blob: cc06f09dc6eb80b5fadce8b3dd9d195c7371c7b0 (
plain) (
blame)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
|
\renewcommand{\abstractname}{\Large Abstract}
\begin{abstract}
In recent decades, \gls{apr} has been advancing consistently
according to benchmarks. However, its use in practice is still limited
due to the difficulty in choosing a desired patch among the generated pool.
This work introduces a method to logically differentiate between patches
through symbolic execution. The technique generates a tree of decisions
for developers to reason between patches based on the program's inputs
and semi-automatically captured outputs. Its implementation \psychic{}
based on \klee{} is evaluated on patches automatically generated
for toy programs in the \textsc{IntroClass} benchmark,
showing promising preliminaries.
\vfill
\end{abstract}
\thispagestyle{empty}
|
