An Elitist-Flower Pollination based Strategy for Constructing Sequence and Sequence-less t-way Test Suite
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In line with the upcoming of a new field called Search Based Software Engineering (SBSE), many newly developed t-way strategies adopting meta-heuristic algorithms can be seen in the literature for constructing interaction test suite (such as Simulated Annealing (SA), Genetic Algorithm (GA), Ant Colony Optimization Algorithm (ACO), Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO), Harmony Search (HS) and Cuckoo Search (CS)). Although useful, most of the aforementioned t-way strategies have assumed sequence-less interactions amongst input parameters. In the case of reactive system, such an assumption is invalid as some parameter operations (or events) occur in sequence and hence, creating a possibility of bugs triggered by the order (or sequence) of input parameters. If t-way strategies are to be adopted in such a system, there is also a need to support test data generation based on sequence of interactions. In line with such a need, this paper presents a unified strategy based on the new meta-heuristic algorithm, called the Elitist Flower Pollination Algorithm (eFPA), for sequence and sequence-less coverage. Experimental results demonstrate the proposed strategy gives sufficiently competitive results as compared with existing works.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".