DagSemProc.06301.12.pdf
- Filesize: 117 kB
- 5 pages
Document
Subjectivity in Clone Judgment: Can We Ever Agree?
Authors
-
Part of:
Volume:
Dagstuhl Seminar Proceedings, Volume 6301
Series: Dagstuhl Seminar Proceedings (DagSemProc) - License:
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license
- Publication Date: 2007-04-19
Cite AsGet BibTex
Cory Kapser, Paul Anderson, Michael Godfrey, Rainer Koschke, Matthias Rieger, Filip van Rysselberghe, and Peter Weißgerber. Subjectivity in Clone Judgment: Can We Ever Agree?. In Duplication, Redundancy, and Similarity in Software. Dagstuhl Seminar Proceedings, Volume 6301, pp. 1-5, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2007)
https://doi.org/10.4230/DagSemProc.06301.12
https://doi.org/10.4230/DagSemProc.06301.12
Abstract
An objective definition of what a code clone is currently eludes the field.
A small study was performed at an international workshop to elicit
judgments and discussions from world experts regarding what characteristics
define a code clone. Less than half of the clone candidates judged had
80% agreement amongst the judges. Judges appeared to differ primarily in
their criteria for judgment rather than their interpretation of the clone
candidates. In subsequent open discussion the judges provided several
reasons for their judgments. The study casts additional doubt on the
reliability of experimental results in the field when the full criterion
for clone judgment is not spelled out.
Keywords
- Code clone
- study
- inter-rater agreement
- ill-defined problem
Metrics
- Access Statistics
-
Total Accesses (updated on a weekly basis)
0PDF Downloads