Table 3 Performance of clone detectors on not-yet-obfuscated clones as per type
From: Are our clone detectors good enough? An empirical study of code effects by obfuscation
| Â | T1 | T2 | ST3 | MT3 | T4 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
SDD | (100, 21, 34) | (100, 32, 49) | (100, 21, 34) | (100, 2, 3) | (100, 0, 0) |
CCFinder | (100, 100, 100) | (98, 100, 99) | (100, 38, 55) | (97, 3, 7) | (75, 0, 1) |
CCAligner | (92, 99, 95) | (86, 97, 91) | (87, 81, 84) | (73, 48, 58) | (54, 31, 39) |
Deckard | (99, 100, 100) | (82, 100, 90) | (99, 80, 88) | (96, 26, 40) | (71, 4, 8) |
SourcererCC | (100, 43, 60) | (100, 5, 9) | (100, 3, 6) | (100, 1, 2) | (100, 0, 0) |
Oreo | (100, 66, 79) | (99, 22, 35) | (100, 35, 52) | (99, 6, 11) | (60, 0, 0) |
ASTNN | (100, 100, 100) | (100, 92, 96) | (99, 95, 97) | (100, 92, 96) | (100, 89, 94) |
DeepSim | (87, 100, 93) | (65, 100, 76) | (76, 66, 70) | (61, 50, 54) | (31, 25, 28) |
CCLearner | (97, 100, 99) | (95, 100, 97) | (96, 95, 95) | (93, 71, 81) | (61, 13, 22) |