detect Type-3 clones in an input as large as 250 million lines of code in just four hours on an average workstation, with good recall and precision as measured by our BigCloneBench.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.804
Threshold uncertainty score0.446

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.244 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Quick stats

Citations53
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSoftware Engineering ResearchFrench-language works237,207