Achieving accurate clone detection results
Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop on Software Clones
Towards clone detection in UML domain models
Proceedings of the Fourth European Conference on Software Architecture: Companion Volume
Language convergence infrastructure
GTTSE'09 Proceedings of the 3rd international summer school conference on Generative and transformational techniques in software engineering III
An extended assessment of type-3 clones as detected by state-of-the-art tools
Software Quality Control
Automated type-3 clone oracle using Levenshtein metric
Proceedings of the 5th International Workshop on Software Clones
Incremental clone detection and elimination for erlang programs
FASE'11/ETAPS'11 Proceedings of the 14th international conference on Fundamental approaches to software engineering: part of the joint European conferences on theory and practice of software
Mining student capstone projects with FRASR and ProM
Proceedings of the ACM international conference companion on Object oriented programming systems languages and applications companion
XIAO: tuning code clones at hands of engineers in practice
Proceedings of the 28th Annual Computer Security Applications Conference
| Hi-index | 0.01 |
Code reuse through copying and pasting leads to so-called software clones. These clones can be roughly categorized into identical fragments (type-1 clones), fragments with parameter substitution (type-2 clones), and similar fragments that differ through modified,deleted, or added statements (type-3 clones). Although there has been extensive research on detecting clones, detection of type-3 clones is still an open research issue due to the inherent vaguenessin their definition. In this paper, we analyze type-3 clones detected by state-of-the-art tools and investigate type-3 clones in terms of their syntactic differences. Then, we derive their underlying semantic abstractions from their syntactic differences. Finally, we investigate whether there are any additional code characteristics that indicate that a tool-suggested clone candidate is a real type-3 clone from a human's perspective. Our findings can help developers of clone detectors to improve their tools.