MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1947217269 · doi:10.1109/ase.1998.732610

Programmatic testing of the Standard Template Library containers

2002· article· en· W1947217269 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware Testing and Debugging Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTest suiteComputer scienceWhite-box testingConformance testingSuiteUnit testingSoftware engineeringProgramming languageCode coverageKey (lock)Keyword-driven testingCode (set theory)Black boxComponent (thermodynamics)Test caseSoftwareOperating systemSoftware developmentSoftware constructionArtificial intelligenceStandardizationMachine learningSet (abstract data type)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We describe part of an STL conformance test suite under development. Test suites for all of the STL containers have been written, demonstrating the feasibility of thorough and highly automated testing of industrial component libraries. We describe affordable test suites that provide good code and boundary value coverage, including the thousands of cases that naturally occur from combinations of boundary values. We show how two simple oracles can provide fully automated output checking for all the containers. We refine the traditional categories of black-box and white-box testing to specification-based, implementation-based and implementation-dependent testing, and show how these three categories highlight the key cost/thoroughness trade-offs.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.651
Threshold uncertainty score0.184

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.038
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.186 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSoftware Testing and Debugging TechniquesFrench-language works237,207