MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2072077040

JST: An Automatic Test Generation Tool for Industrial Java Applications with Strings

2013· article· en· W2072077040 on OpenAlexaff
Indradeep Ghosh, Nastaran Shafiei, Guodong Li, Wei-Fan Chiang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware Testing and Debugging Techniques
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceJavaSymbolic executionScalabilitySuiteString (physics)Programming languageTest suitePathfinderKey (lock)Software engineeringTest caseDatabaseOperating systemSoftwareMachine learning
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract—In this paper we present JST, a tool that automatically generates a high coverage test suite for industrial strength Java applications. This tool uses a numeric-string hybrid symbolic execution engine at its core which is based on the Symbolic Java PathFinder platform. However, in order to make the tool applicable to industrial applications the existing generic platform had to be enhanced in numerous ways that we describe in this paper. The JST tool consists of newly supported essential Java library components and widely used data structures; novel solving techniques for string constraints, regular expressions, and their interactions with integer and floating point numbers; and key optimizations that make the tool more efficient. We present a methodology to seamlessly integrate the features mentioned above to make the tool scalable to industrial applications that are beyond the reach of the original platform in terms of both applicability and performance. We also present extensive experimental data to illustrate the effectiveness of our tool. I.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations42
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSoftware Testing and Debugging TechniquesFrench-language works237,207