Static analysis tools have achieved great success in recent years in automating the process of detecting defects in software. However, these sophisticated tools have yet to gain widespread adoption, since many of these tools remain too difficult to understand and use. In previous work, we discovered that even with an effective code visualization tool, users still found it hard to determine if warnings reported by these tools were true errors or false warnings. The fundamental problem users face is to understand enough of the underlying algorithm to determine if a warning is caused by imprecision in the algorithm. In our current work, we propose to use triaging checklists to provide users with systematic guidance to identify false warnings by taking into account specific sources of imprecision in the particular tool. Additionally, we plan to provide checklist assistants, which is a library of simple analyses designed to aid users in answering checklist questions.

[ .pdf ]

@inproceedings{khoo09checklist,
  author = {Yit Phang Khoo and Jeffrey S. Foster and Michael Hicks and Vibha Sazawal},
  title = {Triaging Checklists: a Substitute for a {PhD} in Static Analysis},
  booktitle = {Proceedings of the Workshop on the Evaluation and Usability of Programming Languages and Tools (PLATEAU)},
  month = oct,
  year = 2009
}

This file was generated by bibtex2html 1.99.