MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2339904014 · doi:10.1109/tse.2015.2487958

Black-Box String Test Case Generation through a Multi-Objective Optimization

2015· article· en· W2339904014 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

VenueIEEE Transactions on Software Engineering · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware Testing and Debugging Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceString (physics)Random testingAlgorithmTest caseTest (biology)Test functions for optimizationString searching algorithmOptimization problemMathematicsMachine learningProgramming languageData structure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

String test cases are required by many real-world applications to identify defects and security risks. Random Testing (RT) is a low cost and easy to implement testing approach to generate strings. However, its effectiveness is not satisfactory. In this research, black-box string test case generation methods are investigated. Two objective functions are introduced to produce effective test cases. The diversity of the test cases is the first objective, where it can be measured through string distance functions. The second objective is guiding the string length distribution into a Benford distribution based on the hypothesis that the population of strings is right-skewed within its range. When both objectives are applied via a multi-objective optimization algorithm, superior string test sets are produced. An empirical study is performed with several real-world programs indicating that the generated string test cases outperform test cases generated by other methods.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.436
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.048
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