MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2155388066 · doi:10.1002/stvr.210

A rigorous method for test templates generation from object‐oriented specifications

2001· article· en· W2155388066 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

VenueSoftware Testing Verification and Reliability · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware Testing and Debugging Techniques
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsTemplateComputer scienceFormal specificationProgramming languageFocus (optics)Test caseWhite-box testingObject-oriented programmingFormal methodsExtension (predicate logic)Specification languageTest (biology)Software engineeringSoftwareSoftware developmentSoftware construction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper describes a rigorous method that investigates the suitability of formal specifications written in Object‐Z specification language for testing object‐oriented software implementation in a black‐box fashion. The insight gained in the formalization of a model, the inherent abstractions, and formally specified intended behaviours and exceptions lead to the generation of test templates that are free from any implementation bias. The method described in this paper is an extension of the one proposed by Stocks and Carrington. In particular, the focus of the paper is on generating test templates for composite operations in an Object‐Z specification. The method is illustrated using the specification for an electronic mail system. The specification and the test templates generated for the electronic mail system show several interesting properties of the application that require considerable attention during testing. Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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)0.015
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.560
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.233 · 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