<scp>Katana</scp> : Dual Slicing Based Context for Learning Bug Fixes
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Contextual information plays a vital role for software developers when understanding and fixing a bug. Consequently, deep learning based program repair techniques leverage context for bug fixes. However, existing techniques treat context in an arbitrary manner, by extracting code in close proximity of the buggy statement within the enclosing file, class, or method, without any analysis to find actual relations with the bug. To reduce noise, they use a predefined maximum limit on the number of tokens to be used as context. We present a program slicing based approach, in which instead of arbitrarily including code as context, we analyze statements that have a control or data dependency on the buggy statement. We propose a novel concept called dual slicing , which leverages the context of both buggy and fixed versions of the code to capture relevant repair ingredients. We present our technique and tool called Katana , the first to apply slicing-based context for a program repair task. The results show that Katana effectively preserves sufficient information for a model to choose contextual information while reducing noise. We compare against four recent state-of-the-art context-aware program repair techniques. Our results show that Katana fixes between 1.5 and 3.7 times more bugs than existing techniques.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it