Automated Game Design Learning

While general game playing is an active field of research, the learning of game design has tended to be either a secondary goal of such research or it has been solely the domain of humans. We propose a field of research, Automated Game Design Learning (AGDL), with the direct purpose of learning game designs directly through interaction with games in the mode that most people experience games: via play. We detail existing work that touches the edges of this field, describe current successful projects in AGDL and the theoretical foundations that enable them, point to promising applications enabled by AGDL, and discuss next steps for this exciting area of study. The key moves of AGDL are to use game programs as the ultimate source of truth about their own design, and to make these design properties available to other systems and avenues of inquiry.Comment: 8 pages, 2 figures. Accepted for CIG 201

Stateful Testing: Finding More Errors in Code and Contracts

Automated random testing has shown to be an effective approach to finding faults but still faces a major unsolved issue: how to generate test inputs diverse enough to find many faults and find them quickly. Stateful testing, the automated testing technique introduced in this article, generates new test cases that improve an existing test suite. The generated test cases are designed to violate the dynamically inferred contracts (invariants) characterizing the existing test suite. As a consequence, they are in a good position to detect new errors, and also to improve the accuracy of the inferred contracts by discovering those that are unsound. Experiments on 13 data structure classes totalling over 28,000 lines of code demonstrate the effectiveness of stateful testing in improving over the results of long sessions of random testing: stateful testing found 68.4% new errors and improved the accuracy of automatically inferred contracts to over 99%, with just a 7% time overhead.Comment: 11 pages, 3 figure

DSpot: Test Amplification for Automatic Assessment of Computational Diversity

Context: Computational diversity, i.e., the presence of a set of programs that all perform compatible services but that exhibit behavioral differences under certain conditions, is essential for fault tolerance and security. Objective: We aim at proposing an approach for automatically assessing the presence of computational diversity. In this work, computationally diverse variants are defined as (i) sharing the same API, (ii) behaving the same according to an input-output based specification (a test-suite) and (iii) exhibiting observable differences when they run outside the specified input space. Method: Our technique relies on test amplification. We propose source code transformations on test cases to explore the input domain and systematically sense the observation domain. We quantify computational diversity as the dissimilarity between observations on inputs that are outside the specified domain. Results: We run our experiments on 472 variants of 7 classes from open-source, large and thoroughly tested Java classes. Our test amplification multiplies by ten the number of input points in the test suite and is effective at detecting software diversity. Conclusion: The key insights of this study are: the systematic exploration of the observable output space of a class provides new insights about its degree of encapsulation; the behavioral diversity that we observe originates from areas of the code that are characterized by their flexibility (caching, checking, formatting, etc.).Comment: 12 page

Fairness Testing: Testing Software for Discrimination

This paper defines software fairness and discrimination and develops a testing-based method for measuring if and how much software discriminates, focusing on causality in discriminatory behavior. Evidence of software discrimination has been found in modern software systems that recommend criminal sentences, grant access to financial products, and determine who is allowed to participate in promotions. Our approach, Themis, generates efficient test suites to measure discrimination. Given a schema describing valid system inputs, Themis generates discrimination tests automatically and does not require an oracle. We evaluate Themis on 20 software systems, 12 of which come from prior work with explicit focus on avoiding discrimination. We find that (1) Themis is effective at discovering software discrimination, (2) state-of-the-art techniques for removing discrimination from algorithms fail in many situations, at times discriminating against as much as 98% of an input subdomain, (3) Themis optimizations are effective at producing efficient test suites for measuring discrimination, and (4) Themis is more efficient on systems that exhibit more discrimination. We thus demonstrate that fairness testing is a critical aspect of the software development cycle in domains with possible discrimination and provide initial tools for measuring software discrimination.Comment: Sainyam Galhotra, Yuriy Brun, and Alexandra Meliou. 2017. Fairness Testing: Testing Software for Discrimination. In Proceedings of 2017 11th Joint Meeting of the European Software Engineering Conference and the ACM SIGSOFT Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering (ESEC/FSE), Paderborn, Germany, September 4-8, 2017 (ESEC/FSE'17). https://doi.org/10.1145/3106237.3106277, ESEC/FSE, 201

A Mapping Study of scientific merit of papers, which subject are web applications test techniques, considering their validity threats

Progress in software engineering requires (1) more empirical studies of quality, (2) increased focus on synthesizing evidence, (3) more theories to be built and tested, and (4) the validity of the experiment is directly related with the level of confidence in the process of experimental investigation. This paper presents the results of a qualitative and quantitative classification of the threats to the validity of software engineering experiments comprising a total of 92 articles published in the period 2001-2015, dealing with software testing of Web applications. Our results show that 29.4% of the analyzed articles do not mention any threats to validity, 44.2% do it briefly, and 14% do it judiciously; that leaves a question: these studies have scientific value

Statistical log differencing

National Research Foundation (NRF) Singapor