MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2086038725 · doi:10.1134/s0361768812040019

FSM-based testing from user defined faults adapted to incremental and mutation testing

2012· article· en· W2086038725 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

VenueProgramming and Computer Software · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware Testing and Debugging Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTest suiteComputer scienceModel-based testingFinite-state machineCode coverageTest caseSuiteFault coveragePolynomialState (computer science)AlgorithmProgramming languageMathematicsSoftwareEngineeringMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We study the problem of deriving a test suite with guaranteed fault coverage from a given finite state machine specification with respect to some given user defined faults. We consider the case when an implementation under test can have more states than its specification while user defined faults are implemented in an arbitrary way. We show that our approach can be used for FSM-based incremental and mutation testing and correspondingly we investigate cases that can be used for reducing length of obtained test suites. In some cases, worst-case length of obtained test suite becomes polynomial. Experiments show significant gains is using our approach in comparison to testing the whole specification.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.574
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.219 · 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