MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2151635819 · doi:10.1145/1276958.1277172

Automatic mutation test input data generation via ant colony

2007· article· en· W2151635819 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware Testing and Debugging Techniques
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsComputer scienceAnt colony optimization algorithmsMutationContext (archaeology)Genetic algorithmJavaCode coverageTest dataData miningMachine learningArtificial intelligenceSoftware

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fault-based testing is often advocated to overcome limitations ofother testing approaches; however it is also recognized as beingexpensive. On the other hand, evolutionary algorithms have beenproved suitable for reducing the cost of data generation in the contextof coverage based testing. In this paper, we propose a newevolutionary approach based on ant colony optimization for automatictest input data generation in the context of mutation testingto reduce the cost of such a test strategy. In our approach the antcolony optimization algorithm is enhanced by a probability densityestimation technique. We compare our proposal with otherevolutionary algorithms, e.g., Genetic Algorithm. Our preliminaryresults on JAVA testbeds show that our approach performed significantlybetter than other alternatives.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.983
Threshold uncertainty score0.294

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.255 · 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

Citations109
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSoftware Testing and Debugging TechniquesFrench-language works237,207