MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400582478 · doi:10.1145/3660793

Towards Better Graph Neural Network-Based Fault Localization through Enhanced Code Representation

2024· article· en· W4400582478 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

VenueProceedings of the ACM on software engineering. · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware Engineering Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaUniversity of AlbertaConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceDebuggingGraphScalabilityInferenceSoftwareTheoretical computer scienceLeverage (statistics)AutoencoderArtificial neural networkSoftware qualityArtificial intelligenceData miningProgramming languageSoftware development

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Automatic software fault localization plays an important role in software quality assurance by pinpointing faulty locations for easier debugging. Coverage-based fault localization is a commonly used technique, which applies statistics on coverage spectra to rank faulty code based on suspiciousness scores. However, statisticsbased approaches based on formulae are often rigid, which calls for learning-based techniques. Amongst all, Grace , a graph-neural network (GNN) based technique has achieved state-of-the-art due to its capacity to preserve coverage spectra, i.e., test-to-source coverage relationships, as precise abstract syntax-enhanced graph representation, mitigating the limitation of other learning-based technique which compresses the feature representation. However, such representation is not scalable due to the increasing complexity of software, correlating with increasing coverage spectra and AST graph, making it challenging to extend, let alone train the graph neural network in practice. In this work, we proposed a new graph representation, DepGraph , that reduces the complexity of the graph representation by <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> <mml:mn>70</mml:mn> <mml:mo>%</mml:mo> </mml:math> in nodes and edges by integrating the interprocedural call graph in the graph representation of the code. Moreover, we integrate additional features—code change information—into the graph as attributes so the model can leverage rich historical project data. We evaluate DepGraph using Defects4j 2.0.0, and it outperforms Grace by locating <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> <mml:mn>20</mml:mn> <mml:mo>%</mml:mo> </mml:math> more faults in Top-1 and improving the Mean First Rank (MFR) and the Mean Average Rank (MAR) by over <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> <mml:mn>50</mml:mn> <mml:mo>%</mml:mo> </mml:math> while decreasing GPU memory usage by <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> <mml:mn>44</mml:mn> <mml:mo>%</mml:mo> </mml:math> and training/inference time by <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> <mml:mn>85</mml:mn> <mml:mo>%</mml:mo> </mml:math> . Additionally, in cross-project settings, DepGraph surpasses the state-of-the-art baseline with a <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> <mml:mn>42</mml:mn> <mml:mo>%</mml:mo> </mml:math> higher Top-1 accuracy, and <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> <mml:mn>68</mml:mn> <mml:mo>%</mml:mo> </mml:math> and <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> <mml:mn>65</mml:mn> <mml:mo>%</mml:mo> </mml:math> improvement in MFR and MAR, respectively. Our study demonstrates DepGraph ’s robustness, achieving state-of-the-art accuracy and scalability for future extension and adoption.

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)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.761
Threshold uncertainty score0.966

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0030.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.252 · 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