When quoting this document, please refer to the following
URN: urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-9701
Go to the corresponding Portal

Kapser, Cory ; Anderson, Paul ; Godfrey, Michael ; Koschke, Rainer ; Rieger, Matthias ; van Rysselberghe, Filip ; WeiƟgerber, Peter

Subjectivity in Clone Judgment: Can We Ever Agree?

06301.SWM.Paper.970.pdf (0.1 MB)


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.

BibTeX - Entry

  author =	{Cory Kapser and Paul Anderson and Michael Godfrey and Rainer Koschke and Matthias Rieger and Filip van Rysselberghe and Peter Wei{\"s}gerber},
  title =	{Subjectivity in Clone Judgment:  Can We Ever Agree?},
  booktitle =	{Duplication, Redundancy, and Similarity in Software},
  year =	{2007},
  editor =	{Rainer Koschke and Ettore Merlo and Andrew Walenstein},
  number =	{06301},
  series =	{Dagstuhl Seminar Proceedings},
  ISSN =	{1862-4405},
  publisher =	{Internationales Begegnungs- und Forschungszentrum f{\"u}r Informatik (IBFI), Schloss Dagstuhl, Germany},
  address =	{Dagstuhl, Germany},
  URL =		{},
  annote =	{Keywords: Code clone, study, inter-rater agreement, ill-defined problem}

Keywords: Code clone, study, inter-rater agreement, ill-defined problem
Collection: 06301 - Duplication, Redundancy, and Similarity in Software
Issue Date: 2007
Date of publication: 19.04.2007

DROPS-Home | Fulltext Search | Imprint | Privacy Published by LZI