How many of all bugs do we find? a study of static bug detectors

Citations Over TimeTop 1% of 2018 papers

Abstract

Static bug detectors are becoming increasingly popular and are widely used by professional software developers. While most work on bug detectors focuses on whether they find bugs at all, and on how many false positives they report in addition to legitimate warnings, the inverse question is often neglected: How many of all real-world bugs do static bug detectors find? This paper addresses this question by studying the results of applying three widely used static bug detectors to an extended version of the Defects4J dataset that consists of 15 Java projects with 594 known bugs. To decide which of these bugs the tools detect, we use a novel methodology that combines an automatic analysis of warnings and bugs with a manual validation of each candidate of a detected bug. The results of the study show that: (i) static bug detectors find a non-negligible amount of all bugs, (ii) different tools are mostly complementary to each other, and (iii) current bug detectors miss the large majority of the studied bugs. A detailed analysis of bugs missed by the static detectors shows that some bugs could have been found by variants of the existing detectors, while others are domain-specific problems that do not match any existing bug pattern. These findings help potential users of such tools to assess their utility, motivate and outline directions for future work on static bug detection, and provide a basis for future comparisons of static bug detection with other bug finding techniques, such as manual and automated testing.

Related Papers

• → Where is the bug and how is it fixed? an experiment with practitioners(2017)115 cited
• → SMT-Based False Positive Elimination in Static Program Analysis(2012)36 cited
• → A Study of Debugging Sequence on Multi-Bug Program(2021)1 cited
• Research on source code safety defects based on static test tools(2011)
• → The False False Positives of Static Analysis(2018)