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 OpenAlexaff
Khaled El‐Fakih, Rita Dorofeeva, Nina Yevtushenko, Gregor von Bochmann

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.

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)0.010
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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

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

Citations11
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProgramming and Computer SoftwareSame topicSoftware Testing and Debugging TechniquesFrench-language works237,207