arXiv preprint ·
Cross-Project Bug Localization: What Works, What Doesn't, and Why
- Published
- Source
- arXiv preprint, posted before peer review
- Original
- Read it at arXiv
- Topics
Abstract
Bug localization models require substantial within-project training data that newly active or small open-source projects rarely have. Cross-project learning (CPL) promises to close this gap by reusing labeled bugs from mature projects, but prior CPL studies evaluate a single model against ample-data within-project baselines that data-scarce projects cannot reach. We ask whether CPL's effectiveness is a property of the transfer setting or depends on model architecture. We evaluate three architecturally distinct models, embedding-based BLAZE, convolutional TRANP-CNN, and GNN-based adversarial COOBA, on 63 source to target pairs from 13 open-source Python projects under identical bug corpora, data splits, retrieval candidates, and baselines. The primary baseline is within-project limited training (WP-small, 20% of target labels, the same target-side share as CP-transfer). CPL outperforms WP-small most clearly for TRANP-CNN (Cohen's d = 0.95, win rate 81.0%, p < 0.001, robust to clustering pairs by target project), and less so for BLAZE (d = 0.49, win rate 60.3%, p = 0.002; not significant once pairs are clustered by target). COOBA, under our re-implementation, shows a small gain that does not survive multiple-comparison correction (d = 0.27, p = 0.027). Negative transfer affects 9.5% of TRANP-CNN pairs and 30.2% of BLAZE's and COOBA's. Cross-model direction agreement is only 44-54%: the same pair can help one architecture and harm another, although the models' gains are positively correlated (rho = 0.24-0.42). CPL outcomes are therefore architecture-dependent: practitioners should validate CPL for their chosen model, and CPL studies should report results per architecture.
The authors’ abstract, as arXiv lists it. arXiv’s listings, abstracts included, are free for anyone to reuse.
Read it on ReadSearch
Each opens after you create an account, and brings you back to this paper.
More in Software Engineering
OS-Bench: Evaluating SWE Agents on Cross-OS Code Migration
StateHarness: Maintaining Evolving Project State for Long-Horizon Coding Agents
BenchChecker: Assessing the Credibility of Bug-Fixing Benchmarks for LLMs
Instructions Are Evidence, Not Objectives: Measuring Outcome Alignment of Agents
Mission (Im)Possible: Towards Autonomous Discovery of Autopilot Logic Flaws in Open-Source Drone Frameworks
Get the few papers worth your time in Software Engineering every morning.
ReadSearch reads the new papers in your field each day and brings you the few worth reading, each with its key finding in a sentence.