Blending Conceptual and Evolutionary Couplings to Support Change Impact Analysis in Source Code

The paper presents an approach that combines conceptual and evolutionary techniques to support change impact analysis in source code. Information Retrieval (IR) is used to derive conceptual couplings from the source code in a single version (release) of a software system. Evolutionary couplings are mined from source code commits. The premise is that such combined methods provide improvements to the accuracy of impact sets. A rigorous empirical assessment on the changes of the open source systems Apache httpd, ArgoUML, iBatis, and KOffice is also reported. The results show that a combination of these two techniques, across several cut points, provides statistically significant improvements in accuracy over either of the two techniques used independently. Improvements in recall values of up to 20% over the conceptual technique in KOffice and up to 45% over the evolutionary technique in iBatis were reported.

[1]  Robert S. Arnold,et al.  Software Change Impact Analysis , 1996 .

[2]  Andreas Zeller,et al.  Mining version histories to guide software changes , 2005, Proceedings. 26th International Conference on Software Engineering.

[3]  Markus Pizka,et al.  Concise and consistent naming , 2005, 13th International Workshop on Program Comprehension (IWPC'05).

[4]  Paolo Tonella,et al.  Using a Concept Lattice of Decomposition Slices for Program Understanding and Impact Analysis , 2003, IEEE Trans. Software Eng..

[5]  Dawn J Lawrie,et al.  Information Retrieval Applications in Software Maintenance and Evolution , 2010 .

[6]  Gail C. Murphy,et al.  Who should fix this bug? , 2006, ICSE.

[7]  Jonathan I. Maletic,et al.  Mining software repositories for traceability links , 2007, 15th IEEE International Conference on Program Comprehension (ICPC '07).

[8]  Victoria Interrante,et al.  Visualization viewpoints , 2003 .

[9]  Genny Tortora,et al.  Recovering traceability links in software artifact management systems using information retrieval methods , 2007, TSEM.

[10]  Frank Tip,et al.  Chianti: a tool for change impact analysis of java programs , 2004, OOPSLA.

[11]  G. Sledge.  How long? , 2008, Clinical breast cancer.

[12]  Václav Rajlich,et al.  A model for change propagation based on graph rewriting , 1997, 1997 Proceedings International Conference on Software Maintenance.

[13]  Paolo Tonella,et al.  Nomen est omen: analyzing the language of function identifiers , 1999, Sixth Working Conference on Reverse Engineering (Cat. No.PR00303).

[14]  Victoria Interrante,et al.  User Studies: Why, How, and When? , 2003, IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications.

[15]  Václav Rajlich,et al.  Case study of feature location using dependence graph , 2000, Proceedings IWPC 2000. 8th International Workshop on Program Comprehension.

[16]  Massimiliano Di Penta,et al.  An approach to classify software maintenance requests , 2002, International Conference on Software Maintenance, 2002. Proceedings..

[17]  Lionel C. Briand,et al.  Using coupling measurement for impact analysis in object-oriented systems , 1999, Proceedings IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance - 1999 (ICSM'99). 'Software Maintenance for Business Change' (Cat. No.99CB36360).

[18]  Jonathan I. Maletic,et al.  A survey and taxonomy of approaches for mining software repositories in the context of software evolution , 2007, J. Softw. Maintenance Res. Pract..

[19]  Keith Brian Gallagher,et al.  Using Program Slicing in Software Maintenance , 1991, IEEE Trans. Software Eng..

[20]  Thomas Zimmermann,et al.  Improving bug triage with bug tossing graphs , 2009, ESEC/FSE '09.

[21]  Denys Poshyvanyk,et al.  Who can help me with this change request? , 2009, 2009 IEEE 17th International Conference on Program Comprehension.

[22]  Václav Rajlich,et al.  RIPPLES: tool for change in legacy software , 2001, Proceedings IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance. ICSM 2001.

[23]  Václav Rajlich,et al.  Variable granularity for improving precision of impact analysis , 2009, 2009 IEEE 17th International Conference on Program Comprehension.

[24]  Jonathan I. Maletic,et al.  An XML-based lightweight C++ fact extractor , 2003, 11th IEEE International Workshop on Program Comprehension, 2003..

[25]  Andreas Zeller,et al.  How Long Will It Take to Fix This Bug? , 2007, Fourth International Workshop on Mining Software Repositories (MSR'07:ICSE Workshops 2007).

[26]  Václav Rajlich,et al.  Hidden dependencies in program comprehension and change propagation , 2001, Proceedings 9th International Workshop on Program Comprehension. IWPC 2001.

[27]  Martin P. Robillard,et al.  Automatic generation of suggestions for program investigation , 2005, ESEC/FSE-13.

[28]  Jonathan I. Maletic,et al.  Mining evolutionary dependencies from web-localization repositories , 2007, J. Softw. Maintenance Res. Pract..

[29]  Giuliano Antoniol,et al.  Identifying the starting impact set of a maintenance request: a case study , 2000, Proceedings of the Fourth European Conference on Software Maintenance and Reengineering.

[30]  Emily Hill,et al.  Exploring the neighborhood with dora to expedite software maintenance , 2007, ASE '07.

[31]  Tao Xie,et al.  An approach to detecting duplicate bug reports using natural language and execution information , 2008, 2008 ACM/IEEE 30th International Conference on Software Engineering.

[32]  Markus Pizka,et al.  Concise and Consistent Naming , 2005, IWPC.

[33]  Denys Poshyvanyk,et al.  Combining Formal Concept Analysis with Information Retrieval for Concept Location in Source Code , 2007, 15th IEEE International Conference on Program Comprehension (ICPC '07).

[34]  Yann-Gaël Guéhéneuc,et al.  Feature Location Using Probabilistic Ranking of Methods Based on Execution Scenarios and Information Retrieval , 2007, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering.

[35]  Giuliano Antoniol,et al.  Recovering Traceability Links between Code and Documentation , 2002, IEEE Trans. Software Eng..

[36]  Tibor Gyimóthy,et al.  Using information retrieval based coupling measures for impact analysis , 2009, Empirical Software Engineering.

[37]  Yann-Gaël Guéhéneuc,et al.  Mining the Lexicon Used by Programmers during Sofware Evolution , 2007, 2007 IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance.

[38]  Gregg Rothermel,et al.  An empirical comparison of dynamic impact analysis algorithms , 2004, Proceedings. 26th International Conference on Software Engineering.

[39]  Ramakrishnan Srikant,et al.  Mining sequential patterns , 1995, Proceedings of the Eleventh International Conference on Data Engineering.

[40]  Lionel C. Briand,et al.  Automating impact analysis and regression test selection based on UML designs , 2002, International Conference on Software Maintenance, 2002. Proceedings..

[41]  Jonathan I. Maletic,et al.  Mining sequences of changed-files from version histories , 2006, MSR '06.

[42]  Barbara G. Ryder,et al.  Points-to analysis for Java using annotated constraints , 2001, OOPSLA '01.

[43]  Gregg Rothermel,et al.  Whole program path-based dynamic impact analysis , 2003, 25th International Conference on Software Engineering, 2003. Proceedings..

[44]  Gerardo Canfora,et al.  Impact analysis by mining software and change request repositories , 2005, 11th IEEE International Software Metrics Symposium (METRICS'05).

[45]  Barbara A. Kitchenham,et al.  Coupling measures and change ripples in C++ application software , 2000, J. Syst. Softw..

[46]  Malcolm Munro,et al.  The impact analysis task in software maintenance: a model and a case study , 1994, Proceedings 1994 International Conference on Software Maintenance.

[47]  Leon Moonen.  Lightweight impact analysis using island grammars , 2002, Proceedings 10th International Workshop on Program Comprehension.