MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2804918785 · doi:10.7939/r3pr7n043

Diversity-Based Automated Test Case Generation

2015· article· en· W2804918785 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Ali Shahbazi

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Alberta Library · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware Testing and Debugging Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAlberta Innovates
KeywordsTest (biology)Diversity (politics)Computer scienceBiologyPolitical scienceEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Software testing is an expensive task that consumes around half of a project’s effort. To reduce the cost of testing and improve the software quality, test cases can be produced automatically. Random Testing (RT) is a low cost and straightforward automated test generation approach. However, its effectiveness is not satisfactory. To increase the effectiveness of RT, researchers have developed more effective test generation approaches such as Adaptive Random Testing (ART) which improves the testing by increasing the test case coverage of the input domain. This research proposes new test case generation methods that improve the effectiveness of the test cases by increasing the diversity of the test cases. Numerical, string, and tree test case structures are investigated. For numerical test generation, the use of Centroidal Voronoi Tessellations (CVT) is proposed. Accordingly, a test case generation method, namely Random Border CVT (RBCVT), is introduced which can enhance the previous RT methods to improve their coverage of the input space. The generated numerical test cases by the other methods act as the input to the RBCVT algorithm and the output is an improved set of test cases. An extensive simulation study and a mutant based software testing investigation have been performed demonstrating that RBCVT outperforms previous methods. For string test cases, 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 which implies shorter strings have, in general, a higher chance of failure detection. When both objectives are enforced 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. Prior to tree test generation study, a new tree distance function is proposed. Although several distance or similarity functions for trees have been introduced, their failure detection performance is not always satisfactory. This research proposes a new similarity function for trees, namely Extended Subtree (EST), where a new subtree mapping is proposed. EST generalizes the edit base distances by providing new rules for subtree mapping. Further, the new approach seeks to resolve the problems and limitations of previous approaches. Extensive evaluation frameworks are developed to evaluate the performance of the new approach against previous methods. Clustering and classification case studies are performed to provide an evaluation against different tree distance functions. The experimental results demonstrate the superior performance of the proposed distance function. In addition, an empirical runtime analysis demonstrates that the new approach is one of the best tree distance functions in terms of runtime efficiency. Finally, the study on the string test case generation is extended to tree test case generation. An abstract tree model is defined by a user based on a program under the test. Then, tree test cases are produced according to the model where diversity is maximized through an evolutionary optimization technique. Real world programs are used to investigate the performance of generated test cases where superior performance of the introduced method is demonstrated compared to the previous methods. Further, the proposed tree distance function is compared against the previous functions in the tree test case generation context. The proposed tree distance function outperforms other functions in tree test generation.

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)0.011
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.177 · 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

Citations3
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of Alberta LibrarySame topicSoftware Testing and Debugging TechniquesFrench-language works237,207