MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2019724127 · doi:10.1109/icst.2012.205

Incremental Test Case Generation for UML-RT Models Using Symbolic Execution

2012· article· en· W2019724127 on OpenAlexaff
Eric J. Rapos, Juergen Dingel

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware Testing and Debugging Techniques
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceUnified Modeling LanguageTest caseSoftware engineeringLeverage (statistics)Iterative and incremental developmentTest Management ApproachSymbolic executionCode coverageCode generationSystem under testSoftware developmentSoftwareProgramming languageSoftware constructionArtificial intelligenceMachine learningOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Model driven development (MDD) is on the rise in software engineering and no more so than in the realm of realtime and embedded systems. Being able to leverage the code generation and validation techniques made available through MDD is worth exploring, and is a large area of focus in academic and industrial research. However given the iterative nature of MDD, the evolution of models causes test case generation to occur multiple times throughout a software modeling project. Currently, the existing process of regenerating test cases for a modified model of a system can be costly, inefficient, and even redundant. Thus, it is our goal to achieve an improved understanding of the impact of typical state machine evolution steps on test cases, and how this impact can be mitigated by reusing previously generated test cases. We are also aiming to implement this in a software prototype to automate and evaluate our work.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.154
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.175 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSoftware Testing and Debugging TechniquesFrench-language works237,207