Searching for better configurations: a rigorous approach to clone evaluation
Abstract
Clone detection finds application in many software engineering activities such as comprehension and refactoring. However, the confounding configuration choice problem poses a widely-acknowledged threat to the validity of previous empirical analyses. We introduce desktop and parallelised cloud-deployed versions of a search based solution that finds suitable configurations for empirical studies. We evaluate our approach on 6 widely used clone detection tools applied to the Bellon suite of 8 subject systems. Our evaluation reports the results of 9.3 million total executions of a clone tool; the largest study yet reported. Our approach finds significantly better configurations (p < 0.05) than those currently used, providing evidence that our approach can ameliorate the confounding configuration choice problem.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 36 · Cited by 147
- Authors
- Wang, T., Harman, M., Jia, Y., & Krinke, J.
- Affiliations
- Harbin Institute of Technology (CN)
- University College London (GB)
- Venue
- Proceedings of the 2013 9th Joint Meeting on Foundations of Software Engineering
- Publisher
- ACM
- Published
- 2013-08-18
- Pages
- 455-465
- OpenAlex
- W2131477050
- Cited by
- 147
- References
- 36
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 21 · 2016: 27 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 2
- FWCI
- 14.73
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- ACM Joint European Software Engineering Conference and Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering (ESEC/FSE) (publishedVersion)
- UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Software Engineering Research
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Software Engineering Techniques and Practices
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Advanced Software Engineering Methodologies
- Keywords
- clone detection
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review