MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Goal-Driven Reusable Test Case Design

2023· article· en· W4387951206 on OpenAlexaff
Ibtesam Gwasem, Weichang Du, Andrew McAllister

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Software Engineering Methodologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceTest strategyDomain engineeringSoftware performance testingSoftware engineeringDomain (mathematical analysis)Non-regression testingSystem integration testingFunctional requirementSoftware reliability testingManual testingIntegration testingReliability engineeringSoftware developmentSoftware constructionSoftwareEngineeringOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Software non-functional properties (NFPs) play the dominants role for the acceptability of software in the market. As in single software systems, testing NFPs in software product lines is also important to ensure quality of software products. Research in the area of software product lines testing has been very active over the past decade. However, the most focus of this research has been on testing software functional properties, while testing of NFPs has not received much research attention. In this paper we address non-functional requirements testing based on goal models. Specifically, we proposed a methodology for reusable test case design during domain engineering that supports early testing at the domain analysis stage to help create testable non-functional requirements that will be used for designing effective test cases at the domain testing level. We focus on testing of domain core components. A prototype testing system was also developed to support testing based on the proposed methodology.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Software Engineering MethodologiesFrench-language works237,207